Hansard, 1958-04-22

The following Members have, under the provisions of subsection (3) (i) of section 47 of the Singapore Colony Order in Council, 1955, obtained from the Speaker, permission to be or to remain absent from meetings of the Assembly: Mr Lim Koon Teck (Paya Lebar) - from 15th April to 31st July, 1958. Inche Abdul Hamid Bin Haji Jumat (Ulu Bedok) - from 21st April to 31st May, 1958.

I have received a message from His Excellency the Governor dated the 10th January, 1958, informing me that His Excellency, in accordance with the provisions of section 62 (2) of the Singapore Colony Orders in Council, 1955 and 1956, had that day assented to the following Bills: (i) Singapore Citizenship (Amendment) Bill; (ii) Federation of Malaya Independence (Consequential Provisions) Bill; (iii) Widows' and Orphans' Pension (Amendment) Bill.

I have to inform Hon. Members that, under the provisions of paragraphs (2) and (6) respectively of Standing Order No. 6.

1. I have appointed Mr Lim Koon Teck to be Chairman of the Public Accounts Committee, and Mr R. C. H. Lim to be Chairman of the Estimates Committee.

Hon. Members are informed that there will be published in the Official Report a record of attendances of Members at sittings of the Assembly and Sessional and Select Committees during the Second Session of this, the First Legislative Assembly. [See columns Nos. 103-4] Sittings Of Assembly, Sessional and Select Committees (Cols 0103-0104)

Sir, I propose Mr R. C. H. Lim.

I second it.

There being only one proposal, I declare Mr R. C. H. Lim to be duly elected Deputy Speaker.

asked the Chief Minister whether the necessary legislation for the introduction of the new Constitution for Singapore has been finalised; and whether he can state when the Order of Her Majesty in Council containing the new Constitution will be made.

asked the Chief Minister: (a) when was the draft of the proposed new Constitution for Singapore received by the Singapore Government. (b) are there any aspects in the draft of the proposed new Constitution which call for further negotiations, and if he will identify them; and (c) whether he has been in correspondence with the Colonial Office in London during the past year in connection with these aspects, and if he will present the correspondence to this House.

asked the Chief Minister whether he has received from London a draft of the Constitution of the new State of Singapore, and when other parties who participated in the London talks will receive copies of the draft for their approval.

asked the Chief Minister whether he will give this House an opportunity to debate the desirability of a proposed further all-Party Mission to London in connection with the proposed new Constitution for Singapore; and if he will give an estimate of the probable expense to be borne by this territory in connection with the proposed Mission.

asked the Chief Minister whether there has been correspondence between the Singapore Government and the Colonial Office in London arising out of the rejection by this Assembly last year of the anti-subversive clause in the Report of the Constitutional Conference held in London in March and April 1957 and whether he will present such correspondence to this House.

Mr Speaker, Sir, as there are a number of questions on today's Order Paper on the subject of the Constitutional Order in Council, with your permission I shall answer Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 at the same time. The constitutional instruments are still being drafted in the Colonial Office and I hope that the completed draft will be received here by the end of this month. I have myself recently discussed the drafting with Mr Melville of the Colonial Office during his visit to Singaport, and certain sections have been referred to our local experts for checking and revision. As soon as the completed draft is ready, I shall study it in conjunction with the members of the All-Party Delegation who were signatories to the conference report. The stand taken by the Assembly on the anti-subversive clause was reported to the Secretary of State. No correspondence between this Government and the Colonial Office was entered into on this matter, nor has this Government entered into any correspondence with the Colonial Office on the drafting of the Constitution. The introduction of the new Constitution can be effected at any time this Assembly considers that the time has come to address the Governor to fix a date for the new Constitution in accordance with the agreement set out in paragraph 54 of the Report of the Singapore Constitutional Conference, 1957. I would invite the attention of hon. Members to that part of the Governor's speech delivered on 9th April which reads as follows: "The Government intends that the agreement with the United Kingdom Government on the form of the constitutional instruments should be made by the All-Party delegation which took part in the Constitutional discussion last year." The constitutional instruments deal with the life and future of the new State of Singapore and cannot be framed to the satisfaction of local political Parties and the local Government on the one side, and the United Kingdom Government some 8,000 miles away, without delay and without the risk of losing that unity so desirable for such a vital business save by discussions by the parties concerned. I have therefore made arrangements with the Colonial Office for such discussions to take place in May, and I propose to invite the same members to London to finalise the constitutional instruments. The probable expense to Singapore is return air passages for six persons plus necessary incidentals. The desirability of visiting London for this purpose cannot be gainsaid and I do not consider it necessary that this Assembly should be given an opportunity to debate this matter.

Will the Hon. the Chief Minister confirm that copies of this draft constitution have been circulating or are being circulated to some heads of Government Departments?

Sir, I said in my reply just now that certain sections of the draft Constitution have been referred but not full copies. As it is, I myself have not seen a completed copy.

Is that because the Chief Minister is not in the confidence of Her Majesty's Colonial Office?

I do not know whether that is to my credit or to my discredit.

Does the Chief Minister remember that in London it was agreed that the terms of the constitutional instruments setting out what was agreed to in the Report of the All-Party Committee were to be settled by the Delegation and the Parties that the Delegation represented?

I said, Sir, that when the complete draft is received by me, there will be consultations with members of the All-Party Delegation, and I also drew attention to that part of the Governor's speech which clearly sets out that this Government will do nothing about the draft Constitution without bringing in the All-Party Delegation.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to know whether the Hon. the Chief Minister is able to inform this House what is the main cause of the delay in drawing up the draft Constitution. It has taken one solid year already.

I do not know whether I am in a position to reply to that question. It is a matter for the Colonial Office. I understand they have their hands full because there are a number of other Colonies which are having new constitutions almost at the same time as Singapore.

asked the Chief Minister whether the Government will consider introducing amending legislation for compulsory voting in the forthcoming General Election.

Sir, the answer to this question will depend on the stand which this Assembly is prepared to take when it debates the motion dealing with this subject and standing in the name of the hon. Member for Changi.

asked the Chief Minister when the new Register of Electors for Legislative Assembly elections under the proposed new Constitution for Singapore will be ready; and what is the earliest practicable date for the holding of a General Election under the new Constitution.

Sir, provided there are no major mechanical breakdowns or other unforeseen difficulties, the Registers of Electors for the Legislative Assembly elections under the proposed new Constitution for Singapore will be ready for inspection by the first week of June 1958. On this timetable, the earliest practicable date for holding elections will be the end of September 1958. The answer to the second part of this question is dependent on the stand to be taken by this Assembly when it debates the motion on compulsory voting standing in the name of the hon. Member.

asked the Chief Minister whether he will make a statement as to the purpose of requiring persons detained under the Preservation of Public Security Ordinance, 1955, and their families to appear before him before the detainees are released.

Mr Speaker, Sir, although the Government has been responsible for ordering the detention of certain persons, its attitude to the relatives of the detainees has always been one of sympathy. In some cases, relatives have approached me immediately following the arrest of a member of their family. While I cannot interfere with the course of action which Government has taken after very serious and careful consideration for the general good of the people of Singapore, I consider it my duty, as the head of an elected Government, on the conditional release of these detainees to advise parents, particularly on a personal basis, that they should discharge their duties as parents by looking after the welfare of their sons, and enjoining both parties that they would do well to examine the company they keep in the future. This I consider to be my duty, just as I consider it my duty that a detainee should not be detained one minute longer than is necessary if a single doubt exists in my mind of the need for detaining him.

asked the Minister for Labour and Welfare what is the total number of unemployed persons in Singapore as on 31st January, 1958, giving a breakdown of this figure into:-

Mr Speaker, Sir, according to Employment Exchange statistics, there were 8,292 unemployed persons in Singapore on 31st January, 1958, of whom 393 were either sick or disabled.

asked the Minister for Labour and Welfare whether there are persons who have been registered at the Labour Exchange for some years now, who have so far been unable to secure employment; and what steps the Government proposes to take to secure employment for these people as soon as possible.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the numbers of persons whose names have been on the live register classified by duration of unemployment in respect of periods exceeding six months are as follows: Six months to one year 653 persons One year to two years 608 " Two to three years ... 211 persons Three years and over ... 14 " It is considered not profitable to initiate any national scheme for the special purpose of providing employment to the 225 persons who have been unemployed for more than two years, because most of them are unemployable due to old age, to health and to low standards of skill.

asked the Minister for Labour and Welfare what action the Government has taken or intends to take in regard to the statement reported to have been made by. Mrs Shirin Fozdar at the Afro-Asian Conference of women social workers in Colombo alleging that prostitutes from China have dumped themselves in Singapore and that the Colony is now one big brothel.

Mr Speaker, Sir, a prompt denial to Mrs Shirin Fozdar's statement was made by my Ministry on 22nd February, 1958. I have since interviewed Mrs Fozdar and am satisfied that she had not intended that her statement should be given such a sensational twist.

asked the Minister for Labour and Welfare if he will make a statement on Government policy with regard to the application for entry into Singapore from China of the wife of a sponsor, resident in Singapore, who has produced documents to prove that his former wife is dead and that his application is in respect of his only wife now living in China.

Mr Speaker, Sir, it is Government's policy to admit wives of persons lawfully resident in the Colony. The appropriate regulation to admit such a category of persons is found in paragraph 7 (g) of the Immigration (Prohibition of Entry) Order, 1953. Therefore if the local sponsor in question has submitted satisfactory evidence to prove (1) that the applicant is his lawful wedded wife, and (2) that his former wife is dead, there is no reason why the application should not be approved, unless in the opinion of the Controller the sponsor has insufficient means to provide for her maintenance.

Question No. 13 has been withdrawn. [The following is Question No. 13: Mr Lee Choon Eng to ask the Minister for Labour and Welfare if he will state the numbers of persons permitted to enter the Colony from China during the period January to December 1957, under the different categories:-

asked the Minister for Labour and Welfare if he will state the number of persons, classified under separate categories such as doctors, songstresses, strip-teasers, etc., permitted to enter the Colony from Hongkong on a temporary visa during the period January to December 1957, and the maximum period allowed for any stay in Singapore.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the numbers of persons allowed in from Hongkong on temporary passes for the period January to December 1957 are as follows: doctors - nil; songstresses (including dancing troupes and Cantonese wayang troupes) - 183; strip-teasers - none granted as such; business and social visits - 461. The normal period allowed for persons on business passes is three months and the maximum period normally granted is under two years.

asked the Minister for Labour and Welfare to what extent has the standard of living of the workers in Singapore increased since June, 1952.

Mr Speaker, Sir, as the information sought involves columns of figures and is of some length, I will circulate the information requested by the hon. Member for Kampong Kapor in the Official Report. Following is the information: Every year in July the Labour Department conducts a stratified sample survey of average weekly earnings, hours of work and conditions of employment. The results of this survey for the years 1953 to 1957 are given below:- AVERAGE WEEKLY HOURS WORKED, AVERAGE WEEKLY EARNINGS AND AVERAGE EARNINGS PER HOUR IN ALL INDUSTRIES Year Average hours Average Earning Average Earning worked during for the week per hour the week (All workers) (All workers) (All workers) $ c. $ c. 1953 ... 49.89 32 04 0 64 1954 ... 50.54 33 10 0 65 1955 ... 49.98 36 80 0 74 1956 ... 48.42 37 12 0 77 1957 ... 47.80 37 98 0 79 No figures are available for 1952. The figures quoted indicate: that average weekly hours of work have been progressively decreasing (49.89 hours for all workers in 1953 as against 47.80 hours in 1957); that average weekly earnings have risen progressively from $32.04 in 1953 to $37.98 in 1957 for all workers, an increase of 18.5 per cent; and that average hourly earnings have shown a progressively steady rise from 0.64 cents in 1953 to 0.79 cents in 1957, an increase of 23.4 per cent. Money earnings have increased whilst hours of work have decreased since 1953. On the other hand, the cost of living has remained fairly stable since 1954, as shown below by the Cost of Living Index of the lower income group for the month of June from 1952 to 1957:- COST OF LIVING INDEX OF LOWER INCOME GROUP Weight June June June June June June 1939 1952 1953 1954 1955 1956 1957 100.0 344.6 346.8 313.9 308.2 313.1 320.6 Further, the Labour Ordinance, 1955 provides a number of benefits, including paid annual leave and paid sick leave which were not provided for by law before December 1955. On the basis of these facts, there has been a marked increase in the standard of living of the workers since 1953, and consequently a greater share in the national income.

asked the Minister for Labour and Welfare whether and when the Government of the Federation of Malaya will require travel passes in respect of persons travelling from Singapore to the Federation of Malaya; and if the Government will consider requiring similar passes for persons entering Singapore from the Federation of Malaya.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I have not been officially advised by the Government of the Federation of Malaya that they have decided to institute a system of travel passes for persons travelling from Singapore to the Federation. In the circumstances, the second part of the question, being hypothetical, does not arise.

asked the Chief Secretary-

Sir, as on 17th April, there were 35 persons detained under the Banishment Ordinance. The answer to the second part of the Question is 23, 4 and 1 respectively.

Sir, can the Hon. the Chief Secretary tell us what is the cause of the long delay in banishing these people?

That is the subject of a later question, Sir.

asked the Chief Secretary how many persons against whom orders of banishment had been issued under the Banishment Ordinance (Cap. 127) were banished from the Colony in the second half of 1957.

The answer is two persons, Sir.

asked the Chief Secretary whether any persons against whom orders of banishment were issued under the Banishment Ordinance (Cap. 127) more than three months ago, have not, in fact, been as yet banished from the Colony; and whether he will state the reasons for the delay in banishing them.

Yes, Sir. There have been unexpected difficulties in the matter of shipping arrangements of these banishees, but efforts are being made to resolve them.

asked the Chief Secretary whether Government proposes to introduce legislation for the re-enactment of the Preservation of Public Security Ordinance (No. 25 of 1955), which expires on 20th October, 1958.

Sir, unless there is any material lessening of the threat to public security between now and October, of which the Government at present sees no sign, the Government expects that the public interest will require the enactment of further legislation on the lines of the present Ordinance.

asked (Mr Lim Koon Teck not being present to rise and ask his question) the Chief Secretary whether interviews between members of the Singapore Bar and persons detained under the Public Security Ordinance at the Criminal Investigation Department have been treated as confidential interviews; and whether he will give an assurance that all necessary steps are taken to ensure the complete privacy of these interviews.

Yes, Sir, interviews between detainees and their legal advisers have been treated as confidential and I am prepared to give the assurance asked for in the second half of the question.

asked the Chief Secretary whether any persons detained under the Preservation of Public Security Ordinance, 1955, have been confined at the Central Police Station for more than six weeks, and if he will state the reasons for such confinements in the said Police Station.

Sir, a number of such persons have from time to time been confined for more than six weeks. They are confined there for purposes of interrogation.

asked the Chief Secretary if he will describe the conditions in which persons detained under the Preservation of Public Security Ordinance, 1955, are confined; and if he will state whether there is any separate Detention Camp provided for such detainees.

Sir, the conditions are laid down in instructions issued by the Chief Secretary under subsection (3) of section 3 of the Ordinance. I will supply the hon. Member with a copy of these instructions if he wishes. Conditions of detention follow as far as is practicable the conditions imposed in the United Kingdom on detainees under Defence Regulation 18 (b) during the last War. The conditions are as liberal as considerations of security and discipline permit. Detainees are not required to work except for the purpose of keeping their rooms and precincts clean. There is no separate detention camp for detainees but subject to the availability of suitable accommodation, detainees are not kept in confinement with convicted prisoners.

Mr Speaker, Sir, can the Hon. the Chief Secretary tell us why there is no separate detention camp for detainees, and are such detainees considered as prisoners or criminals?

Sir, I have already said that such detainees are not considered as convicted prisoners and their conditions are, as far as it is possible to make them, consonant with those which have been in force in the United Kingdom for those detained during the last War. As regards putting up a separate detention camp, that would be a matter of building, Sir, It would cost money and we very much hope that it would not be necessary to retain this accommodation for any length of time.

Sir, can the Chief Secretary tell us will the Government then consider utilising some of the buildings that Government possesses to turn them into such detention camps?

Perhaps the hon. Member would like to repeat his question?

Can the Chief Secretary tell us, Sir, will the Government consider utilising some of the present Government department buildings and turn them into detention camps for detainees?

I am afraid, Sir, that there is no surplus accommodation among the present Government buildings.

asked the Chief Secretary if he will introduce amending legislation so that more stringent measures could be taken against gangsters and kidnappers in Singapore.

The hon. Member will now be aware that steps have already been taken to introduce legislation of the type he suggests.

asked the Chief Secretary if he will state, in regard to the storage and sale of fire crackers:-

Sir, in the City area, there are 13 wholesale and 222 retail licensed dealers. In the rural areas, there is one wholesale licensed dealer. Retail dealers in the rural areas have only been required to be licensed since 6th March this year and no licence has yet been issued. In reply to the second part of the question, summonses have been issued. In reply to the third part, the answer is yes in both cases. At the time of the recent New Year celebrations, 25 summonses were issued for unlicensed storage, and two for storage in excess of permitted quantity.

Can the Chief Secretary tell us will Government consider banning all fire crackers in Singapore?

Unless there is very substantial evidence, Sir, that the majority of the community affected desires such a step, the Government has no such intention.

asked the Chief Secretary if he will consider introducing legislation to ban all striptease shows in Singapore; and if he will cause all existing licences issued to be withdrawn forthwith.

Sir, such shows are already forbidden. The terms of the licences granted by the police to female actresses in Singapore preclude the removal of any clothing during the actual performances, or the making of any indecent or improper gesture, action or speech. The conditions of the licence also require that the actress herself is adequately clothed and that none of her clothes shall be transparent or flesh coloured.

Sir, does not the Chief Secretary feel that strip-tease is a moral threat to the people of Singapore which initiated the statement by Mrs Shirin Fozdar?

It is a matter of opinion.

asked the Chief Secretary if he will give the reasons for the delay in implementing the Pawnbrokers (Amendment) Ordinance, 1957, passed by the Assembly on 25th April, 1957, and assented to on 10th May, 1957.

Sir, the Ordinance could not be brought into force until the rules for carrying out the provisions had been made, and the drafting of appropriate rules took longer than expected. As the hon. Member is probably aware, the Ordinance and the rules were brought into force on 1st April. The Licensing Board has already called for applications.

asked the Chief Secretary if he will make a statement on the stand of the Singapore Government towards the Indonesian crisis; and what steps the Government has taken to prevent Indonesians having political connections with the Indonesian crisis from entering this country under the guise as businessmen.

Sir, the present disturbances in Indonesia are purely an internal affair and the Singapore Government will abstain from any act which may be construed as, or may appear to be, interference in the internal affairs of another state. It is not the intention of the Government to deny right of entry into Singapore to persons who are in possession of valid travel documents so long as their presence is not prejudicial to the peace and orderly government of Singapore.

Is the Chief Secretary aware that these persons coming in as businessmen are in fact having political connections with the Indonesian crisis?

I do not suppose, Sir, it is confined to Singapore that persons moving on business purposes also have political convictions.

Sir, is the Chief Secretary then aware of the private meetings of these businessmen in certain places in Singapore about the Indonesian crisis?

Sir, I have no information of such private meetings. If the hon. Member would care to furnish me with any information which showed that these were in any way a threat to the good government and order of Singapore, I would be very happy to investigate it.

Sir, is the Chief Secretary then aware that there is an organisation in Singapore which is called the Island Development Organisation which functions in connection with the Indonesian crisis?

No, Sir.

Will the Chief Secretary then care to investigate if there is such an organisation called the Island Development Organisation, and whether it is registered or not?

If the hon. Member will furnish me with the necessary information, Sir, I would be happy to investigate.

Thank you.

asked the Chief Secretary whether the Government now intends to re-establish the Singapore Sports Stadium Board; whether the Government will take steps or direct that steps be taken by the Board or any other body or persons to estimate the public response to the building of a Singapore Sports Stadium, and whether the Government will consider building a Singapore Sports Stadium.

The answer is no, Sir, to all three parts of the question. If there were at any time an indication that substantial support, financial and otherwise, would be forthcoming from the public, the Government would be prepared to reconsider the matter.

Can the Chief Secretary tell us what kind of financial support from the public that he expects, unless the Government initiates the move?

I am very ready, Sir, to receive representations from any of the bodies concerned. I have not so far received any.

asked the Chief Secretary if he will consider absorbing temporary officers of over 10 years' service in the Miscellaneous Services into the permanent establishment.

Sir, I am not sure what is meant by "Miscellaneous Services". Arrangements were made in 1955 and 1956 to absorb a number of temporary clerks into the permanent service but the appointments were made by selection on the advice of the Public Service Commission and the Government could not accept any general obligation of the measure suggested.

Sir, since the Chief Secretary is not aware of the meaning of "Miscellaneous Services", may I tell him that it is field and technical workers. Will he now, Sir, consider absorbing these workers into the permanent service?

I regret, Sir, that the term "field and technical workers" is not sufficient for my purpose. There are such workers in a number of Government departments and some of them, if I put the proper interpretation on it, are indeed in the permanent service.

asked the Chief Secretary to state :-

Sir, it is not customary to furnish the names of individual officers in this connection. Twenty-eight such officers were sent abroad for specialised training during the period in question. The information regarding type of training and posting on return is considerably detailed, and I will, with permission, circulate it in the Official Report.

Can the Chief Secretary tell us whether these officers on their return are attached to the proper unit in line with the training they underwent while on course?

Yes, Sir. Following is the information: The following is the information regarding the types of specialised training and postings on return of 28 Police Officers sent abroad from 1st January, 1955, to 31st March, 1958:-

asked the Attorney-General:-

Sir, the answers to the first part of the question are yes, Sir; this was a case of unusual complexity and it was considered that it could best be handled by the counsel engaged. For the second part of the question, the answers are yes, Sir; approximately $33,000.

Do I understand, Sir, that there is no one capable here - either the Hon. the Attorney-General or a member of the Singapore Bar - who can prosecute the case for the Government?

It is a matter of opinion.

asked the Attorney-General whether he is aware of investigations by the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau into alleged corrupt practices by the Personnel and Welfare Manager of the Singapore Harbour Board; whether he has received the report from the Bureau; and whether any prosecution is contemplated.

Yes, Sir, I am aware of the investigation referred to and I have received a report from the Bureau. The answer to the last part of the question is no, Sir.

Is the fact that the person investigated had only recently received an order of merit from the Crown - being an Order of the British Empire - a factor in the decision not to prosecute him?

No, Sir.

Is any departmental disciplinary action considered?

This is a matter on which I cannot answer authoritatively.

Will the Hon. the Attorney-General indicate what his advice was in the matter?

No, Sir.

Shame!

asked the Financial Secretary if the Government will consider introducing legislation to amend the Income Tax Ordinance (Cap. 166), in order to provide exemption from income tax of any honorarium received by Youth Club leaders for the performance of their duties pertaining to the Youth Club Movement.

No, Sir.

Can the Hon. the Financial Secretary tell us why it is that he will not consider exemption from income tax of any honorarium received by Youth Club leaders?

In my opinion, the monthly stipend paid to Youth Club leaders is as much income as the salary of, say, a clerk and I see no reason why this stipend should not be subject to tax.

asked the Financial Secretary to state the reasons for the non-submission of Income Tax Assessment Forms to the Balestier Community Centre since 1953.

The hon. Member has been misled, Sir. Income Tax forms of returns have been issued to the Balestier Community Centre, returns of income tax have been lodged and assessments issued in respect of the years of assessment 1954-57 inclusive.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the Financial Secretary said the Balestier Community Centre has received such forms. Are not these forms received only very recently?

It is certainly the case, Sir, that there has been some delay. The Balestier Community Centre failed to give notice of chargeability under section 63 (2) of the Ordinance, as it is required to, and the Income Tax Department had to find out about the existence of this community centre from its own sources of information. Subsequently when the first return was sent to this community centre, certain questions arose in connection with its accounts. These questions have only recently been resolved and the forms of assessment were sent to them in September 1957 and subsequently in December 1957.

Mr Speaker, Sir, is the Balestier Community Centre not a registered society, and is it not the duty of the Income Tax Department to find out whether it is a registered society or not; and if it is, why the delay in the submission of forms?

As I understand it, Sir, the Income Tax Department under section 63 (1) of the Ordinance may send forms to all taxpayers, but under section 63 (2), if that form has not been sent within three months of the start of the year of assessment, the taxpayer is obliged to notify his liability to tax to the Department.

asked the Financial Secretary, in view of the objects and activities of Community Centres, whether the Government will consider exempting all Community Centres from Income Tax.

Sir, without knowing more than I do at present about the activities of the various community centres, the amount of funds available to them, and how these funds are spent, I regret that I am unable to give an answer to this question.

Will the Financial Secretary agree to investigate into the activities of such centres and consider the exemption from income tax of such centres?

I shall endeavour to do so if I can find time.

asked the Minister for Local Government, Lands and Housing when the proposed new coastal road from Bedok Corner to Tanah Merah Besar Road can be completed.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I am unable to say because the road at present is no more than a proposal in the Master Plan.

asked the Minister for Local Government, Lands and Housing whether he will consider making Crown Land suitable for farming available to professional farmers who have been evicted by private landowners.

Crown lands suitable for farming are already occupied by long-settled farmers on Temporary Occupation Licence or will be converted into resettlement areas for the purpose of resettling farmers evicted from lands required for public purposes. Hon. Members are probably aware that there is a great shortage of Crown lands for Government's own resettlement needs, which must have first priority over the resettlement of farmers evicted by private land-owners.

asked the Minister for Local Government, Lands and Housing what is the position now in regard to the construction of a link road between Jurong Road and Chua Chu Kang Road.

Land acquisition for the link road between Jurong Road and Chua Chu Kang Road has been completed and resettlement of T.O.L. holders is being undertaken. It is probable that work will commence within the next three months.

Mr Speaker, Sir, as the lifts which form the subject of my question [No. 40] are now in operation, may I have the permission of the House to withdraw the question, which is: To ask the Minister for Local Government, Lands and Housing if he is aware of the inconvenience being caused to residents on the upper floors of Singapore Improvement Trust flats by the stoppage of the operation of lifts, and whether he will take steps to ensure that the lifts may be operated again.

The hon. Member is too late.

Sir, this is a matter for the Singapore Improvement Trust.

asked the Minister for Local Government, Lands and Housing whether there is a shortage of land in the Colony which could be made available as burial grounds; and whether the Government will consider setting up a Committee comprising of dignitaries of all religious bodies to enquire into the question of introducing legislation to provide for the cremation of all dead bodies.

Mr Speaker, Sir, there is at present no shortage of land which could be made available as burial grounds. With regard to the second part of the question, Government does not propose to consider setting up a committee as proposed by the hon. Member for Queenstown.

Sir, since the Hon. the Minister says that there is no shortage of land available, can he tell us the number of acres of land that is available for burial of dead bodies?

That is a different question.

asked the Minister for Local Government, Lands and Housing if he will make a statement in regard to the number of Singapore Improvement Trust housing units approved for erection :-

Mr Speaker, Sir, the figures for April 1955 to June 1956 are: housing units, 1,210; shops, 52. The figures for June 1956 to March 1958 are: housing units, 6,120; shops, 158.

Do these figures represent completed houses or approved houses?

These figures are based on contracts let during the periods.

Can the Minister tell us how many are completed to date out of these figures?

I am not in a position to say now, Sir,If the hon. Member wishes to have a reply to his question, I will be only too happy to circulate it to him.

asked the Minister for Local Government, Lands and Housing if the Government will consider introducing legislation to amend the Local Government Ordinance, 1957, whereby admission to the public gallery at City Council Meetings will only be by Admission Orders issued by the Chief Administrative Officer in accordance with provisions to be laid down in the legislation, and the Chief Administrative Officer will be empowered to remove or arrest any member of the public who misbehaves or creates unruly scenes during the proceedings of any City Council Meeting.

No, Sir, It is considered that all the necessary powers exist under the present legislation for the City Council to keep the necessary order and to ensure the proper conduct of business in the City Council. Section 40 (1) of the Local Government Ordinance reads: "Subject to the provisions of Standing Orders, all meetings of a local authority shall be open to the public unless the local authority by resolution at any meeting otherwise decides." Therefore, Sir, it would be possible for the Council to provide by Standing Orders for the regulation of admission to the public gallery at City Council meetings in the manner suggested by the Member for Queenstown.

asked the Minister for Local Government, Lands and Housing whether the Government will take over the land at Bukit Panjang and Bukit Gombak and sub-divide it into small building lots for the people in Bukit Panjang division to build their own houses.

Mr Speaker, Sir, at the sitting of this Assembly in September 1956, in answer to a similar question by the hon. Member for Bukit Panjang relating to land at Bukit Panjang and Bukit Gombak, I explained that the Admiralty land in question was required for essential defence purposes which would preclude the building of houses on it. The position remains the same and the Admiralty still requires the land for defence purposes, and this Government cannot and will not take over the land for housing.

asked the Minister for Education if he will make a statement on the question of the recognition or otherwise of the Nanyang and other foreign University degrees.

Sir, I have no statement to make on the recognition of foreign university degrees generally. Government is interested in this question only in the context of recognition for the purpose of entry into the public service. The Public Service Commission have set up a Committee to advise on this matter and the Committee has been functioning for the last few months. The question of Nanyang University degrees has been raised by the Chairman of the Executive Council of that University, who has proposed the appointment of a commission to examine the standards of the University, and this commission is in the course of being appointed.

asked the Minister for Education-

Sir, I will divide my answer into two parts. The first part is none of the equipment referred to in the question was received or purchased for secondary technical schools. Second, technical schools were not proposed until late 1954, and the first of them was not completed until 1956. It was Government's original intention in 1952 to build two trade schools similar to the Balestier Road Junior Trade School. In late 1953, Government approved the creation of a new post of Assistant Director of Education (Technical) and accepted the idea of the building of a Polytechnic which would provide technical education at the highest level. The Assistant Director of Education (Technical) on arrival in the Colony in late 1954, reviewed the situation in view of the need for a bridge between the primary school and the Polytechnic not provided by the trade schools, and advised the setting up of two secondary technical schools in place of the proposed two trade schools. Government accepted the suggestion and two secondary technical schools were built and began operating in January 1956. In the meantime, in 1952 and 1953, apparatus and equipment for trade schools had been requested from Australia under the Colombo Plan and ordered against Government funds. A fair proportion of the equipment and apparatus requested and purchased was unsuitable for secondary technical schools since the latter type of schools does not provide trade training. The answers to the specific questions are: (a) the first Colombo Plan equipment was received in 1954; (b) technical equipment for trade schools was purchased from Government funds; and (c) the approximate value of the above apparatus and equipment is as follows: (i) purchased by Government by indents placed with the Crown Agents in 1952 and 1953, and delivered in 1953 and 1954 was approximately $120,000; and (ii) received under the Colombo Plan from requests made in 1953 was approximately $24,000. The following action is to be taken: Part of the equipment purchased from Government funds will be sold to the Polytechnic; part of the equipment to be used for equipping an afternoon school providing a one-year artisan course for over-age school leavers; and part to be transferred when staff are appointed to the schools to undertake woodwork and metal work in preparation for the General Certificate of Education examination. No request for Colombo Plan gifts for secondary technical schools has been made, and all equipment and apparatus purchased from Government funds for secondary technical schools by orders placed since 1954 is now in use at the schools.

asked the Minister for Education if the Government will set up a Committee to enquire into the report upon the standard of English Secondary Education compared with the Chinese Senior Middle School Education and also to recommend to the Government the need or otherwise of changing the text-books at present in use in English Schools to suit the present trend of political changes.

Sir, it is extremely difficult to compare educational standards of different systems which use different media of instruction. The path proposed by the hon. Member for Queenstown would call for a Committee with a wide range of ability and technical experience both in English and Chinese, and their studies, to be of any value, would necessarily take a long time. Officers with the necessary qualifications are already fully occupied with more important duties, and the answer to the hon. Member's first question must therefore be no. However, there is now in Singapore a visiting research professor conducting a course of training in methods of educational testing, and it would be possible, with his help, to undertake the task at some later date. I am glad to have the opportunity to answer the second part of the hon. Member's question, and to make a brief statement on the progress which has already been made in Malayanising syllabuses and textbooks. The Ministry has set up a committee and this Committee and its various Sub-Committees contain representatives of all the various interested groups, and progress has been made. Syllabuses for geography and physical education in primary schools, English in secondary schools, and civics in Singapore schools are already in print, and others for mathematics, science, history, English in English primary schools, physical education in secondary schools and geography, that is Malay version, are ready for publication. They are to be published in all the appropriate local languages and will cover the contents of teaching in all Singapore schools. The writers and publishers of school textbooks in English anticipate the need for Malayanised textbooks, and some textbooks are already in use. Many others are being prepared in the course of the new syllabuses. Similarly, there are several new schemes of textbooks for use in Chinese primary schools. It is only in regard to the Malayanisation of Chinese Middle School textbooks that there has been any difficulty at all. Even though the work of drafting common Malayan syllabuses has almost been completed, the work of providing the necessary textbooks is a difficult and highly specialised business and I cannot promise quick results, but my officers are aware of its importance and are doing all they can.

Mr Speaker, Sir, since the Hon. the Minister for Education compares standards in English and Chinese schools, may I know whether he recognises the significant improvement of the English language in the Chinese schools? At the same time, does he recognise the very little improvement in the standard of vernacular languages in the English schools?

On the contrary, there has been an appreciable increase in the standard of vernacular languages in English schools.

asked the Minister for Education-

The Bukit Panjang English Secondary School building is expected to be completed for occupation in January 1959. It is proposed to retain the present school as a primary school because Bukit Panjang is a rapidly developing area.

asked the Minister for Health whether he will introduce amending legislation to make inoculation of children against diphtheria compulsory.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I have referred this matter to the Medical Advisory Council and am awaiting their report, but it may be of interest to report to the House that considerable success has been achieved in the rural areas by the medical personnel manning the rural maternity and child health services with regard to diphtheria inoculation without any compulsion being brought to bear.

asked the Minister for Communications and Works whether he will consider reviewing the Transport Services policy to cater for the needs of rapidly developing centres in the rural areas.

Yes, Sir.

asked the Minister for Communications and Works whether, in view of the announcement made by the Singapore Telephone Board of the steep and sudden increases in telephone charges from 1st July, 1958, and the effect on the cost of living in Singapore consequent on such increases:-

As I informed the hon. Member for Queenstown in answer to his question in this House on 24th April, 1957, the Telephone Board is a statutory corporation. The Board has full responsibility for prescribing the rate of charges to be made in respect of the telephone services, and Government has no intention of introducing amending legislation. The increase in the telephone charges are the first in Singapore for 35 years and have been rendered necessary by the rise in the cost of equipment, of labour and, above all, of the finance necessary to meet the increasing demand for new lines. In the last two years, the Board has provided an additional 7,500 exchange lines, that is a 33 per cent increase, and current expansion is running at the rate of 450 lines a month. The hon. Member will appreciate what this rate of expansion involves in terms of interest at current market rates. The increased charges only brings Singapore rates up to a level slightly below that the Federation Government has already found necessary. I am satisfied that any general rise in the cost of living will be extremely small as the main burden will fall almost entirely on persons well able to bear it, but I have, however, represented to the Board that the increase in the charge for public call boxes may be onerous to the poor, and I am awaiting the Board's reply whether they can reconsider this part of their proposed increase. The telephone services have been nationalised since 1955 and the question of nationalisation does not arise.

Mr Speaker, Sir, will these increased rates result in giving better services to subscribers, and is it not a fact that current capital expenditure will result in a return in due course?

The capital expenditure is related primarily to expansion of the services. The system is at present very heavily overloaded and the reason why there have been deficiencies - such as wrong numbers and the crossed lines occur - is that to meet the demand for lines, the load on the network has been increased above that appropriate for full efficiency.

Mr Speaker, Sir, is it not fair for the Singapore Telephone Board to withdraw such increases until such time when it can provide a better service?

No, Sir.

asked the Minister for Commerce and Industry whether he is aware that the prices of chickens and eggs have slumped over the last six months, but that prices of chicken-feed have not gone down comparatively; and whether he proposes to take action to help the poultry-rearers.

The hon. Member is aware, Sir, that as a result of Government's vigorous drive to increase food supplies, the prices of poultry and eggs have as compared to last July declined now by about ten per cent in the case of poultry and about 20 per cent in the case of eggs. Of course compared to April 1955 prices of poultry and eggs have come down by about 30 per cent. Prices of chicken feed, on the other hand, have declined on the average by about 10 per cent between August 1956 and March 1957. There has lately been unfair dumping of eggs from China which has hit our poultry rearers and in order to give a chance of survival to our farmers I have ordered that all egg imports be placed under specific licensing and that as from 15th June all imported eggs, except from the Federation of Malaya, be required to bear an indelible stamp impression to show that they are imported eggs.

Mr Speaker, Sir, does it occur to the Minister that there is a class of people who specially go in for stamped eggs for cake-making?

Mr Speaker, Sir, if the requirement of stamping of imported eggs fails to alleviate the difficulties of our farmers, I shall consider further action when the need arises.

Can the Minister tell us how it is possible to stamp every one of the millions of eggs that come into the Colony every month?

It is not for this Government to stamp the eggs. It is for the exporting countries to stamp their eggs. We will only allow import of eggs which are stamped.

Mr Speaker, Sir, can the Minister tell us what sort of eggs are being bought by hospitals, prisons and other public institutions?

As far as I know, Sir, all public institutions demand local fresh eggs when they call for tenders but I am aware that dealers and contractors are in the habit of mixing imported Chinese eggs which are much cheaper together with fresh eggs and therefore this requirement of stamping will show to the buying authorities what they will be getting from the contractors.

asked the Minister for Commerce and Industry whether, in view of the Indonesian situation, he is taking or has taken steps to safeguard the Colony against depletion of its stock of rice and against the rise in the price.

Sir, there is no danger at present of a shortage of rice in Singapore. Merchants today are holding large stocks in the godowns - a considerable quantity of which was imported for re-export. The Government is always alert to the necessity of maintaining adequate stocks in the Colony for local consumption and therefore not only is a day-to-day check maintained on imports and re-exports of rice to ensure that adequate stocks are retained in Singapore but also, as the hon. Member is fully aware, Government, in spite of strong trade and also political opposition from the hon. Member himself, maintains a rice stock-pile so that the people of Singapore are safeguarded from a sudden shortage of their staple food. The price of rice is beyond the control of the Government. It is dependent on the surplus available in rice-producing countries and on the demand from consumer countries. The indicated exportable surplus available for this year in rice-producing countries in the East is less than last year and as a result prices of all types of rice have increased.

asked the Minister for Commerce and Industry-

Yes, Sir. Permits were issued to fishermen staying in Sungei Seletar area as from 4th November, 1957, Sungei Kranji area as from 4th November, 1957 and Sungei Berth area as from 20th November, 1957. As to question (b), Sir, the permits allow hand-line fishing in specified areas on alternate nights.

asked the Minister for Commerce and Industry whether the Government is prepared to take immediate steps to bring about the establishment of a permanent Singapore Trade Mission in China.

Sir, the Trade Advisory Council on which are represented the various Chambers of Commerce, manufacturers, banking, rubber and overseas Chinese import/export interests are unanimous in advising me that they do not consider it necessary or advantageous at present to establish a trade mission in China. Since it is the Chinese People's Government's express policy to trade on a basis of bilateral agreements thus purchasing direct from producing countries rather than through an entrepot and since we have no products of our own in which we could expand our sales to China, Government considers that no useful economic purpose would be served by the establishment of a trade mission in China at present.

asked the Minister for Commerce and Industry-

Yes, Sir, I am aware that such a Committee has been set up in Singapore by the Australian Apple and Pear Board. The Committee now comprises 12 members, one member having resigned some time ago. I am satisfied that the existence of this importers' Committee not only causes hardship to the dealers who are not on the Committee but is also not in the best interests of Singapore consumers. In fact, the Committee is designed to serve the interests of Australian producers. Government thoroughly dislikes such monopolistic cartels and has made repeated representations to the Ministry of Trade in Australia with a view to its early dissolution. In spite of the Ministry's repeated representations, the Committee is still in being and the only concession made so far by the Australian Board was to remove ceilings on imports in 1956. I am at present, Sir, discussing this matter with the Australian Trade Mission.

"to repeal and re-enact with amendments the law relating to the police force of the Colony and to provide for the establishment, organisation, discipline, powers and duties of the police force and for matters incidental thereto", presented by the Chief Secretary (Mr E. B. David); read the First time, to be read a Second time on Wednesday, 11th June, 1958, and to be printed.

"to amend the Criminal Procedure Code (Chapter 132 of the Revised Edition)", presented by the Attorney-General (Mr E. P. Shanks); read the First time, to be read a Second time on Wednesday, 11th June, 1958, and to be printed.

"to provide for the regulation of public entertainments", presented by the Assistant Minister to the Chief Secretary (Mr M. P. D. Nair); read the First time, to be read a Second time on Wednesday, 11th June, 1958, and to be printed.

"to make provision for the creation of a Southern Islands Local Council to administer the Southern islands of the Colony of Singapore". presented by the Minister for Local Government, Lands and Housing (Inche Abdul Hamid Bin Haji Jumat); read the First time, to be read a Second time on Wednesday, 11th June, 1958, and to be printed.

"to amend the Co-operative Societies Ordinance (Chapter 175 of the Revised Edition)", presented by the Minister for Commerce and Industry (Mr J. M. Jumabhoy); read the First time, to be read a Second time on Wednesday, 11th June, 1958, and to be printed.

"to amend the Life Assurance Companies Ordinance (Chapter 178 of the Revised Edition)". presented by the Minister for Commerce and Industry (Mr J. M. Jumabhoy); read the First time, to be read a Second time on Wednesday, 11th June, 1958, and to be printed.

"to amend the Merchant Shipping Ordinance (Chapter 207 of the Revised Edition)", presented by the Minister for Commerce and Industry (Mr J. M. Jumabhoy); read the First time, to be read a Second time on Wednesday, 11th June, 1958, and to be printed.

"to amend the Legal Aid and Advice Ordinance (No. 19 of 1956)", presented by the Minister for Labour and Welfare (Dr Lim Yew Hock); read the First time, to be read a Second time on Wednesday, 11th June, 1958, and to be printed.

"to make provision for the health, safety and welfare of persons employed in factories and other work places", presented by the Minister for Labour and Welfare (Dr Lim Yew Hock); read the First time, to be read a Second time on Wednesday, 11th June, 1958, and to be printed.

"to amend the Hospitals Board Ordinance (Chapter 140 of the Revised Edition)", presented by the Attorney-General (Mr A. J. Braga (on behalf of the Minister for Health)); read the First time, to be read a Second time on Wednesday, 11th June, 1958, and to be printed.

"for making Final Provision for the Public Service for the year 1956", presented by the Financial Secretary (Mr T. M. Hart); read the First time, to be read a Second time on Wednesday, 11th June, 1958, and to be printed.

"to amend the Military Manoeuvres Ordinance (Chapter 81 of the Revised Edition)", presented by the Chief Secretary; read the First time, to be read a Second time on Wednesday, 11th June, 1958, and to be printed.

"to amend the Malayan Auxiliary Air Force Ordinance (Chapter 77 of the Revised Edition)", presented by the Chief Secretary; read the First time, to be read a Second time on Wednesday, 11th June, 1958, and to be printed.

"to amend the Malayan Royal Naval Volunteer Reserve Ordinance (Chapter 78 of the Revised Edition)", presented by the Chief Secretary; read the First time, to be read a Second time on Wednesday, 11th June, 1958, and to be printed.

"to amend the Royal Malayan Navy Ordinance (Chapter 86 of the Revised Edition)", presented by the Chief Secretary; read the First time, to be read a Second time on Wednesday, 11th June, 1958, and to be printed.

"to repeal and re-enact with amendments the Federation of Malaya Export Duties Collection Ordinance (Chapter 163 of the Revised Edition) and to enable the Government of the Federation of Malaya to collect Federal customs duties within the Colony", presented by the Financial Secretary; read the First time, to be read a Second time on Wednesday, 11th June, 1958, and to be printed.

"to amend the Widows' and Orphans' Pension Ordinance (Chapter 61 of the Revised Edition)", presented by the Chief Secretary; read the First time, to be read a Second time on Wednesday, 11th June, 1958, and to be printed.

"to amend the Betting Ordinance (Chapter 113 of the Revised Edition)", presented by the Chief Secretary; read the First time, to be read a Second time on Wednesday, 11th June, 1958, and to be printed.

"to amend the Common Gaming Houses Ordinance (Chapter 114 of the Revised Edition)", presented by the Chief Secretary; read the First time, to be read a Second time on Wednesday, 11th June, 1958, and to be printed.

"to amend the Societies Ordinance (Chapter 228 of the Revised Edition)", presented by the Chief Secretary; read the First time, to be read a Second time on Wednesday, 11th June, 1958, and to be printed.

Sir, I beg to introduce a Bill intituled "An Ordinance to amend the Criminal Justice (Temporary Provisions) Ordinance (Chapter 131 of the Revised Edition)". Bill read the First time.

Second Reading, what day?

Tomorrow, Sir.

I take it that a Certificate of Urgency will be available tomorrow?

It will be available tomorrow.

Sir, I beg to introduce a Bill intituled "An Ordinance to amend the Penal Code (Chapter 119 of the Revised Edition)". Bill read the First time.

Second Reading, what day?

Tomorrow, Sir.

I take it that a Certificate of Urgency will be available tomorrow?

Yes, Sir.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to introduce a Bill intituled "An Ordinance to amend the Singapore Citizenship Ordinance, 1957 (No. 35 of 1957)". Bill read the First time.

Second Reading, what day?

Tomorrow, Sir.

I take it that a Certificate of Urgency will be available tomorrow?

Yes, Sir.

11.18 a.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That leave be given to introduce a Bill to amend the Kwong Wai Shiu Hospital Ordinance (Chapter 143 of the Revised Edition).

It is customary of course to make a short statement on the contents of the Bill.

The purpose of this Bill is to increase the number of Committee members from 40 to 60 and I shall give a more detailed explanation during the Second Reading.

I second the motion.

Question put, and agreed to. Resolved, That leave be given to introduce a Bill to amend the Kwong Wai Shiu Hospital Ordinance (Chapter 143 of the Revised Edition).

Who is prepared to introduce the Bill?

I, Sir. I beg to introduce a Bill to amend the Kwong Wai Shiu Hospital Ordinance (Chapter 143 of the Revised Edition). Bill read the First time.

Second Reading, what day?

Wednesday, 11th June, 1958, Sir.

The following motion stood in the name of Mr Lim Koon Teck (Paya Lebar)- That leave be given to introduce a Bill to incorporate the Reverend Mother Superior of the Congregation of Good Shepherd Nuns in Malaya. 11.20 a.m.

The Member for Paya Lebar is not here. The notice lapses.

As the hon. Member is away in England, may I move it on his behalf?

No. A notice of a motion in the name of a private Member must be moved by that private Member. The notice therefore lapses and it is up to the hon. Member to give fresh notice.

11.21 a.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That this Assembly, in accordance with paragraph (1) of Standing Order No. 61 of the Standing Orders of the Legislative Assembly, Singapore, appoints the following as members of the Committee of Selection :- Inche Abdul Hamid Bin Haji Jumat (Member for Ulu Bedok). Mr J. M. Jumabhoy (Member for Stamford). Mr Mak Pak Shee (Member for Geylang). Mr Lee Kuan Yew (Member for Tanjong Pagar). Mr Lim Choon Mong (Member for Serangoon).

I second it.

Question put, and agreed to. Resolved, That this Assembly, in accordance with paragraph (1) of Standing Order No. 61 of the Standing Orders of the Legislative Assembly, Singapore, appoints the following as members of the Committee of Selection: - Inche Abdul Hamid Bin Haji Jumat (Member for Ulu Bedok). Mr J. M. Jumabhoy (Member for Stamford). Mr Mak Pak Shee (Member for Geylang). Mr Lee Kuan Yew (Member for Tanjong Pagar). Mr Lim Choon Mong (Member for Serangoon). 11.22 a.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That this Assembly resolves that for the better maintenance of the privileges of the Legislative Assembly the Commissioner of Police be requested to make such orders and do all necessary acts and things as are required to ensure that on each day on which the Assembly is sitting during the present session due order and decorum are maintained and preserved in and around the precincts of the Assembly House. Sir, at the sitting held on 5th September, 1956, this House resolved that at the beginning of each session of this Assembly the Commissioner of Police should be requested to make such orders and to take such action as may be necessary to ensure that that there shall be no disorder in the vicinity of the Assembly House on any day on which the Assembly is sitting. Accordingly, Sir, I move the motion standing in my name.

I second it.

The Question is, "That this Assembly resolves that for the better maintenance of the privileges of the Legislative Assembly the Commissioner of Police be requested to make such orders and do all necessary acts and things as are required to ensure that on each day-" [At this point, the Minister for Commerce and industry (Mr J. M. Jumabhoy) walked across the Floor.]

Order. Will the hon. Member please sit down? Mr J. M. Jumabhoy resumed his seat.

Hon. Members are perhaps not aware that when the Speaker is on his feet, no Member should rise or enter the Chamber.

Question put, and agreed to. Resolved, That this Assembly resolves that for the better maintenance of the privileges of the Legislative Assembly the Commissioner of Police be requested to make such orders and do all necessary acts and things as are required to ensure that on each day on which the Assembly is sitting during the present session due order and decorum are maintained and preserved in and around the precincts of the Assembly House.

11.25 a.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the order that Sessional Paper No. S.L. 10 of 1958 do lie upon the table be discharged and the paper withdrawn. Sir, I regret that there was a procedural error in the form of presentation of the Sessional Paper. However fresh Sessional Papers Nos. S.L. 11 to 19 of 1958 on the same subject have been tabled to take its place. These Papers have been tabled in accordance with section 3 of the Fees Ordinance (Chapter 165).

I second it.

Question put, and agreed to. Resolved, That the order that Sessional Paper No. S.L. 10 of 1958 do lie upon the table be discharged and the paper withdrawn. 11.26 a.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That an Address be sent to His Excellency the Governor expressing the thanks of this Assembly for his speech delivered on Wednesday, 9th of April, 1958. Sir, nearly a fortnight has elapsed since the Government's policy for this last session has been made known in the Governor's Speech and this traditional motion is to give Opposition Members an opportunity to debate and criticise our policy. Sir, this is the second session since I became Chief Minister. The first session began on 29th August, 1956, and much has happened since then. 1 need not recount all the events which took place but there is one which I find it necessary to draw attention to because the threat is still with us although much diminished in venom. I refer to subversive activities and the Government's firm action against such elements. The Government's stand is again reiterated in that part of the Governor's Speech which reads: "The Government will continue its vigilance in countering Communist infiltration and sub-version and will not hesitate to take whatever steps are required to counter this threat to the livelihood and well-being of the citizens of Singapore." Sir, we will soon be entering a new era in our political evolution. The new constitution which the All-Party delegation brought back to Singapore from London last year in accordance with the mandate entrusted to the delegation by this Assembly will be brought into operation with the General Election. This new constitution is an honourable and satisfying discharge of the mandate of this Assembly. This record, Sir, would not be correct if I did not mention that there was one hon. Member who is now no longer with us, who felt so heartsick that he resigned and issued a challenge to a by-election against another Member who in honouring his acceptance of the challenge so boldly thrown out at him resigned, contested in the by-election on the matter in dispute, received the support of his electorate and is now still with us. The Member who issued the challenge resigned, did not contest in the by-election and declared that he was giving up politics. This new Constitution, Sir, is a challenge to the people of Singapore who, I am confident, will rise to the occasion and uphold the democratic form of government. This new Constitution opens the way to a richer prize, a prize worth capturing. Hence subversive elements are mustering their forces and endeavouring to open up new fronts, having lost the old fronts through Government's firm action, by finding stooges from among persons who are prepared to prostitute themselves for their own ends, or who are so blinded by their own evil that they unwittingly lend themselves to be made use of by these evil forces to the detriment of the well-being of the citizens of Singapore. In any community one is bound to find such persons, and I hope and pray that their eyes will be opened in time to the fact that they are playing with fire which will surely destroy them in the end. As I said earlier, Sir, the new Constitution is a challenge to the citizens of Singapore. The Government is pledged to wipe out the destructive forces in our midst, and there can be no relaxation in our vigilance; but this fight can be hampered if the citizens of Singapore do not guard themselves against evil and destructive propaganda. During the last session the Government had an uphill fight against the evil propaganda that was being disseminated by subversive elements and swallowed by gullible people who should have thought better. This Government was accused of being against Chinese education and Chinese culture. The Government's primary duty is to protect the well-being of the citizens, and in the discharge of this sacred duty we had to take action against certain Chinese middle schools and had to detain under the Preservation of Public Security Ordinance a number of students from these schools, because their subversive activities in these schools were a grave threat to the well-being not only of their fellow-students but also of Singapore. It is from the student body that the future leaders of Singapore will arise, and if they are not put on the right track while in school to become worthy citizens, their future will be blighted, their outlook will be distorted, and they will be a liability instead of an asset to the country. This action of the Government taken in the best interests of the citizens of Singapore was twisted by disruptive forces for the consumption of gullible people as an action against Chinese education and Chinese culture. Let us examine the Government's education policy based on the All-Party Report. For the first time in the history of Singapore, Chinese education has an equal place. Teachers in Chinese schools are put at par with teachers in English schools, thus receiving large increases in their emoluments. This year the Government is spending $15 million on Chinese education. This, Sir, we claim is indeed a proud record. In the short space of two years we have done more for Chinese education than all the previous administrations put together, and very much more than governments in neighbouring countries having Chinese populations. I do not fear any contradiction on this. I have offered to send a small group of students from Chinese schools on a visit to these neighbouring countries, and even to the Chinese mainland, to see for themselves. I have received a good number of applications and these are at present being considered, and arrangements will be made to send a group on the tour during the August school vacation. This is the Government's answer to the evil forces which preach and misguide people to foolishly believe that this Government is against Chinese education. The Nanyang University, Sir, was recently officially opened by the Governor. I have stated on several occasions during, the past few months that the Government will give recognition to Nanyang University degrees, but before this can be done, it has been proposed to appoint a Commission of Scholars to advise on recognition, thus giving weight to such recognition. The delay in the appointment of this Commission has been due to the attitude of the Nanyang University authorities. A happy change, Sir, has now taken place, and proposals for a Commission of Scholars to advise on recognition are going forward. When this has been resolved, the Government will grant financial aid if required, thereby helping to make the Nanyang University an institution of high learning of which we can all be proud. Can anyone honestly and truthfully say that this Government is against Chinese education? For the first time in the history of Singapore we have a multilingual City Council and will soon have multilingual District Councils and a multilingual Legislative Assembly. The Chinese language is given due place in debates in these Councils and in the Legislature. And the gates of this august Assembly are thrown wide open by our citizenship laws, under which some 300,000 Chinese who were not born in Singapore have registered as citizens. Their names will appear on electoral rolls for the forthcoming general elections, and I look forward to seeing candidates fielded from among this group. Thus, Chinese-speaking Chinese and China-born Chinese who have become citizens of Singapore enjoy for the first time the same rights and privileges as all other citizens. I do not, Sir, for a moment doubt that in enjoying these rights and privileges they will not forget that they too have responsibilities towards the State of Singapore which will soon be brought into being under the new Constitution. Sir, are actions on the part of the Government such as I have recounted against Chinese education and Chinese culture? Oh, citizens of Singapore, be not bluffed again! Listen not to evil propaganda! Guard against this and let us march forward together, and fight subversive forces and rout them! Rout them out and make this Singapore of ours a happier and a better land to live in. I must confess, Sir, that we would have lost our fight last session against subversive forces had we not been endowed with the Marshall law by my predecessor. I refer to the Preservation of Public Security Ordinance. The people of Singapore should be grateful, as this Government is indeed grateful, to him for introducing this Marshall law, which is a very effective weapon against the rampages of the Communists and their fellow-travellers. This Marshall law emanated from the mind of a man who was most vehemently against Communism, and among his other achievements, this is the most outstanding one when he was Chief Minister. My colleagues and I thank him, this Assembly thank him, and above all the people of Singapore thank him too. And now, Sir, a few words about our relationship with the Federation of Malaya. I quote from the Governor's Speech: "The Government is happy to record the continued cordial relationship which it enjoys with the Government of the Federation of Malaya. The Government takes the stand that union with the Federation is inevitable, and will direct its energies towards creating a climate and conditions conducive to such a union." Sir, the Federation Prime Minister, Tunku Abdul Rahman, is a man of great understanding and appreciation of the ties between Singapore and the Federation of Malaya. The two territories are inter-dependent. One cannot prosper without the other. Any threat to the economic well-being and security of one is a threat to the other. I therefore hope and pray that the causeway which bridges the hopes and aspirations of true Malayans will not be turned into a real political barrier detrimental to both territories. And this Government is directing its energies to seeing that this does not happen. Sir, in the Governor's Speech there is this paragraph: "The Government intends to recommend to the Assembly the holding of elections for an enlarged Assembly under the new Constitution as soon as it is practically possible to do so. The time-table will depend on the preparation and enactment of the necessary constitutional instruments and legislation as well as any measures which this Assembly may decide to adopt in order to improve the electoral procedure. The Government intends that the agreement with the United Kingdom Government on the form of the constitutional instruments should be made by the All-Party delegation which took part in the Constitutional discussion last year." Sir, questions have been asked at this sitting on the constitutional instruments, the date of coming into effect of the new Constitution, the proposed trip to London, and the Member for Changi has asked Government's view on the introduction of legislation for compulsory voting although he had very much earlier tabled a motion in support of compulsory voting - Motion No. 9 on the Order Paper. All these questions, Sir, have been answered this morning and the motion will be debated at its due time. The answers which I have given to questions on the draft Constitution need not be amplified. I would like, however, to say a few words more about the London trip. I hope to receive before the end of this month from the Colonial Office the draft Constitution so that copies can be handed to members of the All-Party delegation for their study. I will call meetings of the All-Party delegation so that we can sort out our ideas on the matter before proceeding to London to finalise the constitutional instruments. The discussions will begin in London on 12th May, and the delegation will be the guests of the United Kingdom Government to whom I wish to record my thanks for this hospitality. I am sure hon. Members will agree with me that the quickest possible way of finalising the draft Constitution is by discussions around the table and not by protracted correspondence or telegraphic communication. The purpose of the London trip is clear, and yet there are dishonest politicians who try to read into it motives that are manifestly false. I have been accused of wanting to reach an understanding with the Colonial Office to appoint me as Yang di-Pertuan Negara under the new Constitution. Sir, the agreement reached in London with the Colonial Office bars the appointment as Yang di-Pertuan Negara of any person who is closely connected with politics. How can I ever be, I wonder? I have also been accused, Sir, of trying to seek Colonial Office approval to extend the Rendel Constitution so that I can continue to be Chief Minister. What utter falsehood. The job of Chief Minister was thrust upon me in June 1956 at a time of crisis. I did not want it, but duty to my country and service to the people of Singapore demanded that I should take it up. The carrying of two jobs - that of Chief Minister and of Minister for Labour and Welfare - is a heavy one and my health has suffered in consequence, and the only sustaining factor in my job - my two jobs - is that I am serving my country to the best of my ability, and in the discharge of this duty, Sir, there is no sacrifice great enough or noble enough. Sir, let us now turn to compulsory voting. This is the subject which has caused much gnashing of teeth and tearing of hair by some politicians and erstwhile friends. As Motion No. 9 on the Order Paper on compulsory voting is still to be debated, I do not propose to say much on this subject although it has a bearing on that part of the Governor's Speech which refers to the date of the general elections. However, I would like to say here and now that it was at one of the civics courses that the view was expressed, not by me, that compulsory voting would be a good thing for the people of Singapore. This was given publicity in the Press and it brought forth comments from individuals and organisations and representations to the Government from certain organisations. I met representatives from organisations that had made representations to me. I informed the meeting that if compulsory voting was introduced at this stage, it would mean a delay in the general elections, but certainly not beyond the life of the Rendel Constitution. A report of this meeting appeared in last Sunday's papers. Sir, I have touched only on the more important aspects of the Governor's Speech as these are uppermost in the minds of hon. Members. I do not propose to take up the time of hon. Members much longer by elaborating on what the Government proposes to do during this last session. All I need say is that we are continuing with our four-year programme. We believe we have done much and are still doing more for the people of Singapore, and when we appear before them at election time we shall go forward with confidence and with satisfaction that we have not failed them. Sir, it is now the pleasure and the privilege of hon. Members of the opposition to unleash their criticisms. We will face them. Indeed we thrive on them. Let us all on both sides of the House in the fight that may develop in the course of this debate not lose sight that the fight ahead of us is a crucial fight for democracy in Singapore. Let us go into the election arena, fight hard, but fight wisely, so that subversive forces with democratic organisations as their front may not succeed in stealing away the prize which the All-Party delegation brought back last year. May all subversive forces perish in this attempt! May democracy flourish in the new State of Singapore. Majulah Singapura!

I second the motion, Sir, reserving my right to speak at a later stage. Question proposed. 11.53 a.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, as a non-Party man and a Back-bencher, I have not a great deal of criticism to offer on the speech made by the Governor at the opening of this session of the Assembly. Incidentally, Sir, as Backbenchers we used to have some very nice little desks on which we could put our notes, but now we have not got them any longer. So, placed as they are on this narrow ledge, I hope the hon. Member for Changi will not knock over my notes with his head. The only criticism which I would offer of the speech is, on the whole, that I consider it to be a little airy-fairy and unspecific; otherwise it is the type of speech one might expect to hear from a Conservative or Liberal Government which works in a well-established welfare state. The opening paragraphs refer mostly to historic facts, though one sentence stands out like a beacon. I refer to the sentence which reads: "Singapore exists because of its trade." Because of this very fact which surely everybody recognises, I myself feel fairly optimistic about the future of this great port, and I cannot believe that any Party would try to wreck that trade. Such a Party would have a very short existence. I suppose there is always the possibility of a Party getting into power which might be intent only on creating chaos, but I think it unlikely. Again, of course, we might expect to hear the old tune about blaming the colonialists, and the rights of the workers, with those wearying and repetitive emphases on that very subject - as if there were only two types of men - workers and non-workers.

There are.

The former, of course, being the P.A.P. But I would remind the House that while there is a great deal to be said for looking after the welfare of the worker, it is nevertheless the gifted individual in this life, through his initiative and genius, who does things that in the long run advance the well-being of the worker. However, that is merely in passing, Sir, I personally have always disliked the term "worker" as such. When I was a young man we used to talk about the "working classes" and the "working man". Somehow those terms sounded less sinister than "worker"; "worker" suggests to me the beehive or the ant-heap where the will of the inmates is entirely subjugated to that of their leaders; but whatever Party comes into power, Sir, I have no doubt that it will be to the chagrin of the other side, and one can only hope that the confidence expressed in the final passage of His Excellency's Speech - that he is "confident that when General Elections are held the people and the new citizens of this island will express in definite and unmistakable terms their desire for a stable Government" and so on - will not be misplaced. I am endeavouring to touch on one or two things that the Chief Minister did not particularly refer to in his speech - I am not dealing with education or anything of that nature. I personally believe that the establishment of secondary industries in this island can never and will never take the place of the entrepot trade. There are plently of people here, even in what the Chief Minister has just called this august body, who believe that the enormous and phenomenal growth of population presents no particular problem. They seem to think that jobs will be found for them here, in Johore or in Jupiter, but I personally am not so sanguine about that, and it is therefore refreshing to read: "The Government recognises the need to offer incentive to capital investment in the industrial field in the initial stages and with this in view is now preparing `pioneer industry' legislation. Government Departments have been instructed and subsidised Boards have been requested to give preference to locally manufactured articles." That, Sir, is a splendid statement and I hope that every Party will include in its banner the device - "Encourage capital investment." Still touching on this line of country, I was most interested to hear that- "It is the Government's intention to reorganise and strengthen the industrial section of the Ministry of Commerce and Industry and the possibility of the present Industrial Promotion Board actively assisting in the promotion of large scale industries is being studied." This is good news. I have a lot of time for the Ministry of Commerce and Industry. As a business man, I take a great interest in its functions and I am most interested to learn, as I am sure the whole business community will be, that it is being reorganised and strengthened. As for the Industrial Promotion Board, I think it is high time that this pilot scheme developed into something bigger. I am quite certain that Government could offer assistance to industry which would be both helpful and profitable. A lead actually by Government in this matter might induce some local tycoons who have so far not greatly interested themselves in industry to invest some of their surplus capital in this field. Continuing with the Governor's Speech, we have another of those cogent and brief statements: "The Government will continue to do everything in its power to encourage entrepot trade." That, I think, is a splendid thing too. Let us trade with everybody, no matter who they are, as long as they can buy from us and we can sell to them. Sir, everybody knows that the coffers of the rich land to the south of us are very nearly empty, but they have goods to sell and we can supply them with their needs. Let us at least from this end endeavour to iron out any difficulties that may stand in the way of that trade. My next point, Sir, is on the question of banking legislation. Those of us who have read the Report by Mr G. M. Watson and Sir Sydney Caine, familiarly known as the Watson-Caine Report, are aware that it included draft banking legislation. Most bankers in this city are agreed that this legislation would have to be considerably modified. The Colony banks - and I make no distinction between the branches of big overseas corporations and indigenous banks - understand their business quite well and are very conservatively run. None of their depositors has ever had an anxious moment. It is hoped, therefore, that the proposed legislation will not be unduly burdensome, but I agree that, with the passing of the colonial regime, legislation to supervise the licensing, control and supervision of banks in this city is highly desirable. The outcome of the discussions between this Government and the Government of the Federation of Malaya on the subject of central banking which, according to the Governor's Speech, is continuing, is anxiously awaited by the business community. The advent of a central bank is inextricably linked up with the future of this currency and the pledge that the Government has given "not to make any arrangement which might undermine confidence in the currency in use in Singapore or jeopardise its stability" is, to my mind, the outstanding statement in the speech. Sir, I do not wish to dwell on all the fine things the Government intends to do. The Ministers of the Labour Front Coaliton Government have learned quite a lot in the last three years and they know very well what causes Singapore to prosper. I do not quarrel with their programme. The "unworkable" Rendel Constitution has worked surprisingly well for three years - three memorable years in which Singapore has not stood still at all but has grown and developed greatly - and now there seems to be a fair chance of the Rendel Constitution running its full four-year course! According to the P.R.O.'s translation, the opening sentence of the editorial of the Utusan Melayu of 17th April reads as follows: "The Speech of the British Governor of Singapore at the opening of the Legislative Assembly meeting last Wednesday was actually prepared by the Chief Minister Mr Lim Yew Hock. The Coalition Government of the Labour Front and U.M.N.O./M.C.A. Alliance made use of the Assembly meeting, through the Governor's report of what has been, is being and will be done, to convince the people of the necessity to re-elect the present Government." Sir, I shall not be here myself at the next elections, but if I were, by gad, I think they would have my vote!

I think this is a convenient time to suspend. I will take the Chair again at half-past two. Sitting accordingly suspended at four minutes past twelve o'clock to 2.30 p.m. Sitting resumed at 2.30 p.m.

Debate resumed on Question.

Mr Speaker, Sir, as the curtain rises on the last act of the life of this Assembly, it should be recorded that there was an air of desolation and melancholy, heightened no doubt by the enormously enlarged Chamber and the large number of empty seats. But, it is more than just empty seats which made the Governor's Speech sound so hollow. I wondered on that day how many empty hearts there were. Sir, I give the M.C.S. and the expatriate civil service one bouquet today. They are very good for the stiff upper lip. The thing that impressed me most about the Governor's Speech was his bouncing demeanour, and his joyful confidence, which I hope is justified by the confidential appraisal that he must have of the overall situation of the Labour Front Coalition Government. On this side of the House, Sir, I can only say that the mandate from heaven has passed from the hands of the Labour Front Coalition Government. We did not come to this Assembly to hear all the piddling little things that the Government hoped to enact in its last few months of office. What everybody wanted to know was when are they going to hold the elections. When are we going to have a new Government under a new constitution. On these important subjects, the Speech was singularly silent. It is the art of equivocation. All it says is: "That Government intends that the agreement with the United Kingdom Government on the form of the constitutional instruments should be made by the All-Party delegation which took part in the Constitutional discussion last year." It can mean anything according to the way one chooses to construe it. Sir, every Member in this House, if he were to get a dose of some truth drug that would make him tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth, would say that what occupies him most is, what now? Will I come back to this Chamber? And, of course, most worried of them all are the Independents. Hence the enormous number of Questions filed today by the Independents. They must find a bus or some vehicle before they can find themselves back. The Labour Front and the Liberal-Socialists have been so shattered by the events of the last few months, events which anybody could have told them were coming, that they have not quite recovered their balance. Sir, what I would like to ask both the Labour Front Government and the Liberal-Socialists Party is this: do they want early elections now? I remember so vividly the taunts of the Member for Telok Ayer (Mr R. Jumabhoy) about the Government opposite being undemocratic and that the time had come for early elections. Even the Member for Serangoon (Mr Lim Choon Mong), during the debate over citizenship, insisted that there should be early elections. Now we know from the legislative programme that the Government has planned, and the conferences that it has planned for 1959, that it has every intention of going on for its full term of office. The only question is: what will happen after the District Council elections some time in the middle of this year? It is not possible for us to pretend that this Assembly meets today in the same circumstances as when it met in December last year before the City Council elections. And it is idle for us to pretend that the situation will be unchanged by the results of the District Council elections. The ex-Chief Minister (Mr D. S. Marshall) has suggested that the London trip is intended to enable his successor - his one-time articled clerk - (I understand he gets little joy in calling him Dr Lim) to arrange with Mr Lennox-Boyd to be a Yang di-Pertuan Negara, and to have the constitution extended for two years. I would like to tell the ex-Chief Minister that he should not give ideas to his old colleagues because they may actually take the cue, except that with the P.A.P. participation in the last talks and our being in this Assembly, they are unlikely ever to succeed. But the truth is that early elections or no depends, does it not, upon the chances of an electoral victory for the Labour Front Coalition Parties? That simply is the whole position. If they had won the City Council elections as we wanted them to win - indeed we did-

Thank you.

-then there would have been more bounce in them. We might well be on the way to having elections in August, perhaps September. Unfortunately, partly because of the lack of organisation, and also partly because certain Left-wing elements wanted to destroy the Labour Front and used the Workers Party for this purpose, the Labour Front suffered a catastrophic defeat. Now even the District Council elections will not be held, in the words of the Governor, "until the middle of this year". Originally, I believe, it was scheduled for March. Now I say this advisedly: we are prepared to have the elections at any time because we know that we will win them, be it this year or next year. And I say frankly to the Labour Front, "There will be no magic formula that you can concoct that can bring back the secret of victory other than hard work; that has not been done, the propaganda battle has been lost. Those are the hard facts of life." One thing should be made clear: this issue of the early elections is completely unconnected with compulsory voting. I know that the ex-Chief Minister was somewhat agitated at the thought of early elections being postponed indefinitely on account of compulsory voting. He is renowned for many qualities but one of them is not clear thinking. Early elections have nothing to do with compulsory voting. I ask the Chief Minister two questions and, if he were honest, he would give me a reply which would substantiate what I said. If today all the laws introducing compulsory voting had been passed and the constitution were ready, would he have general elections when he knows that he is likely to suffer defeat? The answer is no, is it not?

You are answering it.

Put it in another way: if there were no need for compulsory voting laws to be passed and the constitution is ready, would there be elections when he knows he is going to be defeated? The answer again is no. And therefore if it were not the excuse of compulsory voting there would be some other excuse. What is important is not the question of compulsory voting or no compulsory voting, but the new constitution. We agreed to a constitution for full internal self-government. We know that a draft - or at least the Chief Minister has admitted it as some kind of a draft which is not really a draft - has arrived and that he has circulated bits of it to the departments concerned. We have not received a copy of it although he admitted that we are entitled to it. Further, he wants to bring the delegation back to London to settle the draft. Now, Sir, there has been considerable press speculation on it. It might well be that some of the leaks were officially inspired, that there will now be written into the constitution a number of things which were not discussed at all, such as making the civil service sacrosanct, preventing the allowances as distinct from the salaries of the civil servants from coming under the control of the Legislature and the Government, building the Public Service Commission into the constitution, making these allowances permanent or consolidating them into basic salaries, and so on. I would like to state my Party stand very clearly on this matter. Nothing goes into the constitution with our consent other than that which we agreed we would take in London, a constitution giving us full internal self-government, that is, the right to run the Government within Singapore with no let or hindrance, constitutional or otherwise. I do not think that the armour-plating complex - if all this rumour happens to be true, and I have more than a fair suspicion that a great deal of it may well be true - can save the situation. It is utterly foolish and stupid to believe that you can make a constitution such that you tie up the hands of the executive and paralyse it at the will of the civil servants. Sir, as the Hon. the Chief Minister rightly pointed out, it was we who justified what we did in London last year, if he cannot hit Mr David Marshall himself, then we do not mind his using the P.A.P. for that purpose. We have a right more than any other Party to see that what we defended is what we will get and nothing less. As for his trip to London, we will not be party to this trip until we have first received a draft copy of the constitution for our study, and our agreement to it. If there are any parts of the constitution to which we cannot agree, then there must be agreement between the Parties to delete such passages from the draft. Otherwise the responsibility for this new constitution will rest on those who will participate in bringing back something less than what we originally agreed. We are not really concerned today with what the Labour Front will or will not do for its last year of office. Those of us who have had the privilege of a front-seat view of what has been happening in the last three years should think clearly and find out why it failed. I say this with no rancour. They did not expect to govern. For more than a year, they did not govern. And then when they tried to govern, the position was too far gone. They were inept, and they got themselves into a mess. That briefly sums up the situation. The first thing they lacked - and we are reminded of it today in the morning press - is sufficient integrity and drive in its leadership to give it the cohesion required for the leadership of any movement. The Member for Farrer Park (Mr A. R. Lazarous), the Member for Queenstown (Mr Lee Choon Eng), the Member for Kampong Kapor (Mr Seah Peng Chuan) who is absent - former Labour Front Members - are throwing enormous stones at the Government today because, for multifarious reasons, the spoils were not shared with them. The ex-Chief Minister is running around, it appears, with a "hammer", large as life, prepared to knock anybody who is not in a position to knock back, and challenging all and sundry. But he is wiser now; he only challenges those whom he knows will not accept the challenge. It is a sad commentary that the Labour Front never grew up from what it was - a collection of individuals who got together to run a Party, got the surprise of their lives when they unexpectedly won the elections and became Ministers. They got an even bigger surprise of their lives when they opened Pandora's Box and a jack-in-the-box bounced up at them. They have never quite recovered from the shock of it all. Sir, the sight of Assistant Ministers boring holes in a sinking ship to make sure that it sinks faster is a pathetic one, and this is not because Assistant Ministers have a habit of buying refrigerators with $925 cash, a practice which Assistant Ministers, or those who aspire to be such, should never adopt. But for an Assistant Minister to call a meeting and condemn your Government for not fulfilling the promises which they themselves made, and they themselves have not carried out, I think takes the cake-

Order. Firstly, I must warn the strangers in the Gallery that they must try and contain themselves. Secondly, I think possibly the hon. Member is contravening the Standing Order by attacking the conduct of a Member of this House. He can only do so of course by a substantive motion.

Sir, I do not wish to condemn the conduct. All I wish is to draw attention to the condemnation or praise which the facts themselves imply. I leave it to those who have read the morning papers to judge for themselves. The Labour Front leadership must be sanguine in the extreme if they believe that with leadership material of that calibre they can survive the stresses and strains which must inevitably be put on any government taking office within the framework of the Rendel Constitution, and with the political situation in Singapore as it is. Sir, I heard the Hon. the Chief Minister today complain bitterly that he had been misrepresented, that he was really not anti-Chinese culture and not anti-Chinese education. He said that it was the wicked people who made it appear that it was so. But what did he expect? If he carries out an anti-subversive purge, does he expect to find his victims all docilely waiting to be picked up? Does he not expect them to fight back? Does he not expect that part of the fight is the presentation - that he was not just anti the Chinese middle school boys and girls whom he wanted to pick up, but anti-Chinese culture, anti-Chinese education? Is he so innocent? Did he not anticipate that the moves he was making meant that it could be so construed - unless he was very careful to see that it could not - that the Right would take advantage of the situation, and that his Government would be pushed to the Right? I have heard nothing more damning of the Labour Front Government than when the nominated Member Mr Sutherland this morning stood up and said with so much condescension and patronage, that it was not a bad speech at all-the sort of thing one expects of a Liberal sort of government or a Conservative sort of government. That from a colonial banker just about puts the seal of death on any political party. Let us face the facts. That is what has happened. Wittingly or unwittingly, he moved against the C.P. Left and allowed himself to be manoeuvred into a position where he makes speeches at the opening ceremonies of American insurance companies, gets himself mixed up with bankers who praise him and his Government as being Liberal and Conservative. Eventually he finds that he is no longer crusading on the Left, which might have been his original intention but fellow-travelling with the reactionary Right to which he was finally drawn. And he must know that this is not the politics of the pre-Rendel days when people had pretty little speeches prepared for them, and showed them to Colonial Secretaries before they made them in the Chamber so that the Colonial Secretaries could prepare their replies. This is a tough business. Power is being fought for - power to control the lives of the people of Singapore, power to shape and unshape the society. One of the most inept things that any politician can do - and I had always thought that at least the Member for Havelock (Dr Lim Yew Hock) was a skilful politician, who has survived first being nominated, then being elected into a pre-Rendel Legislature, then after sitting on the Rendel Constitutional Commission getting himself elected into the Rendel Legislature, I should have thought that he would have had sufficient political aptitude - was to come to this Chamber this morning and repeat all the rumours that have been circulating against him, thereby giving credence to them. Any book on propaganda will tell him that the last thing you should do about a rumour is to repeat it - worse still, repeat it and then deny it. Today he repeated the rumour that he was anti-Chinese culture, anti-Chinese civilisation. He repeated the rumour that he wanted to extend the life of the Rendel Constitution. He repeated the rumour that he was going to settle with Mr Lennox-Boyd to be the Yang di-Pertuan Negara. Why such ineptitude? And the final reason, in my view, why this Government has failed and will fail, despite all the flourish at the end of the Governor's Speech, is because it has not the capacity to govern. It had the civil service run the Government for it. It is an open secret, is it not, that there are what is commonly known in the civil service as "PL. D.W. Ministers". I am told that the "PL." stands for "Please" and "D.W." for "Deal With". When Government servants send up enormous bunches of files to harass Ministers who already find that their constituents are bothering them more than they expected, with an urgent note at the botton "What shall we do? Shall we do (a), (b), (c), (d), (e) or (j)", the Minister puts at the bottom "PL. D. W." and they go back to be "dealt with". The Labour Front will fail as much because it lacked the political aptitude, as well as the political touch which one could not expect of a civil service. The only thing that saves the Labour Front from total rot is because there are a few, although very few, individuals with sufficient integrity and the will to resist a complete rot from setting in. But for that, they would have gone beyond redemption. Sir, I said, not as an idle boast, that the P.A.P. will win the elections if they were held tomorrow, or next year, short of something catastrophic happening or something very foolish that we do. And we will win them, apart from the question of having a better organisation and having better personnel, because the other Parties do not attempt to understand the meaning of a social revolution. Have they not ceased to wonder why in the last four months the Government was just swept aside and the attention of the people of Singapore was focussed on the City Council? Why? Because it had captured the hearts and minds of the workers. [Interruption.] Yes, workers! Mr Sutherland does not believe that men should be called workers. He thinks that there is no such thing as workers. He believes in a working class. Well, that is a more Marxist way of putting it and according to the Marxists - and I think they are quite right in this - there are two types: workers and those who live off workers-drones.

What are you?

Order.

Sir, I have always admired the British for their aplomb, under the most difficult of circumstances. It rather saddens me to hear that he will be leaving us soon. To think that one should miss a bayonet target for practice before the time is up is a matter for regret. But I also wondered how much harm he was doing to the Labour Front Government and the colonial system by his most untimely interjections. I do not wish unduly to demoralise the Government but let them ask themselves. Why is it that the Lorong 3 fire had a public response and the spontaneous goodwill flowing in which no other fire in the past had evoked. True, this is an All-Party effort. This is just by way of illustration. For the first time they begin to understand that these magnificent institutions like the City Council, which they had viewed as institutions of bureaucracy and petty oppression could be turned into public institutions for their protection, welfare and benefit. Albeit, they needed some colourful gesture like throwing out the mace to drive the lesson home. But that is the lesson the Labour Front must learn if they want to know what is going on, and have a chance to compete at all. The Labour Front leader in the City Council said - as it was reported in the last few days and with a great deal of silent praise from the English language press - "Oh well, let's have the Mayor of Penang here but let's have none of this nonsense about, `Down with colonialism and all that,'" because obviously by implication, his Party is not in favour of it. For the first time, the City Council is going to mean something to the people. If we - this year or next year - we are prepared for it any time, - cannot do the same transmutation for the institutions of Government and make them become symbols of the people's rights and privileges instead of symbols of colonial bureaucracy and oppression, then at the end of our five-year term of office, we will be out on our heels and deserve to perish. When in pursuit of a social revolution, never pay the slightest attention to the present English language press. Praise from them means destruction. Decide what you have to do, decide what is right and press on. The more they howl against you, the more you can be certain that you are on the right track. For that reason, I would like to say this for the benefit of the expatriate officers in the City Council. We have the courage and the will, to govern. We expect the civil service including the civil servants of the local Government to obey us and do our bidding. If they foolishly choose to enter the political arena and join political issue with us, as the President of their expatriate association sought to do, writing letters to the press saying that the P.A.P. policy is going to bring chaos and the whole City Council to a halt, then they must expect that they are not just fighting the Mayor and twelve Councillors. They are fighting the whole of the P.A.P. Although we may be in the minority in the City Council, at the latest by the end of one year, it is this Chamber which will determine what happens there. Any participation by civil servants who oppose or sabotage the political policy of a Party which is given the constitutional right to govern will bring swift and certain retribution. That, Sir, is briefly, why the P.A.P. has not failed. I do not say that if or when we form the Government we will succeed where the Labour Front failed. But we will certainly make a better effort, and we have this one great advantage. We have seen Pandora's Box opened and now know what is inside. Whoever forms the next Government, should give this bouquet to the departing Labour Front Government. They charted a minefield. We now know where the booby traps are, and have a fair idea where a few more might be. They got hurt in the process of finding out the booby traps. We hope that when our turn comes we will not be so badly hurt; more, we hope that we will make a success of it because we have seen how not to win an election, and how not to not govern. We ought to know how to win the elections, and having won them, how to set out firmly, democratically and wisely to govern, and bring about the social revolution that we promise beforehand. In this connection, as a last parting shot to the Liberal-Socialists on this side and the Labour Front on the other side of the House: do not try and out-P.A.P. the P.A.P. It is a very foolish and unprofitable business. The ex-Chief Minister tried it; he ceased to be the Chief Minister. He came back as the Member for Cairnhill and tried it again; he ceased to be the Member for Cairnhill. We told the City Council workers that the City Council could stand an extra 20 cents per day per worker. The Labour Front and the Lib-Socs who were there for years and years and never gave them even five cents more said, "Double you; make it 40 cents." We still said 20 cents and we were outvoted. But in the end it is they who will be outvoted. We said, "Prepare for essential services to go on in case of a strike." The Liberal-Socialists said, -the Member for Tanglin (Mr John Ede) may not know what is going on in the City Council, and he may not be aware that his cinemas may close down without electricity - "Do not prepare for it." And the Straits Times in order to do us harm said, "P.A.P. are strike breakers."! Tomorrow if the strike takes place in the City Council, the ultimate person responsible for running the essential services will be the Minister for Local Government. He knows it, and his own Party abstained - at least they had the sense to abstain - but the Lib-Socs and the Labour Front voted against preparing for essential services. Now, Sir, anybody in his senses knows that this Assembly has outlived itself. It is like stale eggs, as a newspaperman who I believe was of American extraction put it, "Gosh, there is a smell of stench around here." Looking in an injured sort of way, I said, "Where from?" He said, "Ah well, you know, some of these chaps I still see around." Well, not wishing to breach the privileges of this Assembly and not wanting to besmirch the character, integrity and reputation of my hon. Friends in this House, I give this last bouquet to the Labour Front. They tried but they did not have a chance. They did not have a team to start with. They broke up before it started. They kept on breaking up after it started, and even before it is over, Assistant Ministers are throwing stones at the Government. By the time it is over - I understand that the Minister for Health (Mr A. J. Braga) is a good shot with a shotgun - I hope they do not go shooting each other as we bid them adieu. 3.10 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise to speak now since hon. Members from both sides of the House are so reluctant to stand up to speak. I wonder whether they are shocked by the speech of the Member for Tanjong Pagar or by the speech of the Hon. the Chief Minister this morning. Sir, I recollect that as soon as the Governor's Speech was delivered, we adjourned to the C.P.A. Room for a cocktail party and one hon. Member from the Government side asked me what I thought about it. I said, "No, I do not like it. It is weak, bad, just like a painted doll and if you will allow me to use a proper Chinese phrase, I will call it "phoon ser kai pin". I cannot find suitable words to describe the Governor's Speech except to say that it is like a painted doll - beautiful but not in place, smiling but not appealing - bad and weak. I was very disheartened when I heard the Member for Tanjong Pagar give a blab, blah, blah speech. I still remember the column where he said when debating the previous Governor's Speech - I quote "Hansard", Volume 2, No. 2 of 5th September, 1956: "But to ignore the political realities which surround this whole Assembly, this Government and the whole country is political childishness." Never so true! I happily endorse every word of this sentence by the Member for Tanjong Pagar, for the speech he has just delivered is childish, Sir. He tried to be smart by ridiculing every Member and every Party in this House. He was even so sure that the P.A.P. will be in power at the next elections and he also warned all the Members who dared to oppose the P.A.P. with the words, "You will see, you will see." Sir, I do not know whether you will allow me to suggest that we should all stand up and bow to the Member for Tanjong Pagar and say, "You are the hero of Singapore. You are the champion of the underdogs in Singapore!"

On a point of information.

If the hon. Member will give way.

No, Sir.

It was Mr Marshall who -

Order.

Sir, I myself come here to learn. Let us always be humble and also let us realise that if nationalism is to be our first achievement, we should try to get the support of the people. Sir, let us talk about the real political situation. I think we are now going through a very dangerous period in the history of Singapore. On one side, we have the English educated class and the middle class of people who adopt the "tida apa" attitude. On the other side, we have the political fanatics who do nothing else but talk politics, morning, noon and night. Then there is the most extremist element in this country who try to introduce all sorts of "isms" and theories. If China introduces land reforms, they want to follow suit. Just now, an hon. Member borrowed the word "Marxist". This word was used many years ago. Is it suitable for this country? The third element - which is the most dangerous and which I think all Members in this House can do something about - is the clash of political personalities: Harry Lee versus David Marshall!

Order. I know that the hon. Member is working himself up but he should still remember his Standing Orders.

Sir, I would like to comment on the clash of political personalities. I do not know why they are fighting each other for. Both of them claim to be champions of the workers, the underdogs, Socialism and leaders of the Chinese school students. Sir, we heard the Member for Tanjong Pagar exclaim with conviction that the next Government will be a P.A.P. Govvernment. An hon. Member: God forbid!

He has commented many times on the recognition of the Malayan Communist Party and I do not want to see a Prime Minister styling himself as, "I am a Leftist. I am a genuine Leftist and I will arrest all opportunists." Let us be fair. I have the utmost respect for the genius and ability of our learned friend the Member for Tanjong Pagar. Why does he not think that it is time for him to stand up boldly and courageously to say, "I am a Rightwing leader and against the M.C.P. element whether secret, underground or even within my own Party." He must admit, Sir, that he has already made himself known as a Right-wing leader within the P.A.P. I still remember that the Left-wing leader of his Party was supposed to be Mr Rajah. Why can he not say, "I am a nationalist leader. I am the leader of all classes - workers, farmers and merchants," instead of saying, "I am the champion of the workers," and ridiculing Mr Sutherland as the "Member for Tanglin Club" and everybody else. Now when the City Council is short of funds, he says, "Let us think how to float loans on the London markets." Why can he not realise that if the Hon. the Chief Secretary (Mr E. B. David) is instructed by Her Majesty's Government to reduce their military commitments in Singapore or withdraw their Army, Navy and Air Force within 24 hours, how we are to find jobs for the over 40,000 workers employed by these Services? How are we going to provide the livelihood for those employed by these three Services?

The P.A.P.

And I want to see how the adviser to the Naval Base Workers' Union and the Member for Sembawang (Inche Ahmad Bin Ibrahim) who is the Secretary of that union are going to provide their workers with new jobs. That is why we have to face the "political realities". The Member for Tanjong Pagar should realise that it is high time for him to decide whether he is Right-wing or Left-wing and whether he believes that the only Left-wing Party in Singapore is the M.C.P. He should not declare, "I am a champion. I am the Leftist element and the rest of you are all hypocrites and opportunists. We the P.A.P. stand for the underdogs!" Sir, if I can foretell the future, within five years or three years or even soon after the General Elections have been held, I will not be surprised to see the Member for Tanjong Pagar become a staunch Right-wing leader and I think that will be a blessing for Singapore. Sir, now let us come back to the Governor's Speech which I criticised as bad and weak but at least they have a very courageous Minister in the Minister for Commerce and Industry (Mr J. M. Jumabhoy) who said some time ago that those who scared away capital investment in this country were "irresponsible" politicians. Sir, there is no better word than that. All of us including myself are irresponsible politicians in that we never gave the people of Singapore a clear-cut policy on Merdeka and we now find that we are to have only internal self-government. We say that Socialism is best for our country and we say that as entrepot trade is so essential, we must try to encourage more capital investment. But are we doing that? We are discouraging capital. Sir, I think it is high time to consider the dangers which lie ahead as the entrepot trade has been on the decline for many months. Employment is decreasing day by day and the possibility of a merger with the Federation of Malaya is getting further and further away. These are the three main issues which we should all try to solve and not the blah, blah political talks. May I ask, "Has any trade union leader or any champion of the labourers or any adviser to trade union workers in this country ever said, `Look, chum, if you want to increase your living standards and your wages, you must try at the same time to increase the industrial output.'?" It must be explained to the workers that by their increasing the industrial output they are indirectly increasing the national income. The irresponsible politicians and irresponsible trade union advisers only know how to win votes. They are now making enough but they are not so sure that the next election is sure for you. Telling enough lies - I want to see how they are going to win and rule, Sir!

The hon. Member used the second person and then followed it up with an expression that somebody is telling lies. I think the word "lies" is unparliamentary with reference to a Member of the Assembly. The hon. Member will withdraw that word.

Sir, I will change it to untrue, Sir.

Order. It is the word "lies" that I wish to be withdrawn.

I am sorry, Sir, I withdraw it, Sir. The question of a merger with the Federation of Malaya has again been repeated in the Governor's Speech - this is the third time it has been repeated. But I wonder how we are going to achieve that. I do not know whether the rumour is true or not that the Hon. the Minister for Local Government, Lands and Housing (Inche Abdul Hamid) many a time has openly told the public that the Chief Minister of the Federation of Malaya (Tunku Abdul Rahman) is very much against the merger because (1) of the labour unrest - in other words, the existence of subversive elements and (2) of the Chinese population. Sir, I do not worry about the first point but I am quite worried about the second point. I hope the Member for Ulu Bedok (Inche Abdul Hamid) can be clear about this point because it is quite harmful to bring up this racial issue. It is all right to say that it is for economic or political reasons. Sir, I do not want to criticise the Government item by item especially as, I must confess, I have always had a high regard for our elected Ministers during the past three years. Even the Member for Tanjong Pagar said that they tried their best but that they were not ready for the task of governing. I would like to bring up a very important point in the Governor's Speech regarding gangster activities: "The Government will continue with its determined efforts to combat crime, gangster and secret society activities." Sir, it is also pointed out: "The increased awareness by the public for the need to give all possible assistance to the police is encouraging." Further it reads: "The Government will maintain the established high standards of efficiency and morale of the Police . Sir, "efficiency and morale of the Police." I dare challenge you the Chief Secretary (Mr E. B. David) to come along with me-

Order. This is the first time I have been called the Chief Secretary. I think the hon. Member should remember that he should address the Chair.

I am sorry, Sir, I dare challenge the Hon. the Chief Secretary to come along with me into every nook and corner of Singapore and ask the public how much confidence they have in the efficiency of the police. Sir, we must admit that they have very, very little confidence. They have no faith in the police especially in the detectives. Sir, this country has achieved tremendous political advancement but I am so sorry to witness that the police force follows the old traditional way. When Group 24 fights Group 08, the latter uses the services of Group 36 to fight Group 24 and this makes the C.I.D. appear very busy against the gangsters - more arrests every day, men detained for 24 hours, finger-prints, etc. "The Government will continue with its determined efforts to combat crime, gangster and secret society activities." Sir, I think it will not be a good thing if they carry on with their present policy of engaging detectives who were formerly gangsters and secret society men. How can you trust them? Under such circumstances, how can our police force work efficiently? The inspectors rely on what information they get from the detectives. The Commissioner of Police relies on whom? On the O.C. and the A.S.P.'s. So, to me, the C.I.D. is more harmful than the subversive elements. It is high time for Government to formulate a new revolutionary policy, even though they have to wipe out the whole C.I.D. The people do not want them. They are irresponsible and corrupted. They use Her Majesty's power to threaten innocent people. I think it is high time to check that. Why cannot the Chief Secretary try to get advice from Hongkong, to recruit more Chinese into the police force, to recruit more intelligent, educated detectives? If Hongkong can do it, why not Singapore? It is high time to have an understanding and friendly police force. You must admit that not only the language barrier, not only the custom or the tradition barrier, but also the whole set-up is made of rock. It is not made of wood. The second point I would like to touch on is the importation of publications. Just now the Hon. the Chief Minister said that the people blame his Government for being against Chinese education and against Chinese culture. I think he deserves it. Maybe he should throw the blame on the Chief Secretary. The Chief Secretary is very unfair on this question. I have a lot of books sent to me from Hongkong and sometimes from China. Some are purely pictorial magazines and some Chinese fiction. But always I have a chit saying, "This publication is being kept in custody by the Chinese Secretariat. If you want to claim it under section so and so of such and such an Ordinance, you can; otherwise it will not be released." Talking about the Sin Pao, Sir, they have banned it. Maybe the Government have all the evidence against it of which I am not aware. But, Sir, I want to know how many Hongkong sexy yellow newspapers have been imported into the colony. Sir, the local mosquito papers live on fabricating a lot of sexy stories and printing nude pictures, and the Government just simply ignore them. Naturally the young and inexperienced Chinese school boys or teachers will be misled by them. Sir, we do not like such poisonous and undesirable publications. The Government not only banned the Sin Pao, but they brought its editors to court. Naturally this Government is branded as not being able to understand Chinese culture. Therefore they are anti-Chinese culture. Although they know that the Chinese intellectuals are against yellow culture, yet they allow yellow pamphlets, magazines and newspapers published abroad to come in. Coming to the last point, Sir, why do the Government not boldly say, "We want to carry on with this Government until 1959. We want to finish the term."? Why do the Government not say, "We support compulsory voting."? Why do the Government not say, "We have a lot of things to do, so we have to carry on another few months."? But now they say the delay is because of compulsory voting. Without compulsory voting, they say they can fulfil their promise to hold the general election in August or September. I challenge the Chief Minister to be so bold as to say that the postponing of the general elections to next year has nothing to do with compulsory voting. He must not mislead the public into believing that his Government is sincere and determined to have the general elections in September, but this damn fool Member for Changi introduced-

Order. The hon. Member must not forget himself. He is going a little beyond what is order. He is becoming really disorderly. The hon. Member must remember that. In future I will take a more serious view. Will he please withdraw the expression?

Sir, I beg to withdraw the expression. I thought I could call myself that! Sir, I want the Government to be bold. Let the people know exactly what the Government is like. Yes, say that the Labour Front Government have confidence in their four-year programme; that they must carry on their programme, but not because of compulsory voting. Sir, I think I have said enough. 3.39 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, one thing is very clear from the speech of his Excellency the Governor. It is that the Government is well aware that its term of office is nearing its end and that elections are around the corner - though the Government is reluctant to tell us how big that corner is. His Excellency's speech begins with casual references to the forthcoming Assembly and District Council elections. It ends with a not so casual reference to the general elections and to the time when this Government will have "to lay down its office." I mention these facts because I think it will help us to understand a little more clearly all the fine and praiseworthy sentiments which appear between the opening and closing passages of the speech. What appears in between is a shop-window display for the election season to remind the people that the Government is prepared to do in the fourth year of its office what it could have done in the three years that went before. That is why, Sir, the programme appears a little crowded. The Government is going to combat crime, gangsterism and secret society thugs. It is going to carry out a survey of the Colony's industrial potential and markets. It is going to promote largescale industries. It is going to encourage entrepot trade and tourism. It is going to grow more food and promote rural development. It is going to give every child the chance to get a primary education up to the age of 14. There are going to be more schools, hospitals and houses - in fact, more of everything. It is going to introduce a social insurance scheme based on the Caine and Brocklehurst Reports. This does not exhaust the list of good things to come but all these are going to be done in the next few months. Certainly, Sir, the fourth year is going to be remembered as a year of promise and a far busier year than all the other three years put together. It may even leave the Government little time to think about or prepare for the District Council and Assembly elections. What bothers me is why the Government has waited until the last few months of its life before trying to start its social revolution. Sir, if the Government's programme is to be fully implemented, it will involve great changes to our social and economic structure. It may be that all that the Government intends to do is merely to pass a number of Bills proposing this and that change - a paper social revolution. For example, Sir, the Government pledges itself, to use its own words, "to safeguard the welfare of the people of Singapore, to raise their level of living and to use this last Session towards achieving these ends." But even if it had more time at its disposal than it actually has, it can only redeem this pledge by fighting those who have a vested interest in preserving the present order of things. It must be prepared to plan its economy which means seeing that there is a greater control over the activities of private enterprise. Its programme means finding the money to finance these things. This means increased taxation. Yet all these years the Government has been reluctant to do these things, much to the delight of the Liberal-Socialists who like socialism, provided the wealthy remain wealthy and there is no interference by Government with the financial activities of the wealthy. The Government's programme therefore means nothing, because it is a harmless film trailer promising "stupendous", "colossal" and "mighty" things which will eventually prove to be nothing of the sort. It is not enough to say that you are going to do this or that during the few months left to the Government. A government which really wants to do these things must have the will and courage to meet the fierce opposition of vested interests. Recent events in the City Council are examples of how local reactionaries and expatriate officials of the City Council will join hands to fight progress where it hurts their privileges. I think the Labour Front will do no more than declare their pious intentions in these things. There may be a few people who mean well in the Labour Front. But it requires more than just a few well-meaning types to make the social revolution a reality. That is the tragedy of the Labour Front. Too many bad types, too few good ones. The ultimate result is a foregone conclusion. They have my sympathies.

Mr Speaker, Sir, after hearing the speeches from the Member for Tanjong Pagar and the Member for Changi, I do not know where I am. I hear of the Right. I hear of the Left. And now I hear of the Left within the Right, or the Right within the Left. As far as I am aware, we have the Rightists and we have the Leftists. But now I come to know that there is a Right within the Left. What that means, I really cannot understand. Now who belongs to this class of people? The old saying goes: "Whoever the cap fits, let him wear it." The Malays say: Siapa makan chilli rasa pedas. (Those who eat the chilli will feel hot.) Really I would like to know who belong to this category of people - who are in fact the Right within the Left. Sir, all these speeches, instead of concentrating on the Governor's Speech, are more or less a challenge to every Member in this House - a challenge issued by the leader of the P.A.P., the Member for Tanjong Pagar. He says that whoever dare go against the P.A.P. in the next general elections will collapse. It would appear to me, Sir, from what he says, that no Party or Independent should go against the P.A.P. in the elections - that the Labour Front should not take part; neither should the Liberal-Socialists take part. If the P.A.P. contest the elections alone and have a walkover in all divisions, then this Assembly will have nothing but 51 P.A.P. Members. Then where is the Opposition? Where is the chance of opposition? Is this a challenge to everyone of us here? After this challenge, Sir, I would like to know how many of the present Members of this House are prepared to come forward and fight the general elections. The Member for Changi says there is only one hero in Singapore, and he is the Member for Tanjong Pagar. So if there is anyone who is prepared to accept that challenge, he is more of a hero than the hero himself! Sir, every candidate who stands for election certainly looks forward to winning. The Liberal-Socialists fielded candidates in all the divisions for the City Council elections. What was the result? They gained only a few seats. The Labour Front was also confident of winning the City Council elections. What was the result? They had only three or four seats. How can we predict that we are sure of winning the elections? Let me see whether that prediction of the Member for Tanjong Pagar will come true. If the prediction does not come true, I wonder what will be the consequence for the Member for Tanjong Pagar since he has boasted that his Party will come into power. Let all of us stand for the elections to the Legislative Assembly. Let us hope for a stable government, irrespective of which Party comes in, rather than boast that it is the Leftist Party that will come into power. Unfortunately within that Leftist Party there is a Right. So where is the Leftist Party, Sir? Coming back to the Governor's Speech, I will read this paragraph: "Singapore exists because of its trade. Under the new Constitution the Government of the State of Singapore, acting with the assent of the United Kingdom Government. will have the power to initiate and conduct matters concerning trade and cultural relations with other countries." Sir, why is it necessary that we should have the assent of the United Kingdom Government regarding trade? Are we not going to have self-government? If we are going to have self-government cannot we consider ourselves fit to decide on our trade relations? Singapore is a free trading port and, as such, we should certainly be allowed to decide on our trading relations with anybody we want if it is in the interests and for the good of the country. Sir, I was not a member of the delegation that went to the constitutional talks. I do not know whether this clause was included in the draft constitution or not. If it was there, then I have very little to say, because it was agreed by the All-Party delegation of this House. If it was not there, I hope that the next delegation to London (the Chief Minister says it will be going soon) will see that this clause is not in it and that we have a free hand to decide on our trade relations. Sir, most of the political Parties in this Assembly want to kill the Liberal-Socialist Party. Every time a Member stands up, he says, "Let us kill the Liberal-Socialist Party", because that Party is accused of being a capitalist Party. So I am of the opinion that, by including that clause, you will, in the first instance, kill trade, and if you kill trade, you will kill capital, and by killing capital, you will indirectly kill the Liberal-Socialists - and I hope the Liberal-Socialists will wake up to that issue! Sir, the next point is the mention of cordial relations with the Government of the Federation of Malaya. This is what the Governor said: "Again, since the Second Session of this Assembly, the Federation of Malaya has emerged as a sovereign independent state. The Government is happy to record the continued cordial relationship which it enjoys with the Government of the Federation of Malaya." Sir, the Chief Minister has said this morning that he has not received any indication from the Government of the Federation of Malaya regarding travel passes across the causeway. Now if this should materialise, then it is going to be serious, because it is going to affect that cordial relationship which the Governor has mentioned. I only hope that it will not materialise, but from the publicity that has been given in the local Press, I think it will. Now with the cordial relationship not between the two Governments but between the Prime Minister of the Federation of Malaya and the Chief Minister of Singapore - because they have had cordial relations and drinks together - I hope the Chief Minister will carefully look into this question of travel passes and see that the Federation of Malaya does not impose them, so as to maintain the cordial relationship between Singapore and the Federation. The Chief Minister this morning has said that one cannot exist without the other. Neither can one prosper without the other. Sir, if it is his view that one cannot exist or prosper without the other, then let travel over the causeway be free. There should be no bar. Then we will have, in fact, actual cordial relationship between the two countries. Coming to the general elections, Sir, I think the Member for Changi is right. Whether we hold the elections this year or next year, the question of compulsory voting does not come in. If the Government is serious in having early elections, I am quite sure it could set up the machinery to meet the deadline. Now, the Governor in his speech said: "The Government intends to recommend to the Assembly the holding of elections for an enlarged Assembly under the new Constitution as soon as it is practically possible to do so." "As soon as it is practically possible to do so." What a vague term, Sir! How long will this be? One year, two years, or three years? Whether you are going to delay the elections, or whether you are going to have early elections, there must be a target date, and if there is one, then Government can work towards it. Without a target date, the Government can give any amount of excuses. The Member for Tanjong Pagar has said this morning that any amount of excuses can be given if the Government wants to carry on. If the Government is serious, let it name that target date and let it not hold the public in suspense. Every Member on this side of the House has asked for an early election and I am sure that we are all keen to have early elections. But the Government has said no, just because of compulsory voting. Let compulsory voting be one issue and early elections be another. As the Member for Changi has said, if the Government cannot have early elections, then let it come out boldly and say, "We cannot have them, not because of compulsory voting, but because we cannot complete our machinery to have early elections this year." But whatever may be the reason, Sir, I still say that there should be a target date for us to aim at. Without a target date you cannot aim at anything, and without any aim you get nowhere. Where can you get to? An hon. Member: Tokyo!

Tokyo! Yes, quite a number will be going there very soon! Sir, on the question of fishing, the Governor said in his speech that- "It is the Government's intention to take all necessary steps to increase the supply of fish and to assist local fishermen who are willing to be trained in new methods of fishing." Sir, how can the Government claim that it supports the fishing industry when it encourages foreigners to come in and compete with our local fishermen? I see the Minister is nodding his head. As far as I can understand, the catch by our local fishermen is quite adequate to meet the demands of our local people. Then why encourage foreigners to come in? I understand that the Ministry is trying to encourage Japanese boats to come in to compete. From what I was told sometime back, four licences were issued to the Japanese to come into Singapore to compete with our local fishermen. Now for the information of the Minister, many shops which are in the fishing trade have closed down recently because of this competition. Is this the Government's idea of trying to support the fishing industry in Singapore, or trying to kill it? The Minister has always given these slogans - "Support local goods!" "Buy Singapore goods!" "Support local industries!"

Order. Moment of interruption. Further consideration, what day?

Tomorrow, Sir.

Resolved, "That this Assembly do now adjourn."-[The Chief Minister]. Adjourned accordingly at one minute past four o'clock p.m. Sittings Of Assembly, Sessional and Select Committees (Cols 0103-0104)

Tuesday, 22nd April, 1958

asked the Minister for Labour and Welfare whether he will make a statement on the recent fire at Kampong Koo Chye, Geylang, and what steps have been taken for the relief and re-housing of the victims of the fire.

The fire at Kampong Koo Chye (Lorong 3) started at about 4.30 p.m. on Saturday, 5th April, 1958 and was brought under control at about 7.30 p.m., by which time over 100 huts had been destroyed, rendering 379 families or 2,050 persons homeless. An emergency feeding scheme was immediately put into operation by the Department of Social Welfare at Sims Avenue Community Centre at 8 p.m. to feed those who were in need of food. Coffee with milk was also served. In the meantime, steps were taken to establish a Relief Centre at Geylang English School to house those who are without alternative accommodation. Blankets from the Civil Defence store were distributed to all the families in the Relief Centre. This Relief Centre is run by the Department of Social Welfare, whose officers are on duty day and night to attend to the needs of the fire victims, such as answering queries or calling for the ambulance in case of sickness or birth. On Sunday, 6th April, 1958 an emergency payment of $5 a person was made by the Department of Social Welfare. A total sum of $10,075 was expended. The Blue Cross Charitable Institution which has always worked hand in hand with the Department of Social Welfare after a fire, swung into action the next day, that is, Sunday, 6th April, 1958 and assumed full responsibility for feeding the fire victims twice a day. It also supplied tea, coffee and cold drinks to the victims throughout the day and night. In addition, it supplied household necessities such as tooth brush, tooth paste, soap, towels and so on to the victims. In view of the number of children, nurses from the Health Department of the City Council are on day and night duty looking after the feeding and care of the children. The St. John's Ambulance Brigade (since withdrawn), and the British Red Cross also did day and night duty in the Relief Centre. The Civil Defence personnel helped and supplied the necessary transport during the first and second day. The number of voluntary welfare workers that helped were too numerous to be mentioned. The response from the public to the appeal for donations in cash and kind was overwhelming. Rice and fresh food continued to be donated to the Relief Centre in large quantities and the amount of clothing received was far more than what the fire victims required. The total cash donations from the public, so far as is known, have reached about $250,000 of which about $150,000 have been distributed by the Singapore Chinese Chamber of Commerce, the Singapore Joint Relief Organisation, Nanyang Slang Pau, the Buddhist Association and the Rubber Packers' Association. With the $5 a head from the Social Welfare Department included each fire victim had now received a sum of $82. At present, 296 families consisting of about 1,050 fire victims are accommodated in the Relief Centre at the Geylang English School. Cinema and other variety shows are put on for their entertainment. The Franciscan nuns arranged games and handicraft classes for the children during the day. The fire victims are well looked after and no efforts are being spared to make them as comfortable as possible. They all appear well and happy. Three fire victims gave birth at the Kandang Kerbau Hospital to three babies, two girls and a boy. The S.I.T. will give top priority to those who wish to have S.I.T. accommodation at the old Kallang Airport site. It is expected that there will be enough flats to house all the families. So far, 196 families or a total of 1,100 persons have registered for such accommodation. Government has made a declaration under section 5 of the Land Acquisition Ordinance in Government Gazette No. 36 dated 16th April, 1958 declaring that the site at Kampong Koo Chye, on which the destroyed huts stood, is needed for public purposes and steps are being taken to acquire the land for the building of low-cost houses. A Committee of Trustees consisting of the Chief Minister, the Mayor of the City Council, with the Director of Social Welfare as its Honorary Secretary and the City Treasurer as the Honorary Treasurer, have been formed. The Trustees will be responsible for the Kampong Koo Chye Fire Fund and for the building of low-cost houses on the old site. The P.W.D. Architect, and City Architect are jointly responsible for drawing up the plans of the building. Those victims who do not wish to have S.I.T. accommodation and who wish to stay in these low-cost houses will be given an option: -

asked the Minister for Local Government, Lands and Housing whether he will consider implementing a new housing scheme to house those poor families who can only afford to pay a maximum monthly rental of $15.

If the Member for Changi has any practicable suggestions for a scheme to house poor families who cannot afford more than $15 a month, I shall be only too delighted to give such suggestions my very careful consideration. The problem of reducing rents to meet the housing needs of the lowest income group is one that constantly engages the attention of my Ministry and of the Government as a whole. It would, however, be extremely difficult, indeed impossible, if we are not to increase greatly the subsidy for public housing, and if we are to build permanent housing in accordance with present standards of convenience, amenity and supervision, to bring rents down to anything like $15 per month.

asked the Minister for Local Government, Lands and Housing-

I would suggest to the Member for Changi that questions of this nature should more appropriately be directed to the Rural Board. The Rural Board is the road-making authority as well as the Highways authority for the rural areas, and matters not involving policy such as details of expenditure on road repairs and conditions arising from the state of roads clearly concern the Rural Board primarily.

asked the Minister for Education, in regard to the salary scales of teachers in Chinese schools:-

The Hon. Member for Changi seems to be confused about the issue of salaries of teachers in Chinese schools. The problem of salaries of teachers in Chinese schools is not as clear-cut as it is suggested in the three parts to his question. The question of a revision of salaries for teachers in Chinese schools was mooted when the full-aid scheme came into operation as far back as December 1954. Since then the majority of teachers in Chinese schools have had their salaries revised, but there are still a number of them who have claimed recognition in one form or another, such as those with experience but without qualifications and those with academic but not professional qualifications and so on. It is difficult to state exactly when the revision can be completed but I want to assure the Hon. Member that I am as anxious to get this matter settled early as anybody else.

asked the Minister for Education if he will consider recognising an untrained teacher with ten years' teaching experience as equivalent in status to a normal-trained teacher.

Obviously the Hon. Member for Changi is not aware of the fact that this question of untrained teachers with ten years' experience has been settled between me and the various Chinese educational bodies in one of our meetings and that it is the details of implementing that decision that have to be worked out.

asked the Minister for Education, in regard to pre-war teachers in Chinese schools who continued to teach in these schools after the war, if he will consider including their pre-war service in their record of service.

Here again it seems that the Hon. Member for Changi is unaware of the fact that Government has decided that service before the war of teachers in Chinese schools will not be reckoned for incremental purposes in the revision of their salaries. A great deal of publicity was given to this issue in the Press some time last year when the Chinese educational bodies were informed of this decision.

asked the Minister for Education if the Government will consider paying post allowance to principals of Chinese schools; and whether consideration will be given to back-dating the payment of the allowance.

The Hon Member for Changi seems to be interested only in post allowance for principals of Chinese schools. I want to emphasise that it is Government's policy to treat all teachers alike as far as possible and although the organisation in Chinese schools is somewhat different from that in English schools, the principle of post allowances has been accepted. Indeed the Chinese educational bodies have submitted proposals for the allowances to be paid and these are being considered with a view to early implementation. Government is in honour bound to consider payment from the date the school came into the full-aid scheme.

asked the Minister for Education whether a memorandum has been submitted to the Government of Singapore by the Malayan Students' Association in the United States of America, on the question of recognition of American degrees of Malayans, and whether he will make a statement on the matter.

A Memorandum on American degrees has been received from the Malayan Students' Association in the United States of America. I have no statement to make except that the Public Service Commission has a standing committee which is considering the matter.

asked the Minister for Health to give details of the crimes which have been committed within the precincts of Government Hospitals since 1957, and to state what steps have been taken for the protection of the Nurses and other members of the Hospital staff.

General Hospital: (1) On 28-12-57 an unknown person entered the Nurses' Hostel at night and injured a nurse with a sharp instrument - injury not serious - motive unknown. (2) On 8-3-58 a Laboratory Assistant who was in company with a Nurse in a secluded dark area in the hospital ground was fatally attacked by a person or persons unknown. Kandang Kerbau Hospital: (1) On 16-12-57 an intruder entered a temporary pupil midwife's quarters and stole some personal effects. Tan Tock Seng Hospital: (1) On 7-1-58 in the course of a fight between some unknown persons and the hospital staff a male adult was found dead with stab wounds in his body. (2) Few petty thefts committed in the Nurses' Hostel. Trafalgar Home: (1) Minor incidents, such as fights amongst inmates and some visitors. Steps taken for protection 1. In the General Hospital action has been taken to have the barbed wire fence around the Nurses' Hostel raised to 7 feet. Police whistles have been given to the watchmen in the hostel. Police are patrolling the grounds of the hospital more frequently. Nurses have been warned not to frequent unlit areas at night. 2. In the Kandang Kerbau Hospital, the numbers of Watchmen have been increased to afford greater security to the hospital staff. 3. In the Tan Tock Seng Hospital increased lighting to roads and paths used by the staff to and from their quarters and the wards have been provided. Increased and additional lighting of perimeter of quarters occupied by nurses and residential staff living in hospital precincts have also been provided. Windows of Nurses's Quarters which have not the protection of a chain link fence have been provided with wire mesh. 4. In the Trafalgar Home internal discipline has been tightened.