Hansard, 1958-04-24

GOVERNOR'S SPEECH - (Debate on the Address) - (Third Day) Order read for resuming adjourned debate on Question [23rd April], "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."-(The Chief Minister). Question again proposed. 10.02 a.m.

GOVERNOR'S SPEECH - (Debate on the Address) - (Third Day) Mr Speaker, Sir, when the Assembly adjourned yesterday, I was mentioning about the Government's efforts to improve the living conditions of the people in the rural areas. I quoted two very outstanding efforts in this direction, namely, the road development plan and the Rural Development Panel. Besides these efforts of the Government to improve the lives of the people, Sir, the Hon. the Chief Minister has introduced the Factories Bill which is designed to protect the welfare of the working people in the factories. All this is evidence to prove that the Government is quite earnestly endeavouring to bring prosperity to the people of Singapore. The hon. Member for Tanjong Pagar, Sir, referred in his speech - I quote the Straits Times of 23rd April: "Referring to the Labour Front Government, he said the party had never grown up from what it was when a group of individuals got together to fight an election and got the surprise of their lives when they became Ministers. They never recovered from the shock." I think all these achievements of the Labour Front go on to prove that the Labour Front Coalition Government - "the ship" he referred to is safe and sound, and that it is sailing along smoothly in the best interests of the people. But while the Government is endeavouring to do that, the P.A.P. does not want to do anything about those achievements. They are only interested to know when the elections will be held. This means that the P.A.P. is not interested in the welfare of the people; it is only endeavouring to seek power. We know this; the people of Singapore know it; and I am happy indeed that there are signs to indicate that the people have realised fully the implications of the Member's speech. Sir, the Government cannot easily give way to the political passions of the P.A.P. It cannot give up its duty to the public. If the hon. Member felt that the ship is sinking, and if the Member can contribute anything to make it safer, I would invite him to join the Labour Front. Failing that, I would request him to mind his own business in the P.A.P. and not try to meddle in the business of the Labour Front. Sir, the hon. Member also mentioned the over-optimism of his Party's achievements in the forthcoming Legislative Assembly elections. Sir, if only the P.A.P. knew its weakness, it would not boast so much. I am hopeful that even the Member for Tanjong Pagar will admit that the P.A.P. policies have antagonised the people to a very considerable extent. Workers, farmers and hawkers - everybody in Singapore - are completely frustrated. The P.A.P. is gradually losing its faith in the coming elections. The people, too, have completely lost confidence in the P.A.P. For instance, the wise policy of the Labour Front Government has been responsible for winning over all the Chinese middle and primary school students who once backed the P.A.P. to its side. The working population of Singapore are also dissatisfied with the P.A.P. Sir, the Labour Front Government has always tried to foster good relationships between the employers and the employees. It has been responsible for the promotion of genuine trade unionism in Singapore. Once, the P.A.P. said the same thing. That was when they were not in power either in the Assembly or in the City Council. They had been responsible for telling workers to demand more money and better conditions of service. But today what do we find? They shun trade unionism and they try to make use of the workers for their own interests. Sir, I am not making a guesswork of the whole thing; I have solid proof of this, and I think the people of Singapore also have evidence to prove this. Sir, the first act of the P.A.P. Councillors in the City Council against trade union interests was this: when the City Council Labour Unions Federation started negotiations with the City Council, the City Council very willingly accepted but when it found that the Unions were not toeing their line, it decided to send its agents to individual workers to split the unity which was existing in the City Council Labour Unions Federation. As a result, P.A.P. agents went into individual houses of the labourers and asked them to accept the proposals put forward by the P.A.P. Councillors. Sir, I think this is a very bad act and I do not think for a moment that this kind of trade union policy is good for this country. Again, there is evidence to show that the P.A.P. has tried to split the trade union movement in Singapore and to disrupt its unity. Sir, I am now reading a press release which was issued by the Information Bureau of City Hall, dated 22nd March. It states: "The Chairman of the Labour Sub-Committee, Mr Ong Pang Boon, is happy to announce that 70 per cent of the redundant workers in the City Gas Department have today accepted the Council's ...". Sir, this was an attempt to break "black legs" in the trade union movement, disrupting the trade union movement in Singapore. This is undemocratic.

GOVERNOR'S SPEECH - (Debate on the Address) - (Third Day) Yellow unions!

GOVERNOR'S SPEECH - (Debate on the Address) - (Third Day) Sir, I do not think that in the history of the Labour Front Government, it has ever engaged people to go out and see workers against a recognised trade union. We have kept our faith with the working people, but today the so-called champions of labour in Singapore are trying to disrupt the healthy trade union movement in Singapore. Sir, there are also allegations which I received from City Council employees that P.A.P. agents are propagating communalism among the workers. I have heard it said and workers complain to me that the Chinese members of the trade unions have been told, "These 8,000 Indian employees have got an independent country and they can very well go off, and we are going to stick firm to our terms and if we win the day we will see that we will replace them with Chinese and Malay labour." I do not think, Sir, this is a very healthy sign in Singapore. This happened in the Naval Base; this happened in the Harbour Board; and this will happen wherever the P.A.P. has influence in the trade union movement. All this, Sir, is proof to show that the P.A.P. has completely failed in its policy towards the labour movement in Singapore. Sir, the P.A.P. can only fool some people some time but they cannot fool all the people all the time. The people of Singapore, particularly the trade union people, now realise that all the empty promises all the empty policies which the P.A.P. normally urge before they get into power, will not be fulfilled when once they get into power. This is a solid and concrete example of its policy. Briefly, Sir, I think the P.A.P. trade union policy is to enslave the trade union people on to its side and make them work as slaves. I do hope that those trade union people in the City Council, in the Harbour Board and in the Naval Base, who have suffered under the P.A.P. trade union policy, will realise where their loyalties should lie. Sir, I have heard it said that even if the P.A.P. gets a few seats in the Assembly to form a government, it is not preared to form a government. It is afraid of forming a government and face the people. It prefers to continue in opposition and to do the same kind of talking as it is used to. Sir, the activities of the P.A.P. in recent months have resulted in a genuine fear among the minority communities in Singapore. Recently, one of the P.A.P. leaders in the City Council asked a minority member - an Indian member - to pack up all his things and go to India if he so wishes. The P.A.P. has tried to meddle with the Malays. Sir, very many minority community members have approached me and posed me questions as to their future in Singapore. I have assured them that under a Labour Front Coalition Government, they have nothing to fear. But they are not satisfied. They are not satisfied because of the tactics of the P.A.P. in its treatment of minorities. Sir, that genuine fear can be seen in writing if one goes outside the Victoria Memorial Hall. The Singapore Indian Congress has called out at a public meeting demanding reserved seats in this Assembly. I do not personally support reserved seats in this Assembly because I believe that communalism has no place in Singapore. But all these demands have now come out as a result of the fears of the minority communities in Singapore if a future government which is opposed to them gets into power. Before I sit down, Sir, I have to reply to some of the remarks which the hon. Member for Tanjong Pagar has made. Unfortunately he is not here to listen to me but I do hope that he will read my statements if the newspapers publish them. Sir, the hon. Member has referred to the sad sights he has seen in which the junior ministers of the Government throw stones at the sinking ship to make it sink faster. I have already told this Assembly, Sir, that the Labour Front ship is safe and sound; it is not sinking. And I would assure him that my relations with the Ministers and Party members are very, very cordial, and I would serve my Party and the Ministers loyally and faithfully for ever. I have been a front-line soldier in the struggle for freedom for this country for so many years, and I have undergone several sacrifices in the best interests of the people. I think the Member has tried to throw a spanner into the works and to disrupt the unity which we have achieved among us. Had it not been for the fact that the P.A.P. leaders waged constant war on individual leaders of the Front and poisoned its members against the Front, the P.A.P. would not have survived. The P.A.P. today, divorced from the anti-British supporters of the M.C.P. members and subversive elements is not worth its name, and all their hopes of winning the 51 seats in the Assembly will remain nothing but empty dreams. 10.19 a.m.

GOVERNOR'S SPEECH - (Debate on the Address) - (Third Day) Mr Speaker, Sir, whenever the hon. Member for Tanjong Pagar speaks in this House, we can always rely on hearing something new. The day before yesterday, the hon. Member gave us a lengthy discourse on how to catch votes. He gave us a brilliant analysis of why, as he alleged, the Labour Front was on its way out. He accused the Labour Front, Sir, not of not doing enough for the people - he has admitted many times in the past that the Labour Front has done a lot of good things - but he accused the Labour Front of failing to capture the imagination of the people. Now therein lies the fundamental difference between us and the P.A.P. The hon. Member believes in firing the imagination of the people to catch votes. He even cited examples of action which his Party has taken in the City Council, like the removal of the mace and perhaps the firing of crackers. Why, even the ex-Chief Minister goes about brandishing hammers all over the place, and he has got his henchmen shouting slogans, `We are leftists! We are leftists!' - as if leftist is a pass-word to gaining access to this Assembly. `We are leftists! We are leftists!' by people who depend on trade and commerce for their livelihood, who depend on the flow of trade; they go about shouting `We are leftists, we are leftists'! And brandishing hammers all over Singapore! All very well indeed, Sir, I say, to fire the imagination of the people, but what then? Will the people eat slogans? Do they live on slogans? Do they live on strings of crackers? Do they earn their livelihood by waving hammers in public places? We, Sir, do not believe in these empty things. In fact, that is the fundamental difference between us and the P.A.P. or the ex-Chief Minister's hammer brandishing "heroes". We believe in serious work. We believe in doing things for the people, in providing education, housing, medical facilities, in broadening the basis of our economy, so that these slogan - calling people of today will find jobs tomorrow when their ardour for waving hammers and shouting slogans has cooled off and hunger gnaws at their insides. Sir, it is time the people of Singapore are told the truth. It is time the people of Singapore realise that dark clouds are already looming on the economic horizon. It is time they realise that all this shouting of "isms" is not going to fill their stomachs. It is time they realise that if they follow this talk of right, left, left, right, they are very soon going to left, right, left, right themselves to destruction! Just as Hitler's army goose-stepped itself out to oblivion. It is time the people realise, Sir, that the only possible "ism" in Singapore is "practicalism", or "realism", if you like. What, Sir, is the purpose of our politicians? Is it to gain seats for themselves in the elected Assembly? Is it to fill their pockets? Is it the lust for power? The hon. Member for Tanjong Pagar, Sir, says that it is to capture the imagination in order to catch votes. Then let the people beware of such politicians. For my part, Sir, I am proud to say that I am a businessman by vocation and that I am not a politician, because there is nothing so dangerous as a professional politician who will go to any length to retain his seat. He will not stop at anything. He will lie, he will plot, even betray his Party, his loyalty, just to keep his seat, because to him it means his livelihood - he needs his seat to earn his so many hundred dollars or so many thousand dollars if he becomes a Minister. But does it do any good to the country? My Party, Sir, stands for Singapore, not for the reactionaries, not for the revolutionaries - these are hackneyed words, Sir, that can be twisted by politicians as they please - words which really have no meaning in an entrepot trading centre like Singapore. Sir, we believe in good government. As an example that anyone in Singapore can see - all the statutory boards and committees - we have not stuffed them with people just because they are loyal to the Labour Front. We have put people on these boards whom we consider are capable of running those boards and undertakings, not caring whether they belong to whatever Party, whether they are in the opposition, whether they wave hammers, or go about with lightning banners, or go about with torches. Sir, there is an example which is fresh in the mind of everyone in Singapore. The Central Provident Fund - a few days ago we read that the City Council was floating a loan of $30 million and it was said that the Central Provident Fund has promised its support. Sir, if the Government wished it, it could have put pressure on the Central Provident Fund not to lend its money to the City Council, and thereby prove to the citizens of Singapore that the Central Provident Fund Board has no faith in the City Council. But for the sake of good government, we, Sir, do not stoop to such levels of pulling strings behind the scenes. We do not pack the boards with our Labour Front members. We let the boards operate of their own free will. Even, Sir, against pressure from the Member for Serangoon a few months back for the Beehoon Co-operative Society, asking me to put pressure on the Industrial Promotion Board - I point-blank refused to do so. It is true, Sir-

GOVERNOR'S SPEECH - (Debate on the Address) - (Third Day) On a point of clarification, Sir - I certainly have not been putting pressure on the Minister because pressure would not do any good, but it was persuasion on my part to see whether he would see the right path to fulfil a promise made by him.

GOVERNOR'S SPEECH - (Debate on the Address) - (Third Day) Thanks to the Member, Sir, for clarification - "persuasion" can be in inverted commas. But, Sir, I have not made such a promise because in fact legally I have no right to ask the Board to fulfil any promises I make. Otherwise it could mean I could make promises to so many people: "vote for me and I will get all the money for you from the Industrial Promotion Board." If we come to that stage, Sir, then I say that Singapore is not worth living in, and therefore I refuse to meddle. When I set up a board, I say, let the board work according to its own conscience. We heard criticism yesterday of the Singapore Improvement Trust delays and I have all along personally been sympathetic with the criticism, because I myself have fought the S.I.T. for five years during my political career, over delays. And I say that just because a board is under the control of a particular Minister, that is no excuse for the Minister to defend it. If that board does things wrong, let it get public criticism.

GOVERNOR'S SPEECH - (Debate on the Address) - (Third Day) Abolish it!

GOVERNOR'S SPEECH - (Debate on the Address) - (Third Day) It is going to be abolished. Sir, in short we stand for Singapore and the good of the people of Singapore, and we will go to the people, Sir, on the past performance of the Labour Front. We will go to the people, Sir, telling them honestly what the future is, and what the remedy for the future is, and how far that remedy can succeed, and what are the pitfalls in the future. In these days, Sir, of dishonest, power-seeking, budding dictators, this may sound unbelievable, but it is true. We are not going to thrust ourselves on the people with lies and slogans to fire their imagination. We are going to be frank and honest with them. If they still wish to choose dishonest slogan-shouting fanatics, it is their funeral. They can have the choice and they are welcome to it. I for my part, Sir, am entirely against politics as they are today, with all the dishonesty that is going on in politics today. And it is not only our misfortune, Sir, that politics are dishonest; it is the misfortune of many other countries in Asia today, where there are politicians who are out for power and for personal gain. I, Sir, quote what the President of the Republic of Pakistan said on 23rd March. This is what he said: "Pakistan is riddled with insincerity, disloyalty and lack of consistency. Self is universally above service."- How true also of Singapore- "All that matters is the craze to make money or gain power."- And I can tell the House one thing: the man who holds my seat in the Ministry of Commerce and Industry can make a fortune if he wishes to; and perhaps there are many who are after it just for the sake of making money. [Interruption].

GOVERNOR'S SPEECH - (Debate on the Address) - (Third Day) Order.

GOVERNOR'S SPEECH - (Debate on the Address) - (Third Day) It is true. I am not speaking of any particular person, but there are many; I can see on the political horizon many figures who are just out to fill their pockets if they can get hold of that ministry. Then the President of Pakistan goes on to say - no - the Prime Minister of Pakistan has this to say, Sir: "I cannot help reminding you that the economic difficulties with which the country is faced are due to a large extent to unstable political conditions." Again how true of Singapore; not because this Government is unstable because it has not got an elected majority. That is a lie. Stability is not the word. This Government is quite stable. It has carried on for two years and it is going to carry on for another year. But it will not, if as the Chief Minister said we find that our purpose for governing is over. We are not going to occupy those seats if we are not wanted. Instability here means instability created by these budding dictators who shout their heads off with leftism, rightism, this-ism, that-ism. "The paramount need" - I quote again, Sir, the Prime Minister of Pakistan, "The paramount need of the moment is sound and stable political conditions within the country, and unless we have such conditions, it is futile to hope that we can bring about balanced economic conditions." Hear, hear, I say! "Politicians are perpetually engaged in unprecedented political manoeuvring." How true! We have people crossing the floor of this House left and right, right and left, and who even will bring in a hammer if Mr Speaker will allow so. "This absorbing game of permutation and combination in which various political groups have been indulging in with such abandon must cease. We should know that this pastime no longer evokes any response except one of disgust at home and amusement abroad." In our case, Sir, it is not just amusement abroad, it is our livelihood; it is cutting off our stomachs.

GOVERNOR'S SPEECH - (Debate on the Address) - (Third Day) Will the Minister identify those papers?

GOVERNOR'S SPEECH - (Debate on the Address) - (Third Day) Sir, this is from a Pakistan press release dated 23rd March - both of them are dated 23rd March - and this was quoted in the local newspapers but I could not lay my hands on the local newspapers. Sir, even the Prime Minister of India, the man whom every Asian today respects as one of the biggest leaders of Asia, he, speaking of his own Congress Party, one of the biggest political parties in the world, said this, "We are worried about many things and most of all about the lowering of standards of political behaviour." This is from the Straits Times of 5th April. What matters to us, Sir, is that Singapore has the same problems. Democracy unfortunately is probablly not as suitable here as it is suitable in some countries in Europe. Perhaps we start with democracy but we might end up with dictatorship - with these goose-stepping, left-right, left-right, slogan-shouting, hammer-waving fanatics. Let us hope that democracy is not killed at the inception.

GOVERNOR'S SPEECH - (Debate on the Address) - (Third Day) I endorse it.

GOVERNOR'S SPEECH - (Debate on the Address) - (Third Day) Sir, in Singapore we have people who are out to exploit emotions. Emotionalism is their stock-in-trade for they have nothing better to offer. You have the hammer-waving ex-Chief Minister calling loudly for trade representation in China - an issue that is calculated to arouse the emotions of the Chinese people: `Our motherland, our fatherland, we must have trade representation.' Naturally they will support the man who says, `We must have trade representation in China.' Then somebody else starts shouting, `Minority seats for the Indians' and so on. Does the ex-Chief Minister justify the need for trade representation in China? What likely benefit is this going to bring to Singapore? He does not state that our trade, our imports are much more than our exports to China. He does not state that the Chinese Government's policy is to purchase direct from producing countries and therefore since we have nothing of our own to send to China she is not going to buy from us more. The only profit will be to China to sell more consumer goods to us, goods which are not costed, which are produced with cheap labour, like the eggs, and dumped on our market. And that will mean that in the end our labour will have to cut down its wages and lower its standard of living. Then what happens? This is muddled thinking, muddled thinking which is misleading the people of Singapore. Then we also have this hysteria about the postponement of general elections by a few months, if compulsory voting was introduced. Sir, we have waited one hundred years to get rid of colonialism, but these hammer-waving fanatics, and even for that matter the hon. Member for Telok Ayer, cannot even wait a few months more in order to ensure that the democratic right of voting is exercised by everyone who is eligible to exercise such a right. Sir, the Member for Telok Ayer and the hammer-waving fanatics are at one with each other in this respect. Mr R. Jumabhoy (Telok Ayer) rose -

GOVERNOR'S SPEECH - (Debate on the Address) - (Third Day) Is it a point of order? Mr R. Jumabhoy resumed his seat.

GOVERNOR'S SPEECH - (Debate on the Address) - (Third Day) This is not the first time, Sir-

GOVERNOR'S SPEECH - (Debate on the Address) - (Third Day) Order. No point has been raised. Please continue.

GOVERNOR'S SPEECH - (Debate on the Address) - (Third Day) Sir, these people have no patience. They want to get at the plums of office immediately but they have no constructive economic policy. Sir, I challenge the hon. Member for Tanjong Pagar - I am sorry he is not here but I am sure that it will be conveyed to him by his colleague (the Member for Ponggol-Tampenis) - I challenge him, Sir, to come to this House and debate the economic policy of the P.A.P., what the P.A.P. is going to do on the economic front if it gets into power. So far the P.A.P. has talked in broad outlines, but what is its true economic policy? It has never publicly announced, "We are going to do this, we are going to do that." In fact, most of these Parties, what they do is they talk in broad outlines and just in order to get into power, play on the sympathies of the people on emotional issues, shout about colonialism which is a dead horse already and flog it. That is all they can do. Let me warn the House, Sir, and let me warn the people of Singapore, that the future is bleak as far as economic conditions are concerned, and that that is going to affect every man, woman and child in Singapore. It is not just a matter for those sitting in this House or for those who carry on trade. It is a matter for every man, woman and child. They earn their livelihood because of the economic prosperity of the colony. If that prosperity goes, they are sunk. And I am not going to be a partner, Sir, to that sort of destruction. Sir, in England when the Nazi bombers were hammering away at England in the battle of Britain, Sir Winston Churchill said all that he could promise was blood, sweat and toil. Blood we have had, Sir. Not much, some; but if we are not going to sweat and toil from now on and forget all this nonsense about isms and slogans, we are going to get more blood, Sir, more blood - secret society activity, gangsterism, murders and, possibly, riots, because when men's stomachs are empty they will go to any length to fill them.

GOVERNOR'S SPEECH - (Debate on the Address) - (Third Day) Then the P.A.P. will come into power.

GOVERNOR'S SPEECH - (Debate on the Address) - (Third Day) I say, Sir, let us forget all this nonsense. Let us get together. The time has come for all good citizens who are honest to get together in saving Singapore from dishonest politicians.

GOVERNOR'S SPEECH - (Debate on the Address) - (Third Day) Hear, hear!

GOVERNOR'S SPEECH - (Debate on the Address) - (Third Day) Coming down to more mundane affairs, Sir, of day-to-day administration - the hon. Mr Sutherland piously hoped that every Party will improve and encourage capital investment. It is with tongue in cheek, Sir, that politicians talk of encouraging capital. I remember, Sir, a delegate from Hongkong to the ECAFE Conference went to see his Lordship or Worship - I do not know the right term - but he went to see the Mayor, and the Mayor agreed with him that we need more capital here, we need industrialisation. Yet - I am sorry, Sir, that the Member [for Tanjong Pagar] has just come in - yet what is his Party doing? What steps is it taking to see that capital investment is encouraged? All the actions that it takes and all the actions that its rank and file take - some even following hammer wavers of another Party-

GOVERNOR'S SPEECH - (Debate on the Address) - (Third Day) Order. The Minister is perhaps getting a little too excited. I cannot allow pointing at Members, at the same time using the pronoun "his" - I think it is the Member for Tanjong Pagar.

GOVERNOR'S SPEECH - (Debate on the Address) - (Third Day) I am sorry, Sir, but when I think of the damage that is being done to Singapore, I cannot contain myself.

GOVERNOR'S SPEECH - (Debate on the Address) - (Third Day) Address the Chair, Mr Minister.

GOVERNOR'S SPEECH - (Debate on the Address) - (Third Day) Yes, Sir. Sir, all these politicians who talk with tongue in cheek of encouraging capital, of encouraging investment in industry - are they really doing it? They are killing all initiative for capital to come here.

GOVERNOR'S SPEECH - (Debate on the Address) - (Third Day) Incentive; the Member has got it mixed up.

GOVERNOR'S SPEECH - (Debate on the Address) - (Third Day) Order. Let us not have unnecessary interruptions.