Hansard, 1958-11-05

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 J. M. Jumabhoy (Stamford) - from 19th October to 25th November, 1958; Mr J. M. Mason (Nominated) - from 3rd November to 2nd December, 1958.

I have received two messages from His Excellency the Governor. The first message dated the 14th October, 1958, informs me that, in accordance with the provisions of Section 62 (2) of the Singapore Colony Orders in Council, 1955 and 1956, His Excellency had that day assented to the following Bills: (i) Customs (Amendment No. 2) Bill; (ii) Preservation of Public Security (Amendment) Bill; (iii) Criminal Law (Temporary Provisions) (Amendment No. 2) Bill; (iv) Income Tax (Amendment) Bill; (v) Merchant Shipping (Amendment No. 2) Bill; (vi) Undesirable Publications (Amendment) Bill; (vii) Public Entertainments Bill; (viii) Factories Bill. The second message dated the 27th October, 1958, states that, having received instructions from Her Majesty through the Secretary of State authorising him to do so, His Excellency had that day assented to the Malayan Auxiliary Air Force (Amendment) Bill.

I have to inform Honourable Members that I received a report dated the 28th October, 1958, from the Honourable Mr Justice F. A. Chua, informing me that the Honourable Mr T.M. Hart, Financial Secretary, took and subscribed the Oath of Allegiance before him on the 28th October, 1958. This was done under She provisions of paragraph (3) of Standing Order No. 1 (Oath of Allegiance) in order to enable the Honourable Member to attend and take part in proceedings of the Estimates Committee held between the time of his becoming a Member of this Assembly and this sitting. 10.04 a.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, with your permission I wish to make a statement on the participation of the Government in the Singapore Constitution Exposition which is being organised by the Chinese Chamber of Commerce in celebration of the achievement of a new Constitution next year giving birth to a self-governing State of Singapore. The emphasis of this Exposition is national, instilling loyalty and pride in Singapore and in its constitutional development, for at this time of the celebration it must be the wish of everyone of us that every citizen in our predominantly young population should share the significance and exhilaration of that event. This new Constitution is coming to us because of our own unity, determination and steady constitutional efforts, and it gives us the reality and the substance of freedom in our internal affairs. To change the title and status of Colony for that of a State is a major and irrevocable step in our history and a matter of great pride and joy for our people. The emphasis of all exhibits in the Exposition will be on the achievement of self-government, but it was clear that, without major Government participation, the emphasis would not be readily understood. It is essential that there should be a Government Pavilion to emphasise the fact, nature, extent and reality of the constitutional change and to show the advances already made under the impetus of an elected government which we expect will be the greater when the fully elected Government under the new Constitution takes over. Moreover, it is important to emphasise the wide range of services which the Government provides for the welfare, prosperity and security of the people of Singapore. The Government Pavilion will come as the climax of our activities in civic education whose aim has been to ensure that the fullest and widest use is made of the opportunity to vote, which has been conferred by our citizenship legislation last year. 100,000 square feet have been reserved free of charge for the Government within the demarcated area of the Exposition. The Committee under the chairmanship of the Assistant Minister to the Chief Secretary (Mr M. P. D. Nair) has been preparing plans and estimates in consultation with the Ministries. It is proposed to build a covered space of 60,000 square feet. It will be in two parts, each facing on to the main axis of the Exposition; one showing the Government's part in increasing the wealth and economic prosperity of the country, and the other showing the wide range of social services in health, education and welfare which the Government provides for the people. Details of cost have not yet been worked out to an extent which allows the Govermnent to ask for a specific sum to be voted, but every means is being sought to achieve economy by using materials which will be required for other purposes next year and by borrowing of material and equipment. Moreover, exhibits are being designed in such a way that they can be of long-term use for departmental activities afterwards. For the need to win the unity, understanding and co-operation of our citizens is a task as continuous as the democratic process itself, and I am sure this Assembly will wish that this exhibit should be of a standard to match not only the general standard of the Exposition but also of the theme of the new Constitution. Sir, I have another statement to make clear the policy of the Government in relation to the recent ban on the importation of publications from certain publishers - Mr Lee Kuan Yew (Tanjong Pagar) rose -

Point of order?

On a point of order, Sir. Surely the Chief Minister does not wish us to be inundated by a series of statements before we have recovered from his first one?

Actually I take it that the Chief Minister would welcome questions on his first statement, and therefore, perhaps he will pause now and if hon. Members wish to ask questions on his first statement, they may do so.

Am I right in believing, Mr Speaker, Sir, that this Exposition is being organised by the Chinese Chamber of Commerce and not by the Singapore Government?

The Exposition is being organised by the Chinese Chamber of Commerce, and the Government is taking part in it and so is the City Council.

Am I right in believing that when the Chinese Chamber of Commerce mooted this idea, the purpose was not as stated by the Chief Minister today?

When they mooted this idea, the Chinese Chamber of Commerce thought of a trade fair on art international basis, and when they saw me they felt that a better emphasis would be on the achievement of self-government. Hence the name of that trade fair has been changed to that of Constitution Exposition.

Am I right in believing that, as a result of the persuasive powers of the Chief Minister, he has successfully engaged the Chinese Chamber of Commerce in politics?

I have not endeavoured to persuade the Chinese Chamber of Commerce. Perhaps it is surprising to the Member for Tanjong Pagar that there are citizens in Singapore today who have a keen desire to show their loyalty to Singapore.

No one doubts the desire of everybody to evince their loyalty. I am asking the Chief Minister whether this political slant that has been given to the trade exposition is a result of the intervention of the Chief Minister?

Nonsense!

Nonsense!

May I now proceed with another statement, Sir, in relation to the recent ban on the importation of publications from certain publishers in China and Hongkong? Sir, I would like to emphasise that this was not a change of policy but a tightening up of the application of our policy. Previously, all books had been allowed to enter except those specifically banned. This was appropriate when there was still a certain amount of freedom for publishers, and classics and textbooks in particular were re-published untouched from the freer days of Chinese culture. But with the change of policy in China and the subordination of all publishing houses, and through the process of rectification of all writers to the Communist Party, this laxity could not be allowed to remain unchecked, for with an import of a million publications a month from China and Hongkong, there can be no guarantee that the assessment and sifting can be complete. It is therefore the procedure now that only books which are specifically exempted for the cultural and academic value of their contents, and which have not been reduced by editing, presentation or selection to the level of Hsueh Hsi textbooks, will be allowed to enter. We appreciate, Sir, that this has caused temporary hardship to those in the book trade, but every step is being taken to speed up our processes of assessment of existing books, so that exemptions among those already here and for the future can also be given speedily. It has been encouraging that the grounds of our policy have been generally accepted and that there is appreciation of the need at this time of democratic nation-building to prevent the weight of other external ideologies and nationalisms drowning our own. This is the logic of citizenship in action, and it is for us, by our mental reactions and by our actions, to show that citizenship based on exclusive and active loyalty to Malaya is a reality, and an axiom of our political thought and action. If it can be shown to us that this action pf ours weakens the forces of democracy or inhibits the growth of our new patriotism, then we are in the wrong. But no responsible government in Singapore can accept criticism based on any outlook which is not Malayan. I realise that we cannot merely create a vacuum and that the ultimate answer is the production of writing of our own with a Malayan atmosphere and a Malayan outlook. I would appeal, therefore, to all writers to direct their thoughts and words to the lives and aspirations and problems of the peoples of Malaya; and to publishers in all languages to give our writers encouragement by offering publication and distribution facilities. We cannot produce best-sellers straightaway, but now is the time for those who have had the benefit of our rapidly growing education and who feel the new forces of democratic constitutional nation-building to express that positive creative force for those who are less explicit and begin to make our own contribution to the world of arts. Sir, before I make the final statement, I would welcome questions from the other side of the House. 10.15 a.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I wish to ask the Chief Minister whether he is aware that it is already the practice and a fact that every book imported from China or Hongkong, especially in the Chinese language, has been examined carefully by the Chinese Secretariat before it is allowed to be sold on the market? Therefore those 53 publishers -

Order. Perhaps the hon. Member will pause there and get an answer to his question.

I am sorry, Sir, I have lost the trend of the hon. Member's question while listening to what he was going to say.

Perhaps the Member for Changi will repeat his question.

Sir, I would like to ask the Chief Minister whether he is aware that it is the practice for the Chinese Secretariat to examine every book published in the Chinese language, whether it is imported from, say, Peking, Hongkong or Formosa? Those 53 publishers who have been banned - many of their books have already been -

Order. I think the Chief Minister has grasped the question.

Sir, I said in my statement that the previous policy had been to allow these books to come in and the restriction was only placed on certain books which were banned. Because of the change of policy of the Chinese People's Government and because of the growing sense of nation-building in Malaya, the Government has thought it fit and proper that this attempt by the Chinese People's Government, through publications, to indoctrinate the citizens of Singapore should be checked.

Actually, Sir, my question is in two parts. I want to ask whether the Chief Minister has any adequate evidence to prove to this House that those books which are allowed to be imported - including a lot of classics by Confucius and Lao-tze, and books on the arts, too, such as music, medicine and science - have any political significance; and also whether the Chief Minister is aware that in certain universities and libraries there are thousands of books classified as research work, such as the classics, books on science or special studies, and has he any concrete evidence that those books have any political significance?

Sir, if the hon. Member will step into my office and arrange an appointment with me, I will endeavour to show to him in secret the attempts that have been made.

Sir, I want an explanation from the Chief Minister, in public why the Singapore Government has found 23 more publishing houses than the Federation Government has discovered, to be subversive.

Sir, in regard to that, I understand that the Federation Government is asking importers to take up separate import licences for those publishers which were not listed by them in its earlier ban.

Mr Speaker, Sir, as the Chief Minister has appealed to the local publishers and writers to publish and write literature with a Malayan outlook, there is one question I want to ask him. It is this - can he inform this House whether it is possible for our local publishers and writers to publish classic books on special studies'? Say, for example compare the works of Shakespeare with the Chinese classic The Red Chamber Dream.

Sir, I think the hon. Member has not understood my statement well. I said, regarding the classics, books of art and science, so long as they have not been contaminated by any attempt to subordinate them to the Communist doctrine, they are not going to be banned. In fact, they are indeed welcomed. What I am appealing to is that, since we are all conscious of a new nation being born in Malaya, and since we have each and every one of us declared that we love Malaya, surely there are bound to be some people in Malaya who will be able to contribute in this world of art.

Can the Chief Minister give an illustration of such a contamination for the benefit of the public?

It may interest the hon. Member, Sir, to know that I am having a White Paper compiled.

Mr Speaker, Sir, just now the Chief Minister touched on Malayan loyalty. He has a suspicion that the books from China are going to cause the Chinese in Singapore to withdraw their loyalty to Malaya. Does the Chief Minister know that a lot of books from Taipeh and Hongkong have been financed by the U.S.I.S., and that they go out to the local overseas Chinese calling on them to support the Chiang Kai-shek regime? Does the Chief Minister consider this also harmful to this country? If he wants to ban the 53 publishers, can he tell us how many publishers there are in Taipeh and Hong-Kong who are supporting the Chiang Kai-shek regime and trying to woo the support of the overseas Chinese and who should be banned?

Sir, in our desire and attempt to build up a Malayan nationhood, any attempt by outside forces to thwart that objective is wrong.

Mr Chief Minister, your third statement.

I have one final statement to make, Sir, and it is in regard to the decision of the Government to assist the Federation of Malaya by limiting the dumping of Chinese cottons into the Malayan economic unit of which we are a part and a beneficiary. Mr Speaker, Sir, I am not concerned now with the details of the decision, but wish to emphasise again that criticisms must be related to the new stage of our constitutional develop- ment. It is the clear assumption of our new constitution that it is the last stage before independence through merger with the Federation. We accept, with understanding but without loss of faith in our ultimate objective, the position that it is not the present policy of the Federation that there should be merger now. Meanwhile, Sir, Singapore cannot afford a running bickering battle with the Federation hoping to win every time; for not only will that snot be to our long-term economic interest, but it is no way to show our readiness to share our fortunes with them for better and for worse, in riches and in poverty. This does not make us a colony or a slave of the Federation, or any other noun which is culled from the dictionary of denunciation. We must be realistic and even the partnership of equals and independents assumes a great deal of give and take. My appeal is, therefore, that in all our discussions of issues of this kind we must start from a Malayan assumption and we must show towards the Federation the consideration we expect from them. This may not be an easy policy to follow, but again we must realistically face facts and not ignore them. And one of these facts is that if we claim to be a part of a Malayan nation seeking the rightful union which circumstances deny us today, we must act as a part of a Malayan nation here and now. Let us remember the essential elements of policy such as citizenship, education and multilingualism which we are able to follow without question, and ask ourselves before we let loose the full flood of criticism whether the issue is important enough to put the constitution and the policies it enshrines in jeopardy. Only by trial and error, approaching each issue reasonably, can we begin to reach agreement. There must be the will and the mood; and then our future will be the stronger together, because of the mutual confidence, the mutual co-operation which has been worked out voluntarily. As each stone is laid by agreement and cemented by mutual respect and appreciation, the joint home of Malayan independence will be the stronger and more rapidly built.

10.29 a.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, some hon. Members will probably have received, communications from their constituents as a result of the flooding caused by heavy rain on Monday last, the 3rd of November, and I think it may be useful if I make a statement on what has been achieved so far by the Government's flood control works; on what remains to be done; and on the broad picture, in short, as it is today and as far as we can forsee it for the next few years. I had better start by enumerating some of the basic simple points to which I have referred in the past in the Assembly, but which may not be clear in hon. Members' recollection. The first point is that we have to get the water right off the land and into the sea, or else we have to retain it in a properly planned and constructed reservoir. It would be useless to approach this flooding problem on a short-term vote-catching basis. It would be fairly easy sometimes to shift the flood water off the land of political supporters and on to the land of political opponents. But I would not wish to do that and I am sure that my honourable political opponents on the Opposition Benches would not wish me to do it to them. The only way to deal with flood problems is by proper overall schemes after a full study of the facts. My second point is that flooding cannot be dealt with as simply as some people suppose. It is not just a matter of deepening or widening the channels of the drains. If deepening brings the bottom of the drain down to sea level, then the sea will flow up the drain at high tide, and this is not a desirable result. The only way of stopping this is to have a fairly expensive tidal gate at the mouth of the drain, such as we have put in at the mouth of the Geylang River. Moreover, even where the land is above sea level, deepening of a drain may have serious results. It lowers the water table and dries out the subsoil. For example, in the Queenstown area, the land has been reclaimed by putting earth-fill on top of swamp mud. A deepening of the drain would lower the water table and dry out the foundations and thus affect the stability of the houses. Even where no buildings would suffer from deepening the drains, lowering the water table will draw away the water from the roots of the farmers' crops and then they cannot grow their vegetables for the market. The third point is that flood difficulties are very much increased as development proceeds. This operates in two ways. Firstly, every new piece of development increases both the size and the speed of the run-off of water. Along Bukit Timah Road, each new estate that is developed sends more water down more quickly to the lower parts of the roads. In the same way along Thomson Road on Sunday last I was asked by residents to look at a local flooding problem. Although it was some hours after the rain had stopped, I found a house where six inches of watery mud was still standing in and around the house and this was being accumulated by being trapped between the old and the new Thomson Roads. Residents nearby on the other side of the new Thomson Road telephoned me on Monday to say that their houses which had never been flooded before, were being flooded now. I have not yet got a final report on this particular area. I quote it because it illustrates the danger of new development sending flood waters down to people at the bottom of the hills. Development also causes flooding difficulties when it puts valuable capital investment on to land which would otherwise have been used for drainage. For example, the flooding below the Peirce Reservoir to which I was just referring could have been dealt with by a drain out towards Ponggol but before the drain could be surveyed or constructed or even planned the appropriate line for it had been covered by development at Serangoon Garden Estate and that way out is now closed. The fourth point I should make is the problem of achieving co-ordination between different authorities. The City Council in the City area has to deal with water which is flowing down to them from the rural area and in the rural area the decisions which have been or will be made about the three big City Council reservoirs in the centre of the island affect the planning of flood control works from Mandai right down to Potong Pasir. To co-ordinate plans between separate authorities is never easy. My fifth general point is that adequate flood control schemes are very expensive. They not only take a lot of construction work but they also involve big requirements for land; and in the overcrowded state of Singapore, land requirement means also heavy costs for land clearance and resettlement. Hon. Members will have seen in the Press reports of the complaints by residents in the Aljunied Road area who were reluctant to move off the land required for the drains for our second tidal gate in the area. So much for these general points which hon. Members would like to bear in mind as I go forward with a brief account of the flooding which occurred last Monday and how it is related to the plans which Government has carried out or now has in hand. I have no reports of flooding from the eastern side of the island. The flood control scheme at Bedok seems to have been 100 per cent successful. A little further west, in the Geylang Serai area, our new tidal gate which is associated with some drainage works carried out by the City Council seems also to have been fully successful. Higher up in the Lorong Tai Seng area, there was some water lying about when I visited it and I am afraid that situation will remain and will have to be accepted until we have completed our second tidal gate in the Kallang swamp on the other side of Aljunied Road and cleared the land and dug the drains which will carry the water away from the Airport Road area. I have no reports of significant flooding from Potong Pasir but, as I mentioned just now, there was some local flooding all the way up Thomson Road from Kampong San Teng as far as the Sembawang Hills Estate. So much for the eastern side of the island. As far as reports to me go, there was no other significant flooding there. The rainfall on the eastern side of the island was not so heavy as the rainfall on the western side of the island. As I pointed out earlier, development along the Bukit Timah Road produces an increasingly rapid run-off and concentration of water along Bukit Timah Road and through to Orchard Road. Although the rainfall this year was very much less than it was in the serious flood period of 1954, the flood levels at the bottom of Bukit Timah Road were considerably higher than they were in 1954. For example, in front of the University of Malaya, there were 2½ feet of water and there were three feet of water at the Orchard Road/Scotts Road junction, the water coming there from the same source. The flooding of this area is one of the major problems which will have to be dealt with in the future. The only practical solution is to get the water away from here by a very big ring drain run- fling along Whitley Road across Thomson Road through the south of Toa Payoh down to the Kallang swamp. This will involve very large works and, consequently, a lot of money. Further south, we have the very serious and rapidly increasing flooding along the catchment of the Singapore River. At Upper Queenstown, there was a big accumulation of water and further down in the low-lying area, the floods were as much as three feet in depth. Here again, flooding has been created where it had not previously existed by the very large development works being carried out at the head of the catchment. This is the third major flood control scheme which the Government is carrying out. Putting it briefly, we are cutting through the line of the Railway and propose to run the water away to the west into the sea. There is also an increasing flood area in the City around Robinson Road, Boon Tat Street and Cecil Street. My colleague, the Minister for Local Government, informed this Assembly in July 1955 that the City Council had schemes for pounding areas beneath the area of Boat Quay and Telok Ayer at a cost of about $450,000. I have no recent information about City Council proposals for work in this area but the inconvenience caused to this vital commercial area by flooding must be considerable. I have not had reports of any serious flooding further west in the Jurong and Ama Keng areas, though, no doubt, in any heavy rain there will be some accumulation of water. I must not conceal from hon. Members that, had the tide been higher or had the rainstorm gone on longer, the flooding in the areas affected on Monday would have been considerably worse. The essential problem is that the water has to be got away to the sea, and if the drains are not big enough, it cannot get away; there is a bottleneck and the water lies around until gradually it finds its way out. This constitutes the special danger for Singapore: whilst a single storm will clear itself in a reasonable period of time, a succession of storms can lead to a very considerable accumulation of water with all the very serious danger and damage to crops, to property, to livestock and to commercial activities which are inevitably involved. The problem of flood control will, I am afraid, remain with Singapore for a good many years to come and will involve quite considerable cost and, consequently, quite considerable taxation before it can be fully dealt with. In the 3½ years that I have been concerned with this matter, the Government has spent, exclusive of land costs, approximately $1 million on flood control works and is committed to a further $1¼ million for completion of the Geylang Flood prevention scheme and the Ulu Pandan diversion of the Queenstown flood waters. In addition, the City Council has done quite a good deal of work but I have not got precise figures for their expenditure. It is probably safe to say that the work done so far is only a small part of the work and the cost which will be necessary to give Singapore reasonable freedom from flooding in all areas. Hon. Members are well aware of the serious effects on Singapore of the world trade recession and they are also aware of the very considerable sums which have been found, and necessarily will have to continue to be found, to provide education for our enormously expanding school-age population and for medical and other social services. I do not want to prejudge the decisions which may be made by successive Governments after the next general elections. I cannot attempt to say what priorities may in future be attached to flood control schemes on the one hand, and to social services or to other forms of development on the other. There is, however, no immediate prospect of this Government undertaking any new major flood control schemes apart from the completion of the works I have referred to - at Paya Lebar, Geylang and Ulu Pan-dan. Because of this, I have reluctantly agreed to allow our Drainage Adviser to retire. In the 3½ years in which he has been working here, he has completed a massive job of making an overall survey of the causes of flooding on this island and he has worked out the schemes which will have to be carried out in order to remove the flood problem from us. He has also carried out the important scheme at Bedok and has got us well advanced with the schemes for the Geylang/Paya Lebar area and for Ulu Pandan. He has worked under great difficulties and his achievements have been limited not by his capacity but by the ability of Government to finance the necessary schemes. It is with the greatest regret that I have agreed to his retirement but he does leave behind him the general plans which can be brought into action at any time when the funds are available.

Mr Speaker, Sir, would the Minister tell us the approximate cost of dealing with the Bukit Timah Road problem?

I do not think that it will be safe to give any figure which could be relied on. There are so many unsettled factors at present that I would not care to attempt to give a figure which had any serious meaning in it.

10.43 a.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I lay upon the Table a Certificate of Urgency signed by the Governor in respect of the Education (Amendment) Bill.

Order. I think the Minister has given notice of the Bill.

Can I proceed with the First Reading?

Will the Minister please introduce the Bill first?

Mr Speaker, I beg to introduce a Bill intituled "An Ordinance to amend the Education Ordinance, 1957." Bill read the First time.

Second Reading, what day?

Now, Sir.

May I have the Certificate?

Yes, Sir. Certificate of Urgency handed in.

The Certificate is in order. Are typed copies of the Bill available for Members?

Yes, Sir. Typed copies of the Bill handed in to the Clerk and distributed to hon. Members.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." The cost of education in Singapore has been steadily rising since 1945 and the recurrent cost now absorbs as much as a quarter of Government revenue.

Order. Before the Minister proceeds, I need the Governor's recommendation or consent.

I am sorry, Sir. I have the Governor's consent to proceed with the Second Reading and Third Reading of this Bill now.

Thank you. Please proceed.

As I have stated, the cost of education now absorbs about a quarter of Government revenue. The reasons for this are well known. It has been Government's policy to expand the scope and provision of educational facilities. The number of school-going children has steadily increased and the cost per pupil has tended also to rise. During this time, the education rate on the value of property has been no higher than two per cent and it has yielded a mere $1.6 million in 1957 against the total cost of education of over $57 million in 1957. If the education rate is to remain an item of Government revenue, it is reasonable to raise it in conformity with the increased cost of education. It is proposed therefore to raise the rate to four per cent. This will yield an estimated revenue of approximately $3.4 million in 1959. The increased rate will be assessment on the value of property in the City and in the rural area for next year. Notices of such assessment are issued in November of the year before and in order to facilitate the early issue of notices, I have asked that this Bill be taken through all the stages at this sitting. Sir, I beg to move.

Sir, I beg to second it. Question proposed. 10.47 a.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the Explanatory Statement to this Bill is, I think the most illuminating statement of all time. It says: "The purpose of the Bill is to increase the education rate from two per centum to four per centum of the annual value of rated property." It is exactly what the amendment says: put "four" instead of "two". What I was hoping the Minister would do when he rose to speak in support of the Bill was to explain to us why the figure of four was chosen. Everybody has agreed that the education rate must go up with the increase in cost of education. We would like to know why he has arrived at the figure 4, not 4.5, 5 or 5.

5. There must have been some logical and cogent reason why it was four and we would be obliged if he would inform the House of it.

Order. On the comment on the Explanatory Statement, I think the matter is procedural. Explanatory Statements should purely be factual and further explanations must be given at the Second Reading.

Indeed, Mr Speaker, Sir, with great respect I was not criticising the Explanatory Statement as either incorrect or improper. I was only saying that it must have been the most illuminating Explanatory Statement to a Bill that we have read in this House.

It is in accordance with Mr Speaker's ruling. 10.49 a.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, no one is happy when rates and taxes are increased. Hence we have to examine the necessity for such an increase and see that at least the increased rate should be put to good use. This two per cent increase is for education, a cause to which we are all committed, and the expenditure on which has increased by leaps and bounds during the last few years. This has happened because of the increase in the number of children attending school and I do not see how anyone in his right senses can object to this two per cent increase. But, as I said, we must see that this two per cent increase will be put to good use. No one in this House has uttered more warnings than I have that we have to be very careful regarding public expenditure, particularly on buildings, as the carefree spending days of colonial government are over. My prediction has been proved correct. We have now reached the end of our reserves. Government, however, has at last realised this and has suddenly stopped many projects approved by this House. But the building of more schools and hospitals cannot be stopped. It must continue, and more must be built to provide facilities for our growing population. In one case, I must say the Minister for Education has realised this and I congratulate him. After much persuasion, his Ministry has agreed to relax the rules requiring spacious playing-fields before plans for the building of schools can be approved. I read a letter that I received from him: "The Kiau Nam School, Reference our conversation, I write to confirm that this Ministry has recommended to the Senior Planner (Development Control), Singapore Improvement Trust, the building of Kiau Nam School on the following terms: While this Ministry agrees to the stipulation that adequate playing-fields must be provided where land is available, it is of the opinion that there should be relaxation of standard where applicable, especially in a congested area where site for building schools is scarce and where the school serves a real educational need. The general policy of this Ministry is that the shortage of playing-fields should not be considered as a sole and insurmountable obstruction for a building project. I also confirm that the Minister is prepared to relax the requirement under Section 24 (e) of the Education Ordinance." Sir, I want to cite this case because this clearly shows how money can be saved when you are building a school. This particular school is housed in a large attap hut where 500 students attend morning and afternoon sessions. The Trustees raised $60,000 bought a piece of land of about $30,000 sq. ft. and submitted plans for the building of 11 semi-permanent class, rooms costing about $30,000. These plans were sent back with the information that they might be approved if a two-storeyed building were put on the land. Sir, a two-storeyed building would have cost at least $120,000 on this reclaimed land which' was a swamp. With this approval by the Ministry of Education, the school will be constructed and 800 children will be able to attend and use 11 class-rooms. All this has been done by the voluntary effort of the people living in that area who felt the need to help in building the school for the children who would otherwise be playing in the streets and around drains and getting into mischief. Sir, we cannot and must not stop our children from receiving education because of a shortage of funds but we must see that the best use is made of the funds available. 10.55 a.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I wish the Minister for Education would listen very carefully and note what is being said. I am sure that the whole House will agree that money must be spent most effectively and wisely. Sir, I consider that the Minister for Education should not be portrayed as a bad man who has betrayed the cause of Chinese education. Now, this Bill asks for more money from the predominantly Chinese community of Singapore. Sir, all along, unfortunately, our courageous and hard-working Minister for Education has been condemned and termed as a destroyer of Chinese culture. If the Minister would take this opportunity to compare the so-called Ten-Year Plan for education of the then colonial Government with that of the present Government during the last 3½ years, it would help the public, especially the Chinese intellectuals and Chinese students, to know more exactly about how the Government spends money on Chinese education. Nevertheless, the outcry of discrimination against Chinese education is going on mainly on the question of capital grant for school buildings as applications for capital grant for Chinese school buildings seem always to be delayed by the Singapore Improvement Trust or because of other factors. But so far the Government has not taken effective steps to help any Chinese school management committee to put up a building. It is also very slow in granting such applications. Sir, on the question of the salary of Chinese school teachers, there is an outcry against the experienced teachers receiving less pay than some of their former students. In other words, the salary scale for Chinese teachers is chaotic. Nobody understands why it should be so. Some say "Oh, we are experts, and we must be specially recognised." Others say, "No, the Chinese University degree cannot be recognised." I think it is high time for the Government to give a clear-cut statement on this vexed question of the salary scales of Chinese teachers. My last point is to urge the Government to give more aid to the Nanyang University. Last month, the Minister announced that financial aid was to be extended to Nanyang University. I should imagine that if financial aid had been granted two years ago, the Nanyang University would be in a better position today. 11.00 am.

Mr Speaker, Sir, this Bill which is to increase the education rate from two per cent to four per cent will touch my pocket to the extent of something like $10. I am quit happy to pay that because I know that I am getting much more for the many children that I send to school. I think everybody who is in a position to help Government in providing more money for the young people should rejoice at this step taken by the Government to help the young people. But what is uppermost in my mind now is that there will be 16,000 young students of about 12 years old sitting for the Government common primary examinations and the result of this will be that 11,000 of such children will be thrown out into the streets without any means of getting into a regular secondary school. Of the 11,000 children who will be out in the streets, probably 1,000 or so will be lucky enough to get into afternoon schools, private schools or Government evening schools, but there will still be that large number of about 10,000 young people who will not know what to do with themselves. I Think that with this increase in revenue,, we must find a way to help these young people. We must not leave them without employment and without anything useful for them to do. I certainly think, Sir, that the education that we are having now tends to make almost everybody a pen-pusher. We have many other lines that we must accept. I certainly feel that in a large city we not only want clerks, managers and business executives, but we also want fitters, electricians and plumbers. We want people not only on the level of engineers, who are highly qualified people, but also those who will be just able to effect some sort of repair and help themselves in seeking employment or earning a living. I am thinking that, for the 10,000 young people, something must be done for them. Some sort of school must be set up for them, a school that will teach them a trade, to be able to repair simple faults in radios, teach them about simple plumbing lines, all sorts of things at a level lower than even the Junior Trade School. I am thinking of this because it will then enable the young people to know a trade and so earn a livelihood. If they cannot help themselves, they will be a liability to society. If they cannot earn enough money, they will know where to get it, by fair means or foul. We should try to see that they are assisted along correct lines and not be misled by criminals. Furthermore, Sir, apart from this question of young children and unemployment, there is the question of Government policy in helping Chinese schools. I happen to be connected with a number of Chinese schools, being on the Board of Managers, and in one instance I find that the Education Department has been willing to help in recommending an acre of land in the Tan Tock Seng Hospital burial ground for the building of a school. But then it seems that the Department of Education is not influential enough to help, and so the Land Office must also be brought into the picture. The Planning Department must also have its say and, all in all, the assistance to the school seems to be rendered in such a fashion that it does not give a feeling that help is being handed over willingly. There is a lack of co-ordination in all these Governments Departments - where one Ministry recommends, the other Ministry holds it up. That is absolutely bad. I would say that if Government is going to help, if the Minister says, "We will help certain schools in certain projects", all the other Ministries should assist in such a project. I have another case. This happens to be the case of a school of which I happened to be Chairman. We built a school for 18 classrooms, three storeys high. We wanted to have another storey to give added facilities. I was a Member of the Select Committee on the Education Bill and we all know that there is always a lack of space for school playgrounds. The Minister at that time assured the Opposition that the problem of playing fields will not be an obstacle to school building and so on. However, it spells quite differently when it comes to the Singapore Improvement Trust. As my colleague, the hon. Member for Paya Lebar said, the S.I.T. has its own rule to obstruct all these matters. We have been told not to proceed with the building of another storey to provide added facilities to the children. There is a lack of playing fields which, in this particular case, comprises five or six basketball courts. In such schools as the one in Telok Ayer Street and the one in Clemenceau Avenue, there are no playgrounds at all. I fail to see why we could not give a directive to the S.I.T. to assist Government in the execution of its policy by helping all people who are engaged in education. 11.07 a.m.

Sir, I welcome the proposal of Government to increase this Education Rate from 2 per cent to 4 per cent. When I looked at the Paper, as the hon. Member for Serangoon (Mr Lim Choon Mong) said just now, I was shocked to see that 11,000 students will be left behind, not knowing what to do unless assistance could be given from other quarters. I feel that if we want peace and harmony in this country, the fortunate people should help the poor ones. My only worry is this - as the hon. Member for Tanjong Pagar (Mr Lee Kuan Yew) has asked just now - how did the Government come to this figure of 4 per cent? Is that the right figure that is needed for this education assistance? I do hope that Government will think carefully, but the people do not mind contributing more. Once and for all, how much have they got to contribute; they get tired of having such appeals over and over again. 11.09 a.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the question has been asked why Government has increased the Education Rate from 2 to 4 per cent and not to any other figure. The reason for this is that since the cost of education is continuing to rise, and since this Government will only plan for the next new government, I thought that the increase should be related to the education expansion plan for next year. Therefore I have chosen this rate, to ask for an increase of, as I said in my speech, from $1.6 million to $3.4 million, an increase of $1.8 million, which will be just sufficient to plan for a standstill budget so that the expansion which has been committed will carry on, but no new projects will be carried out by Government. That is the main reason for the increase from 2 per cent to 4 per cent. As regards the concern of several Members over the possibility of throwing out, as they say, 11,000 children into the streets, I must say that this is not a correct statement. 11,000 children will not be thrown into the streets. I am sure some of them will be given places in the Junior Trade School. Many of them will, of course, be admitted into the evening schools run by Government. If necessary, the evening schools will be expanded to absorb those young persons whom the Education Department think will benefit by secondary education. I have stressed to this House quite a number of times that evening schools cater for those who, for one reason or another, cannot gain admission into secondary schools, but that they will be given education on subjects which will lead to their sitting for examinations held by the Royal. Society of Arts or even the Cambridge School Certificate. The hon. Member for Serangoon (Mr Lim Choon Mong) mentioned the case of his own school where he said that the S.I.T. was obstructive. Well, this is the first time that I have heard him air his complaint in public. I have not personally been informed of this. If he had told me personally about it, I am sure that he would have got all the co-operation from me. Even during the Select Committee on the Education Bill I stated that the lack of playing fields should not be an obstruction to the expansion of school building, especially in areas where there is congestion of buildings. The hon. Member for Changi (Mr Lim Cher Kheng) said that there are always delays in the matter of capital grants. He makes it out that the delay is always due to Government, but I must say - I am sorry that he is not here to hear it - that usually such delays are due to the Committees of Management themselves. They have been repeatedly told to submit their claims or their application for capital grants before June in the year before the grant that is to be given. The reason for this is to enable the Government to vet the plans, to see that every thing is in order before the application is put down into the Estimates for approval by this House. Usually the Committees of Management of these schools come any time they like with inadequate plans or inadequate requirements, and when they are asked to complete those requirements or to give us more information, they usually take a long time; and when they do come, it is usually after the Estimates have been prepared and they have to wait for another year before those Estimates can be put down into the budget. Therefore, the delay is not due to the Government. If the managers o these Management Committees will cooperate with the Education Department and comply with the requests required, I am sure things would have been dealt with more speedily. The question of teachers' salaries has also been brought up. The recognition of qualifications for the purpose of fixing salaries for the teachers is a question that is determined not by me but by the independent Public Service Commission, and the teachers in Chinese schools are paid according to the decision of the Public Service Commission. I think the question of salaries especially of the Chinese teachers will be resolved very soon. The hon. Member for Changi also mentioned something about aid to Nanyang University. Well, the aid to be given to Nanyang University is based on the deficit disclosed in the accounts submitted by the University authorities. Hon. Members must realise that we cannot give more than the deficit, otherwise it will mean that Government will be enabling the University to have a surplus, and this should not be the way in which public funds should be handled. The hon. Member for Changi also touched on the black name supposed to have been associated with me as a destroyer and betrayer of Chinese culture, and asked me to mention something about the present plan in connection with the Ten-year plan. The Ten-year plan, augmented by the Five-year plan, envisages expenditure on Chinese education, subject to correction, of course, of something like $300,000, or less than $300,000 for ten or fifteen years; whereas in 1957 Members will realise that on Chinese education alone the Government has spent over $10-million as compared with the Ten or Fifteen-year plan envisaged with an expenditure of only $300,000.

How do you spend it?

I think that is a sufficient answer to those who say that I betray Chinese culture.

Did you spend it carefully?

I think I have answered all the questions, Sir.

Question put, and agreed to. Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole Assembly. Assembly immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill [Mr Chew Swee Kee]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read the Third time and passed.

"to provide for the establishment and incorporation of the Nanyang University and for matters connected therewith", presented by the Minister for Education (Mr Chew Swee Kee); read the First time, to be read a Second time on Wednesday, 3rd December, 1958, and to be printed.

"to make provision for encouraging the establishment and development in Singapore of industrial enterprises by way of relief from income tax", presented by the Minister for Communications and Works (on behalf of the Minister for Commerce and Industry, Mr J. M. Jumabhoy); read the First time, to be read a Second time on Wednesday, 3rd December, 1958, and to be printed.

"to make provision for relief from income tax in aid of industrial expansion", presented by the Minister for Communications and Works (on behalf of the Minister for Commerce and Industry, Mr J. M. Jumabhoy); read the First time, to be read a Second time on Wednesday, 3rd December, 1958, and to be printed.

"to provide for the regulation of employment agencies", presented by the Minister for Labour and Welfare (Tun Lim Yew Hock); read the First time, to be read a Second time on Wednesday, 3rd December, 1958, and to be printed.

"to provide for the appointment, powers and duties of notaries public, and for other matters connected therewith", presented by the Chief Minister (Tun Lim Yew Hock); read the First time, to be read a Second time on Wednesday. 3rd December, 1958, and to be printed.

Order for Second Reading read. 11.22 a.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I have His Excellency the Governor's consent to proceed with this Bill. Sir, I move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." In moving the University of Malaya (Amendment) Bill, 1958, I want to draw Members' attention to clause 68 of the Schedule in the Bill. Clause 68 as it stands is incomplete and it had to be presented in that form because the question of the appointment of the Chancellor was under discussion by both the Governments and no agreement had been reached by the time this Bill was presented. My attention has been drawn to it by you, Sir, and I have given the undertaking that at this sitting I shall have that clause deleted and I shall do that at the Committee stage. Before I touch on the features of this Bill, I want to say at the outset that University teaching in Kuala Lumpur is not a new thing. Indeed for the last few years University expansion has been taking place both in Singapore and i&' the Federation of Malaya. The expansion in Singapore is a natural thing because a University must grow. The expansion in the Federation of Malaya is also natural because the University, although situated in Singapore, has been, in fact, serving both territories and it is our duty to see that university teaching is provided in the Federation as well as in Singapore. Members will recall that a Commission of Inquiry was appointed on the University of Malaya in 1957 under the Chairmanship of Dr Aitken, Vice-Chancellor of the University of Birmingham. A copy of the report has already been presented to this Assembly and I am sure Members are aware of the recommendations of that Commission. The development schemes recommended by the Aitken Commission have been the subject of very careful consideration by both the Governments of the Federation of Malaya and Singapore, and we have jointly decided that, in keeping with the development in both territories, an alternative scheme which aimed at creating two Divisions of the University of equal status - one in each territory - would be more appropriate. A local Joint Constitutional Committee and a Joint Finance Committee were then jointly appointed by the two Governments under the common Chairmanship of Dato Sir Clough Thuraisingham and the Bill before the House today is the result of the recommendations of these two joint committees. I want to place on record here Government's appreciation of the efficient manner in which the two committees have dealt with the work entrusted to them. I want Members to bear in mind that when they consider this Bill the Federation of Malaya has emerged as an independent Nation, and that in Singapore the grant of full internal self-government is imminent. These factors and the rapid growth of the University have made it necessary for the two Divisions of the University to be created. I also want Members to note that under this Bill, the University of Malaya will continue as one unit, but at the same time the two Divisions in Singapore and in the Federation of Malaya will be given as much autonomy as possible. The present Constitution embodied in this Bill is based on certain criteria which would, firstly, maintain academic standards; secondly, preserve the unity of the University and provide for central co-ordination and control of high policy; thirdly, accord to the Divisions the maximum degree of autonomy consistent with the maintenance of academic standards and the preservation of the unity of the University; fourthly, permit the possible establishment of any future Divisions or separate universities with a minimum of difficulty; and fifthly, be simple to operate with a minimum of statutory authorities and thus incorporate wherever applicable recommendations made by the Aitken Commission. I want to allay the fears of Members of this House, indeed of members of the public, that the University has been split and that the policy of the two Divisions may, in future, go contrary to each other or may even compete with each other. The provision of a small single Central Council above the two Divisional Councils of the two divisions will see to it that the University of Malaya will have a single policy, and that the interests of one Division will not run contrary to the interests of the other. High-level policies will be determined by this Central Council, while day-to-day administration of the Divisions will be the responsibility of the Divisional Councils. The principle of responsible government has been followed in the draft of this new Constitution so that each authority in the University will be responsible to the other. For example, the Central Council of the University consists of the Chairman of each Divisional Council and the Chairman of the Standing Finance Committee of each Divisional Council, among other members. The chief executive head of the University is the Vice-Chancellor and the chief executive head of each Division is the Principal and they are responsible to each other through membership of the various authorities provided under the Constitution. There is a slight difference in the membership of the two Divisional Councils in that there are three Government appointees on the Singapore Divisional Council as against four appointees of the Yang di-Pertuan Agong and one appointee of the Conference of Rulers on the Kuala Lumpur Divisional Council. I want to stress here that the difference in the Constitution of the two Governments has made it necessary that the Government representation on the two Divisional Councils should be different. The connecting link between these two Divisional Councils on the official side is provided by the presence of a Singapore Government appointee on the Federation Divisional Council and a Federation Government appointee on the Singapore Divisional Council. My statement will be incomplete if I do not say something about the Students' Union. I know hon. Members of this House are aware of certain statements made by representatives of the University of Malaya Students' Union and also by other interested bodies against the decision to provide for two separate Students' Union - one in Kuala Lumpur and one in Singapore - instead of allowing for a single Students' Union to look after the students in both territories. I want to allay the fears of the students that this is aimed at splitting the students or is done against their interest. I want to make it known, in the first place, that the provision for two Divisional Students' Unions is a logical consequence of the creation of two largely autonomous Divisions, each with its own Divisional Council which will be responsible for the Constitution of the Students' Union in their territory. Secondly, the provision of two separate Unions is really something done in the interests of the students themselves. I am sure that one of the main objects of the Students' Union is to look after the interests and welfare of their members, and who can look after them better than their own colleagues in the same territory? Also, the Kuala Lumpur Division being a new division will have fewer students than Singapore and, as such, should be given every opportunity to develop their own Students' Union. It must be considered that although conditions in both territories are largely the same, there must be minor differences which are best looked after by the students themselves who are on the spot. I want to stress that the provision of two Students' Unions should not deter the students in both territories, and indeed the Union officials themselves, from meeting on an ad hoc basis to discuss matters of common interest. Apart from these few new features of the University of Malaya, the old features of the University remain substantially the same under the new Constitution and I am sure that the University will continue as a unit to provide students both in Singapore and in the Federation the higher education needed. I know that the creation of these two divisions will require tact and foresight in the administration of the University in future, but I am sure that with goodwill from both sides and from the top the future of the University is assured. I cannot emphasize too strongly that when the University has grown, just as both the Federation and Singapore have grown, something must be done to meet the new situation and this Bill now before the House is, in the opinion of both Governments and in the opinion of the experts who have studied the problem and made their recommendations, the best way to meet this new development in this country. I wish also to draw the attention of hon. Members to the fact that the Federation Bill is identically the same and it was passed in the Federation sometime last month. Sir, I beg to move. Question proposed. 11.30 a.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the policies that have been pursued by the Federation Government make this Bill the inevitable consequence, and no one is alarmed that there will be a University in Kuala Lumpur. The Minister for Education has wrongly interpreted the fears in the minds of many of the graduates of the University if he thinks that they are afraid that the University will be split into two. It is well to remember that, with a combined population of somewhere in the region of eight to eight and a half millionth people, Malaya can well afford to have more than three universities - one in Kuala Lumpur and two in Singapore. But what is in the minds of many of the graduates of the University is that the logical outcome of the policies of the two Governments would mean that only Singapore students could be in the University in Singapore, and only Federation students could go to the University in Kuala Lumpur. Once the resources of the University of Singapore - its scholarships and its bursaries - are provided for by the Government of Singapore, it means that the majority of, if not all, the students will, in time to come, be Singapore students, and the same situation holds true with the students in the University in Kuala Lumpur. The one feature of the University of Malaya that was prominent in all its products, is that it was the place where the intellectuals - the elite - of Malaya met on common ground. Be they subsequently leaders of social or political movements in the Federation or in Singapore, there is among all these men a sense of being one. They have gone through the same mill. If the University of Singapore and the University in Kuala Lumpur are to cater not just for Singapore students or for Federation students, but to cater for all in Malaya, then I say we welcome the creation of more and more universities, be they in Singapore or in the Federation. But this can only be if the fiscal policies of the two Governments, with regard to subsidies to the University and its scholarships policy, are so designed that each Government ensures that a sufficient number of its students is in the other division. Only in that way will the two divisions of the University - ultimately, I suppose both will become full universities in themselves - be Malayan. What must be avoided is a situation where they become irreparably separate, not only in geographical location, but in its student population. It is because of this that the students have strenuously fought for their right to form one union. It is not because they feel that the Government is consciously trying to separate them into two student groups. But if you keep the two students' unions separate and, at the same time, make sure that Federation students go to the Kuala Lumpur division and Singapore students go to the Singapore division, then you will have a situation where the two student populations are quite separate and distinct from each other. I hope that it will not be impossible, purely from the administrative point of view, to ensure that both the Singapore and the Federation divisions are pan-Malayan, and not provincial divisions. 11.35 a.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I am quite disappointed when the hon. Member for Tanjong Pagar said that the people of this country and this House are not alarmed at this Bill. Sir, it is with mixed feelings, I must admit, of course, not of alarm, that we now debate this Bill. Based on the size of the population and the area, Singapore and Malaya do require many more universities, and there is reason for having a university in Kuala Lumpur. But we cannot deny the political fervour and political significance that are attached to this Bill. We support higher education as well as the desirability to build more universities, but not at this juncture. The merger between Singapore and Malaya is in poor shape, and now we have this Bill and the Causeway clamp. Sir, I must regret that the hon. Member for Tanjong Pagar did not give more emphasis to this point, but only touched upon the Government's policy of not allowing Singapore students to study in Kuala Lumpur and that Federation students cannot come and study in Singapore. Anyhow, I beg the Singapore Government to make a statement that the introduction of this Bill was never the intention of the Singapore Government or the Singapore Legislative Assembly. We do not want this division. We do not want this Bill. We prefer to be called the Singapore Branch of the University of Malaya. We do not mind the headquarters of the University of Malaya being in Kuala Lumpur. We do not mind former Raffles College or the King Edward VII College of Medicine now being called the Singapore Branch of the University of Malaya. The significance that our people should attach to the University of Malaya is that it belongs to the Malayans, not Kuala Lumpur Malayans or Singapore Malayans. Sir, I must confess that the divide and rule tactics of the old colonial regime seem to have succeeded to some extent, and our people are now dividing themselves. Even in such a dignified and distinguished institution as the University of Malaya, we allow stupid and short-sighted politics to get in. 11.40 am.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I believe that all the people in Malaya and Singapore always consider themselves as Malayans. Nobody in Malaya has ever thought of Singapore as not being a part of Malaya or that Singapore is a foreign territory. At the present time, Sir, the two Universities are joined together by a supreme Council governing the two branches. I believe this is a good thing. It should be a prelude to the creation of more universities. I hope we shall have not only just two Universities but more universities, universities to be situated in the north of Malaya, in Kuala Lumpur and in Singapore. In the whole of South-east Asia, Sir, the University of Malaya is an important institution. My hope, Sir, is that there will be universities situated all over Malaya, but that the students must come from all parts of the country, including Singapore. If there is a policy whereby we have a certain proportion of students coming from each part of the country, then we are consciously getting the best of the country to mix together to produce the best. We must not only think of just having universities for our own students, but I think it would be a wise policy to have students from other countries in South-east Asia joining our universities, so that our ideals would be well known to all in South-East Asia. Not only that, Sir - many of our students should go out and join universities in other countries and so get the best from foreign lands, and then come back and serve us, if we can have that, then we will not be, as the hon. Member for Tanjong Pagar has said, insular. The leaders of tomorrow will not only be able to understand their own local problems but will have a wider outlook in life. They will be able to know what is going on around them in South-east Asia and also what is happening in the world. If we can achieve this, Sir, then I say this Bill, which is just the beginning of things to come, will be a good Bill, when we have more universities to help our local boys. 11.45 am. Mr Chew Swee Kee rose -

Mr Chew, in reply?

In reply, Sir. Mr Speaker, Sir, the hon. Member for Tanjong Pagar has said that the two divisions should not be provincialised, that is, Federation students should be able to come to Singapore, and vice versa, to study. I wish to draw the attention of hon. Members to the fact that with the movement of the Engineering Department to Kuala Lumpur - there is only one Engineering Department in the two divisions - and the existence of the Faculty of Agriculture in the Federation, that will help towards that object, that is, help students from Singapore and the Federation mix together. Singapore students who want to study engineering will have to go to Kuala Lumpur, and where the Medical Faculty is concerned, Federation students will have to come to Singapore for their medical studies. We can expect that in the first few years of the development of the University in Kuala Lumpur, the range of subjects will be incomplete and, as I have said, with the siting of the Engineering Deportment and certain other studies in Kuala Lumpur, students will continue to go from one territory to the other. The present financial arrangements between the two Governments are only for a triennial period, and the position will be reviewed at the end of 1961. The Bill itself, Sir, actually caters for all, and not, as feared by the hon. Member for Changi, for only one section. He said that this is a divide and rule matter. Well, I can assure him that it is not so. As I have pointed out in my speech earlier, the University is not actually being split, but the divisions are allowed to develop themselves. There is a Central Council, a supreme body, governing at the top, and the two divisional Councils are given as much autonomy as possible. The hon. Member for Serangoon has said that he welcomes the creation of more universities so that they can serve the needs of the country. I wish to sound a warning here: that, firstly, we have to consider the finances necessary to have more universities; secondly, we must relate that requirements to the needs of the country. We cannot go on producing intellectuals who cannot be employed. Although they are employable, there might not be sufficient jobs for them. We must temper our needs in that respect. I agree, in principle, of course, that we must expand our university education, but we cannot expand without any limit.

Question put, and agreed to. Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole Assembly. Assembly immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. [Mr Chew Swee Kee.] Bill considered in Committee.

11.48 a.m. Clauses 1 to 4 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 5-

Sir, I move, In page, 4, line 2, to leave out "words" and insert "expression". Amendment agreed to.

There is a note, in page 4, line 3, after the open inverted commas, to insert a comma. That will be done.

Sir, I move, In page 4, line 5, after the open inverted commas, to insert "and". This is a matter of drafting, Sir. Amendment agreed to. Clause 5, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. The Schedule-

There is a note, in page 7, line 8, after "Convocation", to insert a comma. That will be done.

Sir, I move, In page 8, line 28, to leave out "one member appointed by the Council of Ministers of" and insert "the Permanent Secretary to the Treasury,". Members will note that there is only one Government appointee on the Central Council which is the highest executive body and which makes recommendations to the Government on matters of finance. It is therefore important that there should be no mistake that the Government appointee on this Council should be the Permanent Secretary to the Treasury. Amendment agreed to.

Sir, I move, In page 9, line 5, to leave out "for teaching and research". This is a matter of drafting, Sir. Amendment agreed to.

Sir, I move, In page 9, lines 36 and 37, to leave out "and Acts and regulations made thereunder" and insert ", Acts and regulations". It is again a matter of drafting, Sir. Amendment agreed to.

Sir, I move, In page 14, line 16, after "contracts", to insert "under the seal of the Division". This is to legalise the matters done by the division concerned. Amendment agreed to.

Sir, I move, In page 15, lines 2 and 3, to leave out "one person appointed by the Council of Ministers of" and insert "the Permanent Secretary to the Ministry of Education,". Here again. Sir, the Council in the Kuala Lumpur Division should have a Government appointee in that division, and he should be the Permanent Secretary to the Ministry of Education so that he can co-ordinate the policies in both the divisions. Amendment agreed to.

Sir, I move, In page 15, lines 24 and 25, to leave out "three persons appointed by the Council of Ministers of" and insert "the Permanent Secretary to the Treasury, the Permanent Secretary to the Ministry of Education and the Permanent Secretary to the Ministry of Health.". Hon. Members will note that there are three Government appointees on the Singapore Divisional Council. The purpose of Government representation on the Singapore Divisional Council is to look after Government interests and to make certain that the University's policy does not run contrary to that of the Government. Since the University is receiving a grant from the Government, obviously the Treasury must be represented on the Council. It is also obvious that the educational interests must be looked after, since the University is an institution of higher learning. Therefore, the Ministry of Education must be represented on this Council. And there is also the Medical Faculty to be considered, and obviously that Ministry is an interested party. This amendment therefore provides for the membership of three Permanent Secretaries - the Treasury, Education and Health - on this Divisional Council, so that there will be no mistake regarding this representation on the Council in future. Amendment agreed to.

There are two notes: in page 16, line 4, to leave out "Divisions" and insert "Division"; and in page 16, line 6, after "21", to insert a comma. Those are typographical errors.

Sir, I move, In page 17, line 17, to leave out "shall" and insert "may". This is a matter of drafting, Sir. Amendment agreed to.

There is a note, in page 20, line 28, to leave out "division" and insert "Division". That will be done.

Sir, I move, In page 23, line 10, after "with", to insert "the". That is a grammatical requirement, Sir. Amendment agreed to.

Sir, I move, In page 23, line 19, to leave out "of" where it secondly occurs and insert "or". Amendment agreed to.

There is a note, in page 23, line 34, to leave out "accountd" and insert "accounted". That is a spelling error.

Sir, I move, In page 27, to leave out lines 1 to 6. The whole clause should be deleted. This was inserted in an incomplete form because at the time of the submission of the Bill, the appointment of the Chancellor was still under discussion. There is no necessity for this clause to be made. As it stands now, the appointment of the Chancellor will be left to the reconstituted Court of the University. The deletion of this clause will make it necessary to renumber the clauses following.

The Minister should inform the House, of course, that this clause should never have been inserted in the Bill as it is incomplete. Amendment agreed to.

Sir, I move, In page 27, line 7, after "of", to insert "Chancellor,". The deletion of clause 68 makes it necessary to insert the word "Chancellor" so that the Office of Chancellor will continue to exist during the transitional period.

In page 27, line 7, the marginal note will be accordingly amended, i.e., after "of", to insert "Chancellor,".

Sir, I move, In page 27, lines 11 and 12, to leave out "Principals of the Divisions" and insert "Principal of the Singapore Division". Amendment agreed to.

In page 27, line 11, the marginal note will be amended accordingly, i.e., to leave out "Principals" and insert "Principal". Consequential amendments will be made to the numbers of sections consequential on the deletion of section 68. The Schedule, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Bill reported with amendments; read the Third time and passed.

12.00 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, with your permission, I beg to move, That this Assembly approves the Improvement Rate of 2 per centum on the annual value of all houses, buildings, lands and tenements within the City of Singapore, fixed by the Singapore Improvement Trust under subsection (1) of section 22 of the Singapore Improvement Ordinance (Cap. 259) for the year 1959. Sir, this rate cannot by law exceed five per centum on property within the City area. Hitherto, this rate has always been two per centum and the Trustees recommend no change in the rate for 1959. The approval of this Assembly is again required for this rate under the Singapore Improvement Ordinance. This rate, which is in lieu of the improvement rate referred to in section 59 of the Municipal Ordinance, is collected by the City Council and paid over half-yearly to the Trust. The monies from this rate, together with the equivalent Government's contribution under section 23 of the Singapore Improvement Ordinance, are estimated at $3.53 million and form one of the major items of revenue of the Trust and are paid into the Improvement Fund. These monies are spent on improvement schemes such as the rehousing of persons, the opening of back-lanes, the provision of open spaces in congested areas, and generally on the maintenance of the general improvement plan. Sir, I beg to move.

Sir, I beg to second the motion.

Question put, and agreed to. Resolved. That this Assembly approves the Improvement Rate of 2 per centum on the annual value of all houses, buildings, lands and tenements within the City of Singapore, fixed by the Singapore Improvement Trust under subsection (1) of section 22 of the Singapore Improvement Ordinance (Cap. 259) for the year 1959.

12.04 p.m.

Sir, I have His Excellency the Governor's authority to move, That this Assembly resolves that the sum of $415,138 shall be supplied to the Government under the heads of expenditure and for the services specified in the Schedule contained in Sessional Paper No. Cmd. 34 of 1958. The reasons for the various applications are explained in the Sessional Paper but I should like to take this opportunity to make some additional comments. With regard to item 191 which is for Aircraft Services, I should explain that in so far as Malayan Airways Limited are concerned, this refers to duty on petrol uplifted for other than scheduled flights, that is for testing engines on the ground, for test flights within the boundaries of Singapore, and so on. Duty is charged on such petrol at the time of uplift. Remission of duty is made on the authority of the Minister and is paid from this vote. Petrol uplifted for flights outside the boundaries of Singapore, that is for scheduled or international flights, is issued free of duty under the agreement with the company and by arrangement with the Customs and the oil company, and the question of repayment of duty does not arise. With regard to item 196 which is in connection with the conversion of a ward at Tan Tock Seng Hospital, it may be asked why, with so many cases of tuberculosis disclosed by the recent survey, a ward at Tan Tock Seng Hospital should be converted into a hostel for Assistant Nurses. In the first place. Sir, there is a serious shortage of Assistant Nurses for tuberculosis work. Recruitment and training is a matter of top priority. Recruitment will be difficult in any case but training will be impossible unless accommodation can be found within the hospital compound. When the development plans for Tan Tock Seng Hospital were implemented, perhaps too much emphasis was placed on ward accommodation due, no doubt, to the fact that standard plans were available and wards could be built in groups with some ease. As a result, the present position is that we have adequate ward accommodation but no hostel accommodation to cater for the urgent need for Assistant Nurses. In the circumstances, Sir, the most sensible thing to do is to convert one of the existing wards, which is at present standing vacant, into a temporary Nurses Hostel, particularly as this can be done very quickly and at comparatively little cost. This does not mean, Sir, that we shall be short of ward accommodation for tuberculosis cases. In the first place, hon. Members will be glad to hear that the results of the recent survey were much more favourable than had been hoped. Only one per cent of the cases brought to light require hospitalization. To meet this demand, 300 beds have been made available at Woodbridge Hospital where improvements in treatment techniques for mental ailments have resulted in a spectacular reduction in the number of patients. Chronic cases will be accommodated there. The accommodation at Tan Tock Seng Hospital should be quite adequate to cater for the acute cases. Sir, I beg to move.

I second it. Motion committed to Committee of Supply. Motion and Schedule considered in Committee of Supply.

12.09 p.m. Schedule-

The summary is at page 9. Head 8- The sum of $199,450 for Head 8 ordered to stand part of the Schedule. Head 17- The sum of $15,045 for Head 17 ordered to stand part of the Schedule. Head 22- The sum of $61,375 for Head 22 ordered to stand part of the Schedule. Head 34- The sum of $5,039 for Head 34 ordered to stand part of the Schedule. Head 48- The sum of $10 for Head 48 ordered to stand part of the Schedule. Head 54- The sum of $28,534 for Head 54 ordered to stand part of the Schedule. Head 9- Question proposed, "That the sum of $1,979 for Head 9 stand part of the Schedule."

Mr Speaker, Sir, the sum of $1,979 is in respect of two vans: one for the Directorate and Administration and the other for the Engineering Division of the Broadcasting Department. I notice that the amounts voted for both are identical: "Amount voted in 1957 ... $4,750; Amount spent up to 31-12-57 ... $3,576; Outstanding balance ... $1,174"; and then for some curious reason the unforeseen revote is $1 less in the case of the Directorate and Administration van as against the Engineering Division van. I should have thought that the engineers would have been more clever at saving the extra dollar.

I regret that I cannot offer an explanation without reference to my file..

Question put, and agreed to. The sum of $1,979 for Head 9 ordered to stand part of the Schedule. Head 45- The sum of $99,936 for Head 45 ordered to stand part of the Schedule. Head D 48- Question proposed, "That the sum of $62,000 for Head D 48 stand part of the Schedule."

Mr Speaker, Sir, the Hon. the Financial Secretary has informed us almost casually that, as a result of the investigation into T.B. in a recent survey, only one per cent of the cases have been found to be actively infectious and require hospitalization. That is a matter of profound interest to Singapore and perhaps he could elaborate on that a little more, because, if there is a cutting down of hospital beds for T.B. cases, one assumes that the Government will be providing better facilities for domiciliary treatment for cases not requiring hospitalization. That is a question on which I would like an assurance that home treatment or domiciliary treatment is going to be better looked after than in the past. On the other point which was mentioned, that 300 beds in Woodbridge Hospital are being provided for T.B. patients, one would like to know whether this means that there will be congestion or lack of sufficient facilities for mental patients in the Woodbridge Hospital. While we understand the need for training more nurses at Tan Tock Seng Hospital, there are two important issues involved in this. 12.15 p.m.

On the question of the domiciliary nurses, I can give an assurance that that is so.

What is so?

That better facilities are being provided for the domiciliary nursing by the Ministry; and with regard to the question of Woodbridge Hospital, there is no question of any exceptional congestion in the number of beds.

Mr Speaker, Sir, can I have that repeated slowly and clearly, because I could not follow what he said?

I think that will appear in our Hansard.

Sir, I do not mean that the Minister was inaudible but the meaning was not clear and I would be obliged if he would state clearly what exactly he intended to say in reply.

Will the hon. Member then ask a question as to what he wants to know?

Like the Member for Tanglin, I share his anxiety about the shortage of accommodation for domiciliary nursing in Tan Tock Seng Hospital and Woodbridge Hospital, and I would like to know the categorical answer to that anxiety.

I thought I had already answered.

Perhaps the Minister would be kind enough to enlighten the House on exactly what steps are being taken to increase the nurses for domiciliary treatment and what numbers are involved. We are told that hospitalization cases are down to one per cent but it is generally known - subject to correction - that the number of infectious cases of tuberculosis are in the neighbourhood of five or six per cent, unless the survey has shown something very different indeed. There is only one per cent of them to be hospitalized and the balance have to be looked after by domiciliary treatment through nurses, provided by the Ministry of Health, going into the homes and seeing that the patients are under proper care.

I think the Hon, the Financial Secretary has already indicated that one per cent of tuberculosis cases require hospitalization. Now those requiring domiciliary treatment and not hospitalization are looked after not only by the domiciliary nurses but also as out-patients. There is no overcrowding of mental patients in the Woodbridge Hospital.

That does not answer my question. The question I am asking him to answer is this. I am quite satisfied with the interesting statement of the Hon. the Financial Secretary that only one per cent of infectious cases of T.B. require hospitalization. This is something revolutionary which we have not heard of in Singapore before today and, it being a fact, so far as we know, that there are five per cent cases of tuberculosis in Singapore, what is happening to the four per cent? It is not a question of over-crowding at the hospital. It is what new facilities are being provided by the Ministry of Health to provide nurses so that those who are not hospitalized are treated at home and are properly treated.

I have already answered that.

Question put, and agreed to. The sum of $62,000 for Head D 48 ordered to stand part of the Schedule. Head D 59- The sum of $19,626 for Head D 59 ordered to stand part of the Schedule. Head D 45- The sum of $41,246 for Head D 45 ordered to stand part of the Schedule. Head D 56- The sum of $29,900 for Head D 56 ordered to stand part of the Schedule. The sum of $415,138 for the Heads of Expenditure and for the services specified in the Schedule ordered to stand part of the motion. Motion and Schedule reported, without amendment. Question on the Motion put, and agreed to. Resolved, That this Assembly resolves that the sum of $415,138 shall be supplied to the Government under the heads of expenditure and for the services specified in the Schedule contained in Sessional Paper No. Cmd. 34 of 1958.

I think this is a convenient time to suspend. I will take the Chair again at half-past two. Sitting accordingly suspended at 12.20 p.m. until 2.30 p.m. Sitting resumed at 2.30 p.m.

2.31 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the motion which I am now moving asks the House to join me in deploring the inept and incompetent manner in which the Minister for Health and his Ministry have dealt with the current polio epidemic. Sir, I wish to say at the outset that, as a responsible law-making body, we should not say today anything which might cause unnecessary alarm or panic amongst members of the population. What I have to say is not about the rights and wrongs of medical opinion on the use of Sabin vaccine, but on the completely inept and incompetent manner in which the public relations have been handled. At the outset, I apologise for having caused this inconvenience to the Minister for Health who, I understand, is just preparing to leave for his holiday in Hongkong and Japan. I am sorry that I have to bother him in a debate on this matter. But I would like to remind him that, before he leaves for his holiday, he should consider some of the points which I have to make. Sir, whatever the final medical judgment on the use of Sabin vaccine may be, whatever the pros and cons, everybody that I have consulted agrees that, having started Sabin vaccinations, it is the duty of this Government to Sabinise that section of the population that may be open to infection. It is the duty of this Government to see that that is done efficiently, quickly, and thoroughly under expert guidance. This is a purely administrative job and there should be no difficulty in getting the whole mechanism geared up in order that the operation may be completed with the least possible delay. I have, however, this to say on the other aspect - the way in which this problem has been presented to the people, partly by the incompetence and ineptitude of the Minister and his Ministry, and partly because of the cleverness of the colonial language Press. It is no exaggeration to say that, as a result of the often contradictory statements issued and published - one expert of the Ministry contradicting another expert - there has been a general loss of confidence in the work of the Ministry. Furthermore, they have allowed themselves to be drawn into a Press campaign which the Straits Times claims has probably forced the Government into taking action with regard to Sabin vaccine. Sir, an impertinent Press has this to say today: "The second feature has been the use of vaccine to combat the epidemic. Publicity helped the authorities to make up their minds -"

Will the hon. Member disclose the name of the paper?

This is the editorial in the Straits Times published today. A group of journalists found great pleasure in believing that they had. rightly or wrongly, crowded the Government into taking this action. I should hate to believe it is true, and I would be prepared to listen to the facts and be relieved to hear that that is not the case. But whilst that may be just the fault of the newspaper, this sorry record, which has led to a loss of public confidence, is primarily the responsibility of the Minister and his Ministry. This business started with an article on the 8th of October, 1958, in the Straits Times - I am quoting exclusively from this colonial English language paper - it says on page 9: "A private doctor commenting on the Sabin vaccine last night said, 'It is still in the experimental stage in Canada and the U.S. latest report say its effectiveness has not yet been proved. 'There would probably be no harm in trying it here but, if it is not effective in giving immunity, it would give those who took a dose a false sense of security.'" On the 11th October, the same newspaper on page 4 said: "Is swimming dangerous while Singapore polio epidemic lasts? 'Yes' says the Health Ministry, which has advised parents to keep their children away from swimming pools, since the first warning of the epidemic was given on October 1st. 'No' is the apparent answer of the Education Ministry, which has done nothing to stop the present season of school swimming meets." Then says the report at the end of the article: "The Education Minister, Mr Chew Swee Kee, the Minister's Permanent Secretary, Mr Lee Siow Mong, and Dr Doraisingham were not available for comment yesterday." Then on the 12th October again on the question of whether schools should or should not close swimming meets: "The Permanent Secretary to the Health Ministry, Dr M. Doraisingham, said: 'It's for the Education Ministry to decide.' The Minister for Education, Mr Chew Swee Kee, said: 'I don't know . . . it's an administrative matter. Ask my Permanent Secretary, Mr Lee Siow Mong.' Mr Lee said: 'I've been in close touch with the Health Ministry and so far we have had no signal from them to cancel swimming sports, apart from the general warning.'"

Is that the Straits Times?

Yes. 17th October, says the editorial: "This is the wrong time for tranquillisers." General incitement to get people excited! And on the 18th October - a Press conference: "A Health Ministry statement on the subject said:" - on page 9: "'The Ministry has now decided to use this vaccine as an immunizing agent against the disease, but this has nothing whatsoever to do with the outbreak now prevailing. Up to now, the Ministry was not satisfied with this vaccine because sufficient experiments had not been carried out to prove its efficiency or safety. Only recently has it been possible for us to say that this vaccine can immunize a person and, if carried out in large numbers, prevent the occurrence of the disease. But this will not stem the present outbreak. An expert committee recently studied the Sabin vaccine and recommended that this should be used without delay - not because there is an outbreak of poliomyelitis, but there is little reason to postpone its use any further.'... Reminded that the Health Ministry had advised the public not to have anti-polio injections during the epidemic, Dr Doraisingham said: 'We advised caution in having prophylactic injections generally. I am a very busy man and when you reporters ring me up I cannot explain everything in detail on the phone.'" Sir, I am glad to know that those engaged in the duty of looking after the public health are busy people - I should hate to believe they are not - but I wonder whether it is wise, in the midst of a busy programme, to carry on telephone conversations with the Press which one subsequently has either to modify or to deny, with catastrophic result in loss of public confidence. Then on 19th October came the announcement that the Government was going to use Sabin, and the friendly Straits Times, under a headline, said:- "MANY S'PORE DOCTORS WARN AGAINST VACCINE: DON'T BE GUINEA PIGS" And that I call really helpful and friendly! "13 MORE HIT BY POLIO" "thirteen" underlined just to remind everybody that there is some mystery attached to this number, "Biggest total for one day" - a Sunday newspaper carried the banner headline, and went right down to the bottom of the page under the sub-heading "GUINEA PIGS" - before that it said: "According to Singapore's polio expert, Prof. J. H. Hale, there are about 100 cases of non-paralytic polio for every paralytic case. At this rate the number of people who have harboured the disease in the current outbreak would be 11,800. Meanwhile many Singapore medical practitioners warned their patients of the danger of being made 'guinea pigs' of the Government's anti-poliomyelitis vaccination drive. They told patients who approached them for anti-polio doses: 'It may do more harm than good to'"- it continues on page 7- "'you. It's safer to go without it.' Doctors interviewed yesterday warned that people should not be misled into believing that vaccines against poliomyelitis might become a practical and safe public health measure. One of them said: 'The established objection to using such vaccines is that they are not absolutely safe - in other words, there is a danger of their contracting polio after the inoculation. And the germs are so readily transmitted from the recipient to his contacts that it is quite impossible, without extraordinary isolation precautions, to prevent their escaping into the surrounding communities where they might cause an outbreak.'" Then a garbled version of the British Medical Journal publication about experiments in the Central Belgian Congo - how one village got immunized, and an epidemic broke out in the next village, and so it went on to the next village, and the village in between got it, and they had to immunize the whole lot, and everybody was safe. Sir, having warned - of course, not stating categorically themselves but just quoting medical practitioners spreading this line - they then went on to say on the 23rd October: "SOS FOR MORE VACCINE TO MEET RUSH". A sense of urgency, impending doom and disaster - S.O.S. Meanwhile the Minister just merrily read all this and added to the general comment. Said he at a Press conference -

What day?

23rd October - "The Minister for Health, Mr A. J. Braga, spent half an hour at the Yio Chu Kang clinic today." Then Dr Doraisingham said: "The 100,000 doses we have requested would not be sufficient to give vaccine to all children under the age of 10 but in the case of live vaccine - as the Sabin - it can be expected that twice as many or more are likely to be immunized by the transference of the virus from the vaccinated person to the unvaccinated." Sir, this same spokesman for the Minister for Health had said, on the question of transference, in a written question/answer interview with the Singapore Standard the day before, October the 22nd, question: "Knowing all this, why have you hesitated so long before using the Sabin vaccine?" Says the doctor: "'When it is known that, in very rare instances, the less attenuated forms of the virus can be excreted, it is possible in large countries such as India, to experiment with its use in isolated communities at the risk of subjecting the small population group to the prevalence of the virulent virus. Singapore is a small place, and what is a small experiment in an isolated population becomes a national experiment and, in consequence, extreme caution has to be exercised in order to prevent a calamity arising however remote that possibility might be. Hence the reason for this cautious procedure. Until we are entirely satisfied that the use of this vaccine is safe, we could not implement the immunization programme.'" Sir, I seriously doubt whether there should be all these untrained Press Relations officers for each Ministry, It may be an accurate, honest and a fair appraisal of the medical situation. But to tell the public, when you had already decided to let go this Sabin vaccine, that there had been cases (though in very rare instances) where the less attenuated forms of the virus can be excreted - in other words the virulent ones can be excreted through passage! And then to tell them the next day, "Oh, well, although we have got only 100,000 doses, we are hoping that one fellow will pass on to the next chap and we'll have 200,000, maybe 300,000 thereby Sabinising by passage", having the day before told the public that, in rare cases, the virulent ones might be passed on by passage. Then on the 25th October, the Minister on the front page: "...predicted today that the present polio epidemic would die out within a month." Now, Sir, I do not know whether he did. If he did, then he must be a very, very unwise man, because nobody knows whether it is going to die out within a month or not. But there was no denial. Knowing that the Press was already giving his Permanent Secretary difficulties - so much so that he had to say that he was a very busy man, he could not explain everything in detail over the telephone - why should the Minister open himself to such constructions? Immediately after that, Prof. Hale, the only expert that the Government has got, at the same Press conference, said: "Your guess is as good as mine." Now is not that the kind of thing that is calculated to bring the Minister and his Ministry into ridicule and contempt? Said Mr Braga - this is by way of exculpating his Government: "We can't give the vaccine at a large number of centres at the same time, but we will now be in a position to run morning and afternoon sessions. We don't yet know exactly what the new supply of vaccine will cost, but it will be negligible - apart from the freight charges. To have used Salk vaccine for 100,000 children would have cost $3,000,000 - three injections each at $10 a shot." Is not that stupid, Sir, in the midst of a relatively minor polio epidemic - I agree with the Ministry that it is so; it has not reached the proportions epidemics have often reached in places like America - but nevertheless in the midst of a situation where parents are scared stiff, in a near-panic over their children, to say. "Ah, well, you know, it is no use using Salk vaccine. It costs $10 per shot. Three times ten is $30. It will cost in all $3-million. Therefore we are going to get something free or at negligible cost, apart from freight charges." I do not mind the Labour Front Government saying stupid things to bring them to their doom. But I do mind Ministers, either through ignorance or general lackadaisical attitudes to matters which are their concern, saying things which exasperate the public, and convince them that the Ministry, or at least the Minister in charge, is a man guided by the wrong principles, that he was prepared to risk the lives of a hundred thousand kids because he was going to save his Government $3-million. Meanwhile, patent medicine pedlars - the people who manufacture Salk vaccine - canvassed every Assemblyman. They sent a whole lot of pamphlets and leaflets through the post, saying: what a wonderful thing Salk vaccine was. If only they could sell $3-million worth of Salk vaccine! I am told that it actually costs only a dollar per tube and three shots will cost $3. So if the Minister thought he was going to pay $3-million for it, they might be able to sell it to him for $2-million and make a lot of money out of it! But the stupidity of the statement, to which, of course, quite rightly the Straits Times gave considerable prominence on its front page, is enough to have sent any group of intelligent parents into a rage. What I am at the moment amazed at is the calm and the resignation with which they have had to put up in the face of the incompetence with which this whole problem has been handled. Sir, this is what Professor Hale said - I do not doubt that he is a polio expert and that he has been investigating the use of the attenuated form of virus in the Sabin vaccine - but was this likely to induce public confidence? At the same conference he said: "It is estimated that the new supply will be used up within five weeks, but Prof. Hale, who is scheduled to leave here permanently in December, said he would remain to see the job through." Now that is very kind of him, and quite proper. But then he went on to say: "...there would be keen interest in medical circles in other parts of the world in the large-scale Sabin vaccine tests taking place in Singapore and he intended to write a full report on the matter." Sir, I am sure it is right and proper for medical science that such large-scale tests should be fully documented. Undoubted effectiveness and so on of Sabin vaccine. But to tell the people of Singapore that the whole medical world was watching the situation and that he was going to write a paper on it! If the Government had a Public Relations Department which knew its job, it would have told the Minister and his experts that, however true that statement might have been, it is one which was misconceived and calculated to destroy public confidence. But, having gone to all this trouble to explain why Sabin vaccine should be used in an endemic area in the face of a rising epidemic - I do not know whether this is the Straits Times or Dr Doraisingham - but it said here, right at the end of it all "European victim" - "The European boy aged 13 from Serangoon Gardens was admitted to the R.A.F. Hospital. Dr Doraisingham admitted candidly today that the polio virus 'disdains all standard advice about precautions to avoid it.' He added: 'Without active immunisation, people are really helpless in the face of it - it may strike anyone.'" Now, was it competence to say all these things when you had the population already madly queueing around the two or three centres a day; parents waiting at the break of dawn trying to get their kids vaccinated? And you went on to say, "Well, we are helpless; it may strike anyone". That means doom; that we die. Sir, the same newspaper today has the impudence, having quoted all those doctors to show why, in their opinion, Sabin (which has been given considerable publicity by courtesy of the Straits Times) should not be used. It went on to say in the editorial: "Field trials last year in the Belgian Congo were conclusive (whatever the British Medical Journal may say) both as to the safety of the vaccine and its efficacy in stemming an epidemic." Sir, to the extent that this was the result of a Press campaign which was beyond the control of the Minister, he is not to be blamed. But knowing full well from the very beginning that the Press was making this a popular issue and was selling the story, it was the stupidest thing in the world to have allowed three spokesmen at any one time. If there was one expert, then only that expert should have expressed his opinion. But to have three persons to attend the Press conference - one of whom was the Ministerial head (a person renowned for his hunting. shooting and riding activities, not including, unfortunately, the hunting of the polio virus) who said that it was going to end in one month, and then being properly contradicted by his polio expert, Prof. Hale, and having his spokesman, his Permanent Secretary, to add that the polio could strike anyone without active immunisation. Was it necessary or wise? Sir, I hope it is not asking too much of the Minister before he leaves the day after tomorrow for Japan, to take some steps to make sure: first, that the Sabin vaccine is rapidly and effectively distributed to all who require it in Singapore. This is a pure administrative problem which can be overcome. Secondly, if there is any doubt in the matter at all, an expert team should be asked to come, study and supervise the use of this vaccine. Sir, when this article was written about the Sabinisation of a quarter million people in the Belgian Congo, it might interest the Minister to know that there were no less than five M.Ds., all persons of great professional standing - Directors of Laboratories in the Belgian Congo and the U.S.A. and other research institutions (I may refer, for his easy reference, to page 187 of the British Medical Journal dated 26th July) - leading the whole expert team to conduct tests. I would not be unreasonable if I suggested to him that, having already embarked on a nation-wide vaccination process which we all hope will be thoroughly successful, there is no harm in getting an expert team to see the job through. In the meantime he should stop talking in three voices. I know there is one school of thought which is very unkind to the Minister when it says, "Ah, well, anyway, thank God, he is not here to make matters worse." I am hoping that, before he goes away, he will try and do something to see that the machinery runs smoothly and effectively. Sir, I am not suggesting, for one moment, that we should be other than democratic in our dealings with the Press. But I say this: that the Government has considerable powers of persuasion to bring them round to see that the selling of a story is less important than public morale, peace and tranquillity. To have allowed themselves to get caught up in a Press hysteria which has led to such a state that you find the vaccination centres besieger by very angry and very excited parents shows: (1) either the Minister is incapable of using his persuasive powers, or (2) he does not understand that a great deal of harm has been done to public confidence as a result of all this. There are two aspects to this. I am not asking the Minister for Health to discover a cure for polio when the rest of the world have not gone further than Prof. Sabin and Prof. Salk, but I am asking him, even though we have not got the cure, we should at least try to prevent a situation where everybody is in a state of anxiety. Every parent who has a child in the vulnerable age group is in a state of fright - not because there have not been polio epidemics before, there would have been some anxiety anyway, but the presentation of the work of the Minister and his Ministry has led to a general loss of public confidence and the spread of alarm. I would like to say in this Assembly that it is our duty to check it: (1) to ask the Press not to aggravate the situation, and (2) to ask the Minister to get on with the job. He has decided on Sabin. He has had his expert advice. Now is not the time to start an argument whether Sabin should have been used or should not have been used, because all the experts are agreed that once you start Sabin, you Sabinise everybody who requires it. It is his duty to do that, otherwise he will have the wrath of more than the parents of a hundred thousand kids on his head. Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That this House deplores the inept and incompetent manner in which the Minister for Health and his Ministry have dealt with the current polio epidemic. 3.02 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise to second the motion. It is said that the Minister for Health is more at home hunting big game in East Africa and fishing for small fish in local waters than he is in hunting down the virus responsible for the present polio epidemic. Sir, as a fisherman, he is even known to have fished in distinguished company for very small fish from military helicopters, and the excitement of such a novel method of fishing has caused him to become less and less aware of the afflictions of ordinary mortals like ourselves.

Order. I think at this stage it is proper for me to remind hon. Members of the Standing Order which reads: "The personal conduct of Members of the Assembly shall not be referred to except upon a substantive motion moved for that purpose." I cannot see in the present motion anything about the hon. Minister's fishing in Japan or elsewhere.

Sir, many people pay him a compliment when they refer to him as Dr Braga. They do so in the mistaken belief that he has dedicated himself to the destruction of the microbes which afflict human society. But unfortunately for us, this is a sport in which the Minister for Health has shown very little interest. It is not surprising, therefore, Sir, to find the Minister suddenly jolted into action by exaggerated reports appearing in the Straits Times about the extent of the polio epidemic. One does not have to be associated with the Ministry of Health to know that the administration of drugs which have not been offered for public sale should be done under experts supervision. It is now his duty, Sir, to see that this is done. The way in which he has dealt with this outbreak of polio epidemic has confused the general public. As a member of the public, and as an elected representative of the people, I must register a strong protest at the deplorable way in which the Minister has dealt with the present polio outbreak. Sir, my leader has wished the Minister for Health bon voyage on his departure for Japan on Friday. May I take this opportunity, Sir, to send my best wishes to the people of Japan, and I trust, with a little effort at quarantine when the Minister arrives in Japan, the authorities there will be able to control polio more effectively than the Minister for Health has been able to do over here. Question proposed.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I had originally intended to make a statement before the business of the day on the question of the outbreak of polio, the research that has been made and the final decision of the Government to release the Sabin vaccine, but the introduction of this motion by the hon. Member for Tanjong Pagar has forced me to hold my horses until this debate. I propose now, Sir, to give a full statement on this whole matter and that statement will cover the points which have been raised by the hon. Member for Tanjong Pagar, who has a flair for playing to the gallery and making political capital out of other people's suffering for the benefit of his Party. Until recently, Sir, the only way in which some precautions could be taken against poliomyelitis was by giving standard advice. Until actively immunising vaccines were produced, the measures applied to the disease are given in the Report entitled the "Control of Communicable Diseases in Man" published as an official report of the American Public Health Association. That report from the "Control of Communicable Diseases in Man" published in 1955 has this note - "that the substance of this Report has been accepted by the Ministry of Health for England and Wales and the Department of Health for Scotland with certain reservations to meet international commitments and agreements and differences in legislative and administrative practice in Great Britain." I do not propose to burden Members with a detailed technical discussion. Suffice it to say that the standard advice given there has been repeated continually by members of my Ministry and by myself over Radio Malaya. We asked the people to see that children wash their hands before and after meals and keep away from swimming pools, and so forth. But perhaps I might read one or two of the measures recommended in this report at page 136; Epidemic measures: "Protection of children so far as practical against unnecessary close contact with other persons, especially with other family groups or outsiders during epidemic prevalence of the disease. Urban schools should not be closed nor opening delayed, but intensive or competitive athletic programmes should be postponed..." Furthermore, our health officers, sanitary inspectors, health visitors and other staff have been actively engaged in advising householders. Everything possible to impress on the minds of the people the need for taking these elementary precautions was made, short of addressing each and every householder by letter. Until immunising vaccines became available, such advice could only be given. Without vaccines, the medical profession was, in fact, helpless. Hon. Members may be interested to know that even in countries where sanitary conscience and sanitary discipline are highly developed and where people are likely to observe the advice given almost with religious fervour, particularly in the face of an epidemic, epidemic visitations have recurred. I would like to quote from the Epidemiological and Vital Statistics Report prepared by the World Health Organisation, Sir, Volume II No. 7 of 1958, on the question of the visitation of polio in other countries as late as 1958. In the United States in 1951 there were 28,386 cases with 1,551 deaths - this was not taken over the whole area but in the areas where polio had struck. In 1952 there were 57,879 cases with 3,145 deaths; in 1954, 38,476 cases with 1,368 deaths; in 1956, 15,140 with unknown deaths (this is when the vaccine began to be used); and in 1957, 5,903 cases. In most other countries such as the United Kingdom, Italy, France, Sweden, Australia, the pattern of prevalence has been similar. All the advice, however, does not appear to have retarded in the least the tragic succession of periodic outbreaks. In England in 1951, there were 2,614 cases, and in 1955 6,153. I am saying all this just to show that in the absence of immunising agents, the medical profession is helpless. All the precautionary measures taken were palliatives, both in apology for our helplessness and to appear that something is being done, however futile it may be. When the first few cases of poliomyelitis were notified in late September this year, criticisms were levelled at my Ministry as to why active immunisation was not carried out in order to prevent the occurrence of such an outbreak as we now have in Singapore. I would like to give a short statement of the visitation of polio in Singapore. In 1946, there were 237 cases with an unknown number of deaths; in 1948, there were over 200 cases with 21 deaths; and then there was a steady prevalence. In 1949, there were 76 cases with 2 deaths; in 1950, 82 cases with 10 deaths; in 1951, 81 cases with 9 deaths; in 1952, 55 cases with 10 deaths; in 1953, 43 cases with 5 deaths; in 1954, 71 cases with 3 deaths; in 1955, 24 cases with 2 deaths, and then there was an outbreak in early 1957 of well over 100 cases with 7 deaths. The figures today, Sir, from an analysis which I have got here of cases from August to October, are in August 6 cases, September 32 cases, October 168 cases, and up to 4.30 p.m. yesterday, 26 cases. I have got the breakdown figures, if any Members are interested, the nationality and sex of the victims. Now, poliomyelitis in man, Sir, is essentially an infection of the gut - the alimentary tract in which the virus multiplies. In a very small percentage of cases the virus enters the blood stream and subsequently, in a relatively few cases, may invade the nervous system resulting in paralysis. An infection with polio virus does two things. Firstly, the gut becomes resistant to attack. Secondly, it produces antibodies which circulate in the blood stream and so neutralises the virus that may invade the system. From the statements which I made over Radio Malaya and in the Press, hon. Members are no doubt aware by now that there are two types of vaccines available. One the killed vaccine, which is the Salk, and the other a live vaccine, such as the Sabin. The disease poliomyelitis is now known to be caused by three types of virus, and to effectively immunise a person with the killed vaccine such as Salk, three doses are given by way of injections at stated intervals, the first taking 6 weeks to be effective, and the last dose being given 7 months after the second dose. When this is done the body reacts to the vaccine and produces antibodies which circulate in the blood. It does not, however, prevent the infection of the gut by virulent organisms nor protects any one who may be incubating the disease within this period. Salk vaccine, therefore, provided all the three inoculations have been given, acts as a barrier against the invasion of the nervous system by the virus and so would prevent a paralytic attack. Recent evidence shows that the original figure of 70 per cent protection of persons so inoculated is incorrect and is found to be very much less. There is one thing certain that it does not do, and that is, it does not prevent the infection of the gut and, therefore, does not prevent the inoculated person excreting the virulent virus and so cause disease amongst the non-immune. To be effective as an anti-epidemic measure, the inoculation must be carried out on a very substantial scale and within as short a time as possible. By the importation of large quantities of the vaccine which has only become available recently, and by employing large numbers of persons to carry out the inoculations, and at tremendous expense, involving several million dollars, it is theoretically possible to immunise a large percentage of the population temporarily. Such vaccine, however, does not stop an epidemic in progress. I would like to read the World Health Organisation Technical Report of 1958 - this is the World Health Expert Committee on polio - and I am reading at page 8: "In July 1956, during a period of rising incidence, the Chicago Board of Health initiated a mass vaccination programme in which 1,750,000 doses were injected in less than two months. However, there was no demonstrable effect as to dampening the epidemic." Hon. Members of this House are aware how Government has been pleading with parents in the rural areas to bring their children forward to receive protective inoculation against a far more dangerous and fatal disease than poliomyelitis, namely, diphtheria. This has received some success after prolonged sustained appeals. The response has been poor in the city, possibly because it involves injections, and two visits must be paid. Immunisation with Salk vaccine involves three painful inoculations. An ideal immunising agent for Singapore, therefore, is one that should effectively protect the population against disease and, more important, one that the population will readily accept. An even more important consideration is that the vaccine should be safe to use, and I repeat that, Sir, "the vaccine should be safe to use". If there happens to be a vaccine that does not require a syringe with its threatening needle, if there is one which is pleasing to the children taking it, if there is one which at once produces full resistance to invasion by the polio virus and further produces neutralising antibodies in blood stream and it is at the same time safe to use, this vaccine would be the vaccine of choice. Much research has been carried out in this direction and, as is usual, experimental work has been undertaken in regard to various types of live vaccines. Live vaccines will have the virtue of being administered by the mouth, of effectively immunising the gut and of producing antibodies in the blood stream. The problem has been to develop a virus considerably weakened, I repeat, considerably weakened, yet possessing full immunising properties so that it would not cause the disease in the most sensitive of animals - animals far more sensitive than man is - when injected directly into the spinal cord. Unfortunately, Sir, the co-ordinated series of experiments were interrupted by an experiment on man in Belfast with a strain of virus prepared in 1956 and the methods used did not comply with the strict standards set by the World Health Organisation. When live vaccine is being given by the mouth, the attenuated virus infects the gut, multiplies therein, as does a natural infection, and are excreted in the stools. It so happened that in this particular experiment in Belfast, the outgoing virus in a number of cases reverted to full virulence. That is the virulence acquired through passage, and the experiment was found dangerous and called off. That experiment produced a real scare. It was widely publicised, and the medical profession certainly and some members of the public are aware of this experiment. The dangers inherent in the experiment in Belfast did not deter research which continued, and it is now possible to produce a live vaccine like the Sabin that would both be safe and would prevent the gut from such further invasion of the virus and, at the same time, produce antibodies in the blood stream, and when excreted would not revert to virulence. Late in 1956, a batch of over 10,000 doses of a highly attenuated vaccine produced by Professor A.B. Sabin, and which conforms with the World Health Organisation Expert Committee's rigid standards, was sent to Professor J. H. Hale, Professor of Bacteriology of the University of Malaya, for field trials. Professor Hale carried out experiments among European and other volunteers with this vaccine, and over a considerable period of time, in order to assess its safety, watching carefully to see whether any virulent virus would be excreted. Simultaneously also in other countries experimental research with this type of vaccine was undertaken. In the meantime, Sir, the World Health Organisation had appointed an Expert Committee comprising eminent virologists from twelve different countries to further study the problem of poliomyelitis and the use of vaccine. Now the members of that Conference were Israel, Australia, Scotland, Sweden, South Africa, Singapore (Professor Hale attended), Japan, Canada, United States, France, Poland and Russia. They sat in Geneva from 15th to 20th July, 1957. The Report was published in 1958 and that Committee's Report was received by this Ministry on the 13th of August this year. The Ministry immediately entered into discussions with Professor Hale, who was a member of that Expert Committee, regarding the cautious statements contained in the Report, but the discourse appearing on page 24 of the Report shows that studies with the most highly attenuated strains, one of which is Sabin, showed that the excreted virus was harmless even when injected directly into the spinal cord of the most sensitive of animals - animals more sensitive than man is to poliomyelitis. The Committee itself was so convinced of its safety and efficacy that it made certain recommendations which I will read.

3.22 p.m.

May I, at this moment, interrupt to move a business motion, because I doubt whether the Hon. Minister will be able to finish in time?

Yes, Mr Chief Minister.

Thank you, Sir, may I move, That the proceedings on the remaining items of business set down for today be exempted from the provisions of Standing Order No. 7.

I second the motion.

Question put, and agreed to. Resolved, That the proceedings on the remaining items of business set down for today be exempted from the provisions of Standing Order No. 7.

3.23 p.m.

May I now move, That at its rising at the termination of business this day, the Assembly do stand adjourned to 3rd December, 1958.

I second the motion.

Question put, and agreed to. Resolved, That at its rising at the termination of business this day, the Assembly do stand adjourned to 3rd December, 1958.

3.24 p.m.

I was saying, Sir, that the Committee of Experts was so convinced of the safety of the Sabin vaccine that it also made recommendations, which I am now reading from page 25: "After careful consideration of the data at present available on the use of live attenuated polio viruses as immunising agents against poliomyelitis, the Committee strongly recommends that controlled field trials be carried out for the purpose of testing further the value" - not the safety, which has already been established, "of these agents. It recommends that these trials be done in special situations and under special circumstances which are listed in more detail below", and the special situations which the Committee believe will lend themselves to this type of trial, are; in the face of an impending epidemic, or at the periphery of an already existing epidemic; where poliomyelitis of the infantile type is endemic, and in particular, within those areas where signs are indicative of an imminent shift to the epidemic form of the disease to reinforce the immunity previously produced by an inactivated virus vaccine. Now, Sir, the Committee has recommended that large scale field trials should now be carried out, basing its considerations on the knowledge available up to July 1957. This was, however, not the only evidence upon which I relied. I would like to quote from the Annual Report of the National Poliomyelitis Foundation covering the period July 1957 to 30th June, 1958. "Three tests were carried out, one by Professor J. D. Verlinde of the University of Leiden, Holland, on 170 children and adults in families of Faculty members of the University. Next by Dr M. Ramos-Alvarez of Mexico City on the detailed study of 3,000 children under 8 years of age, and also by Professor A. A. Smorodintsev of the Institute of Experimental Medicine in Leningrad." These are cited in the Annual Report of the National Poliomyelitis Foundation, at page 8. In the last- mentioned field trials, the Russian professor carried out five or more serial passages. He cultured the virus excreted from the first batch of children and injected them into the spinal cord of monkeys. The monkeys showed no evidence of paralytic attack. Then he fed that culture to a further batch of children and repeated consecutively five times or more, and this experiment was carried out on 3,000 children. The efficacy and safety thus shown by Sabin vaccine have resulted now in the Russians feeding 200,000 children with the Sabin vaccine as a preliminary canter. Mexico is trying on 200,000 doses, and Czechoslovakia 200,000, and the reason why the 100,000 doses now being used in Singapore are still under expert control, is largely to comply with the request of Professor Sabin with whom Professor Hale has been in constant touch, and to demonstrate to those who have doubts that it is both safe and efficacious. Singapore is not a country as large as many others. In such countries it is possible to test the vaccine out amongst restricted communities without fear of it, if it is proved to be dangerous, spreading to the rest of the community. Any disastrous experiment of this nature in a small place like ours may involve the entire nation. That is the main reason why prolonged studies had to be carried out in Singapore and await the results of studies elsewhere until we are satisfied that it is safe to use it. It is of interest to Members to note that the tests conducted by Professor Hale on 50 to 60 persons specifically for giving immunity and the assessment of safety showed that the virus excreted in all cases were no more virulent than the weak virus put in. At or about the time that Professor Hale was conducting his tests, many other matters were engaging the attention of the Ministry, such as the prevention of the spread of diphtheria, the anti-tuberculosis campaign and, in particular, the cholera problem in Thailand, the prevention of entry of which engaged the full attention of the Ministry. Hon. Members are aware of the success of these concrete actions. Singapore had not been visited by an outbreak of poliomyelitis since January 1957. Outbreaks usually occur every 2½ to 3 years, but let me assure Members that when cases of poliomyelitis were being notified in September, the Ministry recognised the urgency of a decision regarding the safety of mass use of live vaccine in accordance with the recommendations of the Report. The Ministry consulted the Federation Health Authority and the Services to study the problem. An Expert Committee comprising the following studied the problem: The Director of Medical Services, Singapore; the Deputy Director of Medical Services, Singapore; the Assistant Director of Medical Services (Health), Singapore; the Director of Medical Services, Federation of Malaya; the Virologist of the Institute for Medical Research, Kuala Lumpur; the Assistant Director of Medical Services, Singapore Base District; the Assistant Director of Pathology, F.A.R.E.L.F.; Professor J. H. Hale; Professor G. A. Ransome; the City Health Officer, Singapore; Dr A. W. S. Thevathasan; Dr B. R. Sreenivasan; Mr Yahya Cohen and Dr Foo Chee Guan, and after studying this matter very carefully and critically, gave its final recommendation on a division of votes applied to all but the Ministry's representatives at the final meeting on the night of the 11th of October, 1958, that the vaccine is safe to use and should be employed without further delay.

Order. I hate to interrupt the Minister especially when he is on a very important point, but I must remind him that we are in a debate and he ought not to demonstrate that he is reading too much.

Very well, Sir. I immediately consulted Professor Hale who had been conducting satisfactory tests and the Director of Medical Services, Singapore, after which we authorised mass inoculation and in accordance with the specific directive of Professor Sabin given to Professor Hale that the campaign must be done under his, supervision. Further supplies were immediately asked for. This decision was in no way precipitated by articles appearing in the Press or, in fact, by any suggested pressure. I would like to repeat that, Sir. I have given the history of the decision right up to the time of the decision of the release of the vaccine and I can assure you, Sir, and Members of this House that it was not precipitated by any articles that may have appeared in the Press or by any pressure. The situation was ideal to use Sabin vaccine and to prove to doubting Thomases the efficacy and safety as recommended by the World Health Organisation and the polio experts so that in future the Minister for Health can authorise mass inoculation as routine. Hon. Members know that 100,000 doses have been received and are being administered in various centres. The virus now affecting the people of Singapore - and I am now giving this as a matter of information to all those interested - is Type 1 virus. The virus used in Sabin vaccine is Type 2, but evidence has shown that infection by Type 2 virus blocks the gut not only from infection of Type 2 virus permanently, but against Types 1 and 3 for a considerable time, and, in fact, no Type 1 virus can affect anybody who is inoculated with Type 2 for a considerable time. Type 2 virus cannot at any time produce a Type 1 epidemic. Perhaps I should read some of the telegrams that passed between my Ministry, Professor Sabin and Professor Hale. A telegram had already been sent by Professor Hale, but my Ministry did not hear anything, and so sent a cable on 21st October to Professor Sabin of the Children's Hospital Research Foundation, Cincinnati: "Further to Professor Hale's cable this Government would appreciate one hundred thousand doses of your attenuated vaccine stop Will meet costs". Professor Sabin then cabled to Professor Hale in a telegram which I will now read: "Pending receipt your letter can ship vaccine immediately after I know plans for use stop Responsible investigators stop Arrangements for clinical and laboratory surveillance stop Regarding administration during epidemic would agree only to use of Type two vaccine if prevalent viruses are Type one or three - Sabin". Then, Sir, we sent this cable after having consulted Professor Hale on the 22nd October to Professor Sabin: "Epidemic due entirely to Type one stop Investigation and administration of vaccine in hands of Professor Hale stop Children three months to ten years being given Type two oral vaccine stop Four thousand doses already administered stop Investigations stop Proportion of excreted virus tested pathogenicity stop Virus isolation and typing is carried out on all cases of poliomyelitis stop Please assist one hundred thousand doses air freight vaccine as soon as possible stop". And we have got the final cable on the 23rd October: "Shipping one hundred thousand doses Type two oral polio vaccine on PAA Flight eightthree one arriving Singapore October twenty-seventh - Sabin" Questions may have been asked, Sir, why the vaccine originally had to be administered at the two clinics - at Lim Ah Pin Road Clinic and the Yio Chu Kang Road Clinic. The vaccine which Professor Hale received from Professor Sabin was specially for his personal use in field trials and naturally would be insufficient for the purposes of an immediate national immunisation programme. There was, therefore, very great need to limit the numbers. Also, apart from the city, most of the prevalence was in the areas served by these two clinics. Until large stocks became available, the city could not be handled and the logical areas would be those two districts. The Ministry is satisfied that with large quantities of the vaccine now available we are able to immunise a very substantial proportion of the non-immunised population. As I have mentioned earlier, Sir, the first large- scale administration of Sabin vaccine should be, in accordance with Professor Sabin's directives, under the supervision of Professor Hale. We are negotiating to retain Professor Hale who is due to leave in December this year until this epidemic is over. Subsequent administration of the oral vaccine can then be a routine measure. I do not know whether it was suggested that the Sabin vaccine is still in its experimental stage, but it must be remembered that any vaccine is, in fact, still in an experimental stage. The Salk vaccine is still in its experimental stage, and there is much dissatisfaction as to its efficacy, so much so that a fourth injection is now advocated, and I would now like to read from Medical News, which is a newspaper for physicians, dated 6th October, 1958. It is an American paper from Washington: "A nation-wide increase in paralytic polio incidence with the upswing taking on epidemic proportions in the Detroit area is adding weight to the arguments of those who advocate a fourth Salk shot. Some 11 deaths in 162 paralytic polio cases have been reported so far this year among Americans who received three shots of Salk vaccine. Under the circumstances, the Public Health Service said here that physicians may want to recommend a fourth injection to give their patients the maximum possible protection." Now the Public Health Service authorities added: "Waning immunity could not be ruled out as one possible factor in the development of paralytic polio among triply inoculated persons since many cases developed more than a year after the third injection." Confidence in the Sabin vaccine, Sir, can be seen in a personal letter from Professor Sabin to Professor Hale - I am reading from the original - dated 22nd October: "Dear James, I am in receipt of the telegrams from yourself and from the Ministry of Health that were sent to me on October 21st and the one from the Ministry of Health sent on October 22nd in reply to the one that I had sent the day before. I have not yet received your letter." Then it goes on to describe the technical ways of using it, and it finally winds up: "You may be interested to know that a trial with aliquots of this vaccine on 200,000 children has been started in the Soviet Union and that another one is soon scheduled to start on 200,000 children in Czechoslovakia. Drs. Ramos-Alvarez and Gomez have already completed a trial on 3,000 children who received all three types without any complications and plans are now under consideration for extending these tests to an the 200,000 children under five years of age in Mexico." With regard to the criticisms of the apparent contradictory statements by members of my Ministry, it must be borne in mind that the information we give to the Press is often asked for by telephone, is edited and published. These statements were made at a time when we were in no position to make any definite statement as to the use or otherwise of the vaccine when its efficacy and safety was still under discussion and no decision had yet been made. Now, with regard to the question of the cost of Salk vaccine which was referred to by the Member for Tanjong Pagar - Mr Lee Kuan Yew rose -

Is it in elucidation?

Yes, elucidation.

If the Minister will give way. Mr Braga resumed his seat.

I am not in the least bit interested in the cost of the Salk vaccine. In fact, what I wanted to impress on the Minister is that nobody in Singapore is interested whether it costs $1 million or $3 million. All that they are interested in is to see that their children get the best possible protection. I am not interested in arguing costs.

I do not consider that elucidation, Sir, because the hon. Member did refer to the fact that I mentioned $10 in the Press as the cost of a Salk vaccine injection, thereby involving the Government to the extent of $3 million.

The Minister is not out of order.

That appeared, Sir, in the Sarawak Tribune which was under discussion at the time of the Press conference. It said here: "It will be recalled that in April this year the Director of Medical Services in Sarawak, Dr Glynn Evans, in order to encourage the use of poliomyelitis vaccine among the people here, announced that vaccinations would be given free of charge until the end of last May, when a charge of $10 per vaccination was imposed." That was the cost of a Salk vaccine injection. With regard to the question asked by the hon. Member whether the Sabin vaccine would be rapidly and efficiently distributed, my answer is yes. The question is now being studied as to the various centres in which it would be properly and efficiently administered. It must be remembered that Professor Hale has to keep this vaccine at a certain temperature and there are certain technical matters involved of which I am ignorant. The vaccine has to be made up, sent out every morning and returned to him. He personally supervised the administration of the first batch that was given to him for field trials; and as regards the other batch he has got technical men who are fully trained and we will try and distribute the vaccine in more centres. As to the necessity of an expert team coming to supervise this, there is no doubt whatsoever in my mind at all. Sir, I am not in a position as the Member for Tanjong Pagar is to make political capital of other people's sufferings, but as a responsible Minister I am fully aware of my duty to the public and to the advancement of medicine. 3.45 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, in fact, I was prepared to keep quiet in this debate because I did not wish to make political capital out of the situation and also because I am not a medical expert. But, I wish to say this, after listening to such a lengthy and interesting debate in which the Minister for Health suddenly became a polio expert overnight. Looking at the motion charging the Ministry of Health for the inept and incompetent manner in which the current polio epidemic is being handled, I think this may not be entirely due to the polio epidemic itself but to the way Public Relations officers have been releasing information to the public. I wonder whether it is time for me to advise Mr George Thomson to learn something from Mr Gary Wang of the City Council. Sir, if that lengthy analysis of the polio situation by the Minister for Health had been published about a month earlier, I do not think the mover of this motion would have taken the trouble to waste his lungs in trying to seek cheap publicity here.

Order. I did not quite catch the expression. Would the hon. Member just repeat that expression?

Sir, I am sorry. I will withdraw the expression "cheap publicity". Sir, I think the Government should learn a great lesson from this motion. It is not for us now to debate the merits or demerits of using Sabin vaccine. What the Government should do is: (1) Avoid the ugly situation on Monday when the polio treatment centres were besieged by angry parents; (2) The Ministry should consider whether it is wise for an observation team to be sent out to observe and supervise that the use of this Sabin vaccine is really effective, because we have already heard that some authority has thrown some doubts on its efficacy. I am sure the Minister will say, no, we are short of hands to administer the Sabin vaccine and Professor Sabin has specified that only Professor Hale in Singapore is qualified to carry out this vaccination. So, if Government doctors are not sufficient, then let the Ministry appeal to private practitioners to volunteer and help in combating this epidemic; (3) I wish the Minister for Health would think three times, not only twice, and postpone his annual holiday to Japan. That will show us that he and the Ministry of Health are concerned with our welfare; (4) I am sorry I have to pass this remark on the mover of the motion. He is trying to seek cheap political publicity by making this - Sir, I beg to -

Order. The expression has been withdrawn, but apparently not with effect.

I am sorry, Sir. I will withdraw the expression. I mean I wish to remind the hon. Member for Ponggol-Tampenis that if the mover of this motion is a regular goer to the Royal Island Club, is it wrong for the Minister for Health to be a regular hunter or fisherman? 3.51 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I am glad that the mover of the motion has stated his case in very modest terms. Personally, Sir, as a father and a grandfather of many children and grandchildren, the first thing when I take up the paper every morning is to find out what the position is about this polio epidemic. There are thousands of parents in Singapore who might be doing the same thing every morning and worry. Personally, I believe in fatalism, but after taking all the necessary precautions! Sir, the public of Singapore should have protection from the Government. The Government owes that duty to the public. Has the Government done its duty in this case? I am not going to make political capital out of this motion at all. As I said, I am a worried man. We have had polio epidemics before - during the lifetime of this Government - if I am correct. If that is so, what has the Government done since that time to prevent a recurrence or take precautionary measures against it? The Minister for Health has read out reports, telegrams and letters which only date back to September or October this year, subject to correction. He has not said that precautions were taken by his Ministry or by himself much earlier - Mr Braga rose -

Point of explanation?

I think, Mr Speaker, I did say that experiments had been conducted since 1956 by Professor Hale.

Thanks for the explanation, Sir. His Ministry was doing something but could not do much to prevent the epidemic from reaching this stage. It was the Government's duty to have taken all the precautions. Today the parents are living in the greatest fear - what will happen next? it is my fear and it is everybody's fear. If it comes to a vote on this motion, I will, of course, abstain, because I am not going to make political capital out of it. This motion is rather late in deploring, because this Government has been found incompetent in every Ministry except the Ministries held by the official Ministers, if I may say so. That is why I will abstain if it is forced to a division. Sir, I hope even now the Government will take every possible step to protect especially the children from falling victim to this disease. One more thing I might touch upon, and that is the hon. Member for Tanjong Pagar quoting from the Straits Times. This paper is not run by a charitable organisation. It is a limited company formed on a commercial basis. It is out to make as much money as possible, get as large a circulation as possible, and it will publish stories that will sell well. I think many other papers are also run on the same basis. What can we get out of them? Nothing. So the Government and we ourselves should be very careful about what statements we should make. 3.56 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I came here this morning with every intention of criticising the Minister for Health and his Ministry for their slowness in creating centres for vaccination and registration. So far we have only two centres. Daily the Press reports the spreading of this disease. Thousands of parents every morning are attending these centres. It is clear that these two centres are insufficient to cope with the work that is involved. I do not know why the Government has not provided more centres and engaged more staff. Despite this shortcoming, Sir, after hearing what the Minister for Health said just now, I am satisfied that the Government has not entirely neglected its duty. It has done its best in trying to prevent the spread of this disease and, on the whole, Sir, I am personally satisfied that the Ministry of Health has not done too badly. 3.57 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I think the hon. Member for Tanjong Pagar has been very unfair when he based all his criticisms on the Straits Times reports. Sir, the Member has often said in this Assembly that he does not rely on the information in the Straits Times and that only a small percentage of the population do read this paper. I envisaged the type of argument that the hon. Member would advance in this debate and I have brought with me several cuttings from both the Singapore Standard and the Straits Times. Sir, I believe that there is no confusion in the minds of the people of Singapore, because of the factual reports that have been appearing in the Singapore Standard, the Nanyang Siang Pau and the Sin Chew Jit Poh and various other newspapers. For example, Sir, I will read out a Press report which appeared in the Singapore Standard on 2nd October wherein they said: "'Protect Your Children' POLIO WARNING TO PARENTS IN THE COLONY The Singapore Government last night warned parents to take precautions against their children contracting poliomyelitis in view of the increase in the incidence of the disease last month. The Director of Medical Services. Dr M. Doraisingam, in a statement, revealed that last month 32 cases of "polio" were reported, 24 of whom were from the City area. Twenty-seven of these cases were under five years of age, said Dr Doraisingam. The Director advised all parents and guardians that: any child who has a fever, however mild, should be put to bed immediately and a doctor called in." Sir, all these advices were given by the Doctor through the Press and the Singapore Standard deemed it fit to publish this in a factual manner. I think, Sir, we should not believe anything written in a mad paper and I believe sane people should understand the facts quite clearly. I am sure, Sir, hon. Members of the Assembly are quite aware that the Ministry of Health has no control over the newspapers; for that matter, even the Government has no control over them. We have allowed full freedom to the Press and I do not think for a moment that this is the sort of thing we should try to control. I do hope that those people who have read the Straits Times and all other newspapers would be fully aware of what the Straits Times has been telling the people. I do agree with the hon. Member in this respect, Sir, that the Straits Times has exaggerated many of its reports and distorted the facts in such a manner as it has found fit to publish; but I do not think for one moment that the Minister for Health or his Ministry officials should be made responsible for what has appeared in the Straits Times. What I have to say in this debate is this, Sir. The people of Singapore are not in any way confused. They have understood the position quite clearly. They have observed the advice given by the Ministry officials in this respect. They have understood what they should do as a precautionary measure for their children. Finally, Sir, I must say that this motion should not have been brought into this House for discussion. Whatever little confusion the people may have had is now increased because of this motion before the House. I hope, as a result of the publishing of today's debate in the newspapers tomorrow, the people will be able to understand the problem much more clearly and know that the Minister and the Ministry of Health have not been responsible for all the muddle which appeared in the Straits Times. 4.02 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to make the point that we can all, whether in the Government or in the Opposition, be happy that although the methods of controlling and treating polio are still in the early stage, yet some progress is being made. It is a matter on which I think we should fix our attention. In 1945, I was myself a victim of polio in a Japanese prison camp and there was no treatment available. I well remember the feeling of despair with which I arrived under American care in a hospital in Manila and received the final diagnosis there from the doctors. However, now I am able to get along with my two legs quite happily and the only inconvenience I suffer is that I cannot run and, as I do not like running, I suffer no real inconvenience from this affliction. Since those days 13 years ago, considerable progress has been made but we must still recognise that the science of medicine is a science and not a form of magic. We cannot expect the doctors to pull out of the air a cure which will immediately and definitely be final and absolute. The progress of science is much more moderate than that. Now, when we leave aside that aspect and the aspect of newspaper publicity which are almost irrelevant to the motion, we are left with, I think, really one demand from the supporters of the motion, and that is that there should have been more centres and more staff to deal with this outbreak. I think it is fair to say that the medical services have been expanding at an enormous rate during the last few years and that expansion has only been insufficient because the demand for medical services has expanded still more rapidly. Time was when most people in Singapore had not very much faith in Western medicine. Today, I myself receive frequent requests from people in the countryside to try and get medical services of one sort or another provided. The demand is growing everywhere for Western type of medicine and the result is that the staff at the medical services with all its expansion is appropriate, I am told, for a population of about 400,000 people by Western standards, whereas our population is about 1,500,000. Consequently, the staff is just not there for all the requirements and, if in any attempt to deal with polio, staff were transferred from other essential work, it is by no means certain that the situation would really be changed for the better. Polio is a horrible disease with a high rate of suffering and death attached to it, but there are many other diseases in Singapore which do not get the same publicity; perhaps because they are continuous and do not appear in sporadic outbreaks, and perhaps they are of less news value. But you cannot forget the sufferers from other diseases in demanding that more centres and more staff should be provided for this particular disease. I should like to stress that point because the same sort of situation is going to face Singapore in almost all departments of the public service, as far as I can judge, during the next few years. The demand for services from the Government is always increasing, but the means of supplying those services is at the moment not increasing or, where it is increasing, it is not increasing at the rate in which the services are sought. That is perhaps inevitable at this stage because of the adjustments that are being made in the country. There is one thing that does need to be borne in mind. Attacks should not be made which fall on the wrong people and which, in so far as the civil service is concerned, might lead to a loss of morale. I have no doubt that in detail many things can be found wrong - medical services or any other services - but that does not remove the much important fact that a very great many things are extremely right and are extremely well done. 4.08 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, after hearing the speeches in this debate, I find that there is something in the motion which merits the attention of the people. They want to know how the battle against polio is conducted, who is directing operations in this battle, what he is doing and what he will do. We have heard that the expert for polio would like to take his leave arid go to England, but that he would rather remain here in order to see the whole scheme through. Could the Minister also not stay back in Singapore and postpone his holiday in order to see the battle through? If people whose homes are not here attach some importance to this battle, then our own Ministers should take a cue from them. Sir, I would say that the public are all confused. They just do not know what to do. I have been talking to many people and I have asked them, "Why do you want to take Sabin?" The answer is, "Oh, we want to immunise our children." But I have heard from the Ministry that the taking of this vaccine is not to immunise the population but that it is something that should be done continuously, and so on, and not during an epidemic. I read again in one of the Sunday papers - I think it was the Singapore Standard - which gave a detailed report of an interview with the Ministry of Health. There I read some other reports again saying that there are three types of virus: Type 1, Type 2 and Type 3, and that if you get yourself immunised against Type 2, then there is still a chance of your being attacked by Type 1 or Type 3.

No, it blocks Type 1 and Type 3.

Yes. Then we have been told too that the Salk vaccine condemned by the Minister for Health is not effective but Salk is praised by private practitioners as something that has been tested. Now all these are confusions. The people are confused; they get worried; they queue up at 3 a.m. in the morning to get their children immunised. We must stop this scare. We must tell them the truth about what the Government is doing in order to help pacify them. My colleague has said that the Government has done very well or has done its best. I do not disagree with him. The Government has done its best but, just as a school teacher will write on the report card of a student we will say: "He can do better." I am afraid the picture that has been presented to us is not too good. I would say that we expect the Government to pacify the people by telling them exactly what is being done for them and what results to expect, and so on. Let the whole picture be cleared up and not left in this muddle with too many experts voicing too many opinions, all different from one another. 4.12 p.m. Mr Lee Kuan Yew rose -

In reply?

In reply, Sir. I do not want to whip a beaten dog but I would like to suggest to the Minister that a few things could be done: one, to restore public confidence; two, to see that the job of distribution of the vaccine and the vaccination is done strictly and effectively. The first is to get his Expert Committee, who sat and deliberated on that W.H.O. Report after the Geneva meeting of experts, to set out in clear and simple terms why they agreed, unanimously, it appears, to recommend to the Government the use of the vaccine. That will dispose of the fear once and for all created by all these anonymous private practitioners who get quoted in the Press. Set out plainly and simply why this group of people - the A.D.M.S. (FARELF), the A.D.M.S. (Army), the D.M.S. (Federation of Malaya) and the D.M.S. (Singapore) - having considered everything, recommend it. The second is, what does the Government propose to do to make sure that 100,000 vaccine doses are speedily administered, when it hopes to get more, and when it hopes to get the whole process over? If the Government would do that, there would be a return of, at least - if not of confidence - some reassurance that even if the Minister does not know what is going on, there are people there who do know so that even if the Minister is away on his annual sojourn, there are other people there who will get on with the job and see that everybody is immunised.

Question put, and negatived. Motion accordingly negatived.

4.14 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the Report of the Select Committee on the Good Shepherd Nuns Bill, as contained in Sessional Paper No. L.A. 16 of 1958, be adopted.

I second it.

Question put, and agreed to. Resolved, That the Report of the Select Committee on the Good Shepherd Nuns Bill, as contained in Sessional Paper No. L.A. 16 of 1958, be adopted. Bill read the Third time and passed.

4.15 p.m.

Sir, I beg to move. That this Assembly do now adjourn.

Sir, I second it. Question proposed.

4.16 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, by the time I read the Government announcement that there will be a commercial service run, either parallel with, or as part of Radio Malaya after it is separated from the Federation service at the end of this year, there was only time for me to raise this matter on the motion for the adjournment. First, I would like to express , my regret that an important matter of policy should have been the subject not of explanation first in this Assembly but of a bare Press announcement following a whole series of Press speculations. Even up to now, I do not know what is this scheme to run a commercial radio as part of or parallel with Radios Singapore for 1959. I am therefore not in a position to attack the scheme or to express my support for it. I am therefore put in a position where I have to ask the Government to let us know, first, what its plans are, secondly, why it proposed to change the policy which was against commercial broadcasting, and, thirdly, when it is to be introduced and by whom. As I will not have the right to reply, I would like to make some general observations on the question of commercial broadcasting. Sir, when the House was afflicted by Ministers who were very keen on publicity and propaganda, and we were informed that the Government was contemplating the running of commercial T.V., there was a sufficient outburst of public indignation to force the matter to go to a special Committee which deliberated upon it; and we were presented with its Report which strongly advised against it. That was in 1955. Now in 1958, we hear out of the blue that we are going to have a commercial radio station. I would say this. If the purpose of commercial broadcasting is to hand over an apparatus for the dissemination of information and propaganda to commercial enterprise, then let me state my Party's position plainly and simply. We are not against capital doing business in Singapore. In fact, we welcome foreign capital to come and do business here. But we will strenuously object to foreign capital, or even local capital, not doing business, but doing propaganda. If this radio station for commercial broadcasting is to be leased or let or loaned either in toto or from time to time to foreign business concerns, then let me say that the Government should think again before it embarks on this scheme. I am quite sure all Parties in this House, and even outside this House, would be anxious to see that no political propaganda comes out of such a vital instrument of dissemination of information as the radio. Sir, we understand the problem that Radio Malaya will face when it is split into two. It means, in fact, if not almost double, then nearly double the cost of running Radio Malaya as one. From Press announcements from time to time, we are told that there will be split English programmes and split Malay programmes but that the Indian and Chinese programmes will still be combined. Now, Sir, it is a matter for regret that we, who are directly concerned with these matters, should have to read this information from the Press. If the Press already knows, then we should have been told, lithe Press cannot be prevented from knowing, then we should have been told and should have the whole picture put before us before the thing is published. I have certain sympathies for Ministers and civil servants who find themselves having to face a leak - either official or good guesswork on the part of the Press - but this question of Radio Malaya has been engaging the attention of the Press for a considerable length of time. When everybody knows that the Federation - again in pursuance of the same policy which has split the University of Malaya - is intending to split Radio Malaya, it is indeed a matter for regret that we still do not know what the position is. I would like the Minister responsible to tell us what the state of Radio Malaya is now, and what it is going to be after 31st December or, according to his Director of Broadcasting, after 4th January, because it seems that programmes cannot be split except beginning on a Sunday. Whatever it is, let us have the facts. Let us know what this commercial radio is and who is going to run it; and let us then at a subsequent date have a full-scale debate on the matter. 4.22 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I should thank the Member for Tanjong Pagar for having obtained the right to speak on this issue and thus give me the opportunity to speak on the same subject. With the split of Radio Malaya, we are going to have Radio Singapore. About two days ago I was told that with the coming into operation of Radio Singapore, the Teochew dialect programmes will no more be broadcast from the station. Whether this can be confirmed or not, I do not know, but there have been such reports in the Press and rumours have been going round. I hope it is not true, but if it is true, then I cannot see any reason why the Teochew dialect should be abolished. The Teochew community in Singapore is a very large community, I am sure that every Teochew licence holder pays as much as any other licence holder. All have to pay $12 a year and a Teochew who has a radio set at home also has to pay $12. Why then should he be deprived of programmes broadcast in Teochew? The Member for Tanjong Pagar just now touched on the commercial aspect of Radio Singapore. Now if Radio Singapore is going to become a commercial enterprise, definitely it would welcome advertisements. If Radio Singapore is going to welcome advertisement, and it does not broadcast in the Teochew dialect, I am sure it will not be able to broadcast advertisements put up by the Teochew community. If the Minister in charge of this broadcasting station will refer to Rediffusion, the Teochew community contributes most of the income revenue. I was told that the Teochew dialect was introduced some time in 1949. At that time, Teochew listeners were tuning on to Peking for political news, and Radio Malaya then thought that, rather than have the Teochews of Singapore to tune to Peking, it had better introduce Teochew programmes in the station, so that the Teochew community could have entertainment, news and other items which the Station provides. Sir, those who can read will certainly get their news from the newspapers, but those who cannot read will have to depend solely on the radio. What the Teochew community wants is news and entertainment and it looks as if the Government is trying to deprive the Teochew community of this. Even in the District Councils, we are going to have multilingualism and not confined only to Mandarin. Any dialect will be allowed in the District Council meetings, and I cannot see any reason why broadcasting in the Teochew dialect should be abolished. I hope the Minister will be able to explain why broadcasting in Teochew is going to be abolished with the coming into existence of Radio Singapore. 4.26 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I just want to seek information. I am told that I should not speak because somebody has to reply. Is there any time limit for this?

The adjournment was moved at 4.16 p.m. We rise at 4.46 p.m.

I thank you for giving me this warning. Sir, I have been speaking on Radio Malaya every year during the Budget sittings. Radio Malaya has been a burden to the taxpayers. I have also pointed out that it is the white man's heaven where he can get maximum salaries and so on, and that it should be conducted in such a way that it should be .able to make both ends meet. Now, it is very surprising, Sir, that although every year this House has been voicing concern over Radio Malaya, still we do not know what is happening except from the Press. Of course, the Government always want to carry out their policies with the help of their Nominated Members or Ex-officios, and whatever they do they will try to present them as accomplished facts. But the Members on this side of the House, Sir, as the taxpayers' representatives, have a right to voice their concern, or at least to be informed as to what the Government are doing. They could even have been informed this morning, but no statement was forthcoming. It is rather surprising and disgusting. 4.29 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the subject which the hon. Member for Tanjong Pagar put down for debate on the motion for the adjournment was the future of Radio Malaya, but the matter in which, as I understand it, he is particularly interested is the announcement which was made recently that the Government was planning to operate commercial broadcasting in 1959, and he also asked for further information in respect of speculations which had appeared in the newspapers in regard to the arrangements for broadcasting as from January next year. Sir, I can outline very briefly what has happened since December last year when an official announcement was made by the Federation Government that they intended to withdraw from the then Pan-Malayan system of broadcasting and to set up their own Broadcasting Department. They wrote an official letter to this Government in the same month - in December 1957 - and they asked our agreement that a Working Party should meet with representatives of both Governments to explore the way in which this split could come. At that time, I think it was thought that there might be some way in which the headquarters of the Pan-Malayan Department of Broadcasting in Singapore could in some way be physically split so that half went to the Federation and half went to Singapore, and that with the nucleus of that headquarters in both places it would be possible for the two department of broadcasting immediately to operate independently. The examination that was made by the Working Party in February this year made it clear that a scheme of that kind was not, in fact, practicable, more particularly because it would have entailed the transfer of staff and the staff concerned could not be transferred to the Federation without their consent. Moreover, there were a number of technical matters involved in which it would certainly not have been possible to remove the operation and responsibility from Singapore; in particular, as hon. Members will know, the shortwave transmitters which serve the Federation are located in Jurong. A further formal approach was made by the Federation Government to this Government in May this year as to the ways in which the split could take place. They suggested in that letter that a Negotiating Party should be appointed to devise satisfactory arrangements whereby the services which the Singapore Department of Broadcasting would still have to supply to the Federation Department could be supplied on a mutually agreed basis. They listed in their letter the services which they calculated that they would still require to derive from Singapore after the split between the Departments had officially taken place. Examination was made of the services which they would still require and this Government replied agreeing to the invitation to enter into negotiations on that basis. Those negotiations are still being conducted and have not yet been concluded. It was suggested, Sir, that the Government had been remiss in not making some further statement in the Assembly on this matter of the splitting up of the Department, but I would remind hon. Members that there was a passage in the Governor's speech in April this year in which it was stated that this split was going to take place and that the Federation hoped that it would take place from the beginning of next year. Moreover, in September this year, when a financial motion came before the House, reference was again made to the split which would take place in January when provision was sought for an appointment of a Director of Broadcasting, Singapore, in place of the previous Pan-Malayan Director in charge of the Joint Department. Until the negotiations currently taking place are completed, I cannot inform the House exactly what the arrangements will be, or what the services will be, which the Singapore Department of Broadcasting will continue to provide for the Federation, but it seems fairly clear that, initially at any rate, both the technical services which are now provided under the Pan Malayan arrangement, that is, for the shortwave transmitters and so on, and the programme content of which a large part of the Federation programmes are supplied from Singapore, that arrangement initially will have to continue. I do not myself envisage that, as on the 1st of January or on the 4th of January, there will be suddenly any very great difference either in the Singapore programmes or in the Federation programmes. It will take the Federation Government some time to build up the necessary resources to operate their own department and to furnish a higher and higher percentage of the programmes for consumption in the Federation, and it will therefore be a gradual and not a sudden process. I think, Sir, that makes it sufficiently clear to the House why, in fact, up to now there has been no further information to give to the House beyond what has already been stated and was stated in the Governor's speech, that this split would be taking place. Coming now, Sir, to the announcement which was made in regard to commercial broadcasting and that it was the intention of the Singapore Government to plan for this broadcasting to be started in 1959 by the Singapore Department of Broadcasting. That was the purport of the announcement, Sir, and the reasons for this are, broadly - the hon. Member for Tanjong Pagar did, I think, suppose correctly what those reasons were, or anyway the second one - the first one is that broadcasting is, I think it will be conceded, a very popular form of advertising and it has proved a very profitable form of advertising in other countries, particularly in certain other countries in the Commonwealth. I can instance New Zealand and Ceylon, and even in a small place like Fiji, where they are able to operate a commercial broadcasting service at a profit. In a place like Singapore, where there is not only a large urban population with a substantial consumption of consumer goods but where Singapore is also, as it is in so many other matters, geographically very conveniently situated as a centre for a region, it is clearly a place in which there is room for a commercial advertising service and for which I think there is undoubtedly a demand. There will be substantial advertising revenue coming forward if such a service is stated. The second reason for this, Sir, is the one which the hon. Member mentioned, that up to now the operation of a Pan-Malayan Department of Broadcasting has not cost the Singapore Government very much. With the proposed withdrawal of the Federation from this service, it is going to become more and more expensive for the Singapore Government to maintain the existing standards of programmes on the existing, what I may call the national, service and it is hoped, by means of a commercial service, to offset and to more than offset in the long run the additional expenditure which will fall on the Singapore Government in maintaining its present services. I would reassure the hon. Member for Tanjong Pagar by saying that there is no intention of handing over this commercial broadcasting service to any commercial operator. It is intended that it should be run by the Department of Broadcasting, and so by the Government, and therefore there is no risk of the business or political propaganda about which he expressed certain apprehensions. The hon. Member for Queenstown, Sir, referred to the number of Chinese dialects on Radio Malaya. He enquired whether there was any intention of withdrawing the present programmes in Teochew. The Government, with the Department of Broadcasting, has been examining this particular subject of the number of dialects in which the Department of Broadcasting (Chinese Programmes) are at present transmitting and they are at present transmitted in seven dialects. That means that, in fact, no really satisfactory programmes can be given in any particular dialect. It is the inten- tion that as from the beginning of next year there should be a reduction in the number of dialects used in the Chinese programmes, and the intention is that they should be reduced to three - Mandarin, Hokkien and Cantonese, this decision has been taken after consultation with a number of influential bodies in Singapore and it has also been taken in agreement with the Federation Government, but if the hon. Member wishes to make any particular representations on behalf of the Teochew broadcasts, I would certainly be prepared to look at them.

Thank you. 4.43 p.m.

Sir, I am so sorry to hear that the Chief Secretary has confirmed that the Teochew dialect has been thrown out of the broadcasting programmes. Sir, can the Chief Secretary confirm the figure published by the Department of Information Services that the Teochew community is over 200,000 - a figure equal to the Cantonese community? Can the Chief Secretary give an explanation why, if this is the case, he should deny the Teochew community in Singapore their privilege to listen to items from the radio which they want to hear? Is the Chief Secretary ready to admit that Singapore today is suffering from political instability, and that this situation is due to the illiteracy of the population and to their political apathy? So, in view of this, should not the Government fully utilise the broadcasting programmes to educate the illiterates through a mass education programme, thereby killing this political apathy and abolishing illiteracy and thus achieving political stability?

Question put, and agreed to. Resolved, That this Assembly do now adjourn. Adjourned accordingly at Fifteen minutes to Five o'clock p.m. to 3rd December, 1958.

Wednesday, 5th November, 1958

asked the Chief Minister to state -

Overseas Experts and Advisers(Cols 0995-1012)

asked the Minister for Labour and Welfare -

and (b): It is regretted that these are matters which under the Trade Unions legislation cannot be made public.

asked the Minister for Labour and Welfare to state the total number of Trade Unions affiliated to the Singapore Trades Union Congress, giving the total number of members of each Union and the income derived as affiliation fees from such affiliated Unions as shown in the annual returns submitted by the Congress to the Registrar of Trade Unions for the periods ending 31st March in each of the years from 1956 to 1958.

The answer is the same as that given to Question No. 2.

asked the Minister for Labour and Welfare -

, (b) and (c): As the Seamen's Council of Action is not registered under the Trade Unions Ordinance the Ministry of Labour and Welfare is unable to give the required information.

asked the Minister for Labour and Welfare to state -

The total number of trade unions registered in Singapore as at 30th June, 1958, was 278; (b) The number of unions which failed to submit Annual Returns on 30th June, 1958, was 106; (c) The answer to this part of the question is 7. The dates of service of such notice were 2nd July, 1958, 4th July, 1958, 7th July, 1958, 8th July, 1958 and 6th October, 1958. On each of the dates 4th July, 1958 and 8th July, 1958, two notices were served. (d) The number of unions which did not submit their Annual Returns before 30th September, 1958, for the period ending 31st March, 1958, was 25. (e) The answer is NIL. The question of prosecution is under consideration.

asked the Minister for Commerce and Industry to state how many proprietors of Seamen's Lodging Houses were prosecuted between January, 1946, and 30th September, 1958, for -

The Minister's direct responsibility for Seamen's Lodging Houses started with the licensing of the first Licensed Seamen's Lodging House on 10th July, 1956. Since that date there have been no prosecutions of the proprietors of Seamen's Lodging Houses for the three offences enumerated in the question. Information as to any prosecutions prior to 10th July, 1956, is not available in the Ministry of Commerce and Industry's records.

asked the Minister for Commerce and Industry what are the charges for admission to the cinema shows at Connell House (European Seamen) and Asian Seamen's Club (Asian Seamen), and to state the reasons for any differences in such charges.

I am informed that the Committees responsible under the law for the two Institutions have made the following arrangements for charges for admission to cinema shows at their premises. (a) Connell House: Cinema shows are open to all races without charge. Attendances, fifty per cent of which comprise Asian seamen do not exceed the capacity of the hall. (b) Asian Seamen's Club: From 14th March, 1958 to 18th September, 1958, cinema shows were open to Asian seamen without charge. Attendances much exceeded the capacity of the hall and to discourage overcrowding the Committee has approved a charge of 20 cents per head for admission from 19th September, 1958.

asked the Minister for Commerce and Industry whether, before legislation for incorporating the Seamen's Registry Board was introduced, his Ministry had approached the employers' organisations in the shipping industry and the Seamen's Unions to set up a body for the registration and engagement of seamen to be operated by them at their own expense; and what was the result of such an approach.

The answer is "No". The Government brought together representatives of the seafarers and of the shipping companies in an Ad Hoc Committee which recommended that the Seamen's Registry Board should comprise representatives of Government, Shipowners and Seafarers in equal numbers with an independent Chairman and its working expenses should be financed by the Shipowners through a Selection Mr Fee, by the seamen through a small initial charge for the issue of their registration Book and by the Government through an annual grant. These recommendations have been accepted by Government and have been implemented.

asked the Minister for Commerce and Industry to state, from the establishment of the Seamen's Registry Board to 30th September, 1958 -

The answers are -