Hansard, 1960-05-13

Order read for resumption of debate on Question [12th May, 1960], "That the Bill be now read a Second time." Question again proposed. 2.31 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, yesterday the Minister for Labour and Law referred to the fact that in the United Kingdom Parliament was passing a Bill legalising public betting shops. He did not say, however, that in England public lotteries are illegal. Now, this Bill before the House makes public lotteries legal. So at one fell swoop the Singapore Government tries to get as much money as possible from those who are already patronising the illegal bookmakers and those who can be attracted to patronise the new betting shops and buy public lottery tickets that will be issued by approved racing clubs or associations.

You kill two birds with one stone.

Sir, if they are really in earnest about helping the masses, they should make one experiment first to see whether the effects are good or bad. If the results are good, then perhaps they could embark on the second experiment. Instead, at one fell swoop they are introducing public gambling on a big scale. I am sure those of us who were here during the Japanese military occupation will remember that they had public lotteries regularly; so regularly that after a period of enthusiasm people began to be wiser and the tickets had to be sold by the Chamber of Commerce and the One-Star, Two-Star, and Three-Star men. They had legalised gambling dens in amusement parks. And we remember the people found hanging behind some of these parks and in lanes, because they had lost money in gambling. Sir, in the face of that kind of evidence, we are now going back to make the same kind of experiment on a big scale! Yesterday I was accused of being out of touch with reality because I live in the atmosphere of Moral Rearmament. Sir, that is far from the truth. Instead of being out of touch with reality, I must say that I am far more so now. I realise that everybody, deep down, is selfish unless he has a change of heart. Whether a man is a Communist, a capitalist or a socialist, or by whatever label he calls himself, deep down he is selfish. And if we say that a capitalist is selfish because he wants money, the Communist is selfish because he wants power. So basically we are selfish unless we go through a period of change. Now, Sir, this seems on the surface to be a Bill to stop illegal gambling, but I am not sure whether the Government Benchers are saints. Being realistic - I know not all, but perhaps a few are approaching sainthood, and even then they would be realists - we admit that deep down the motive might also be selfish. Therefore, I presume that the $10 million is the bait that is attracting the Government.

Order. I think the hon. Member should be careful about treading on grounds which have already been covered in the debates on the previous two Bills. We are now on a Bill which seeks to legalise public lotteries and sweepstakes. I know the dividing line is a bit difficult to find, but I ask the hon. Member not to retread the ground we have covered.

Sir, yesterday I was just about to refer to a well-known philanthropist who cannot be accused of having been out of touch with reality. A man who has made his way up from poverty to the top rung in business cannot be regarded as being out of touch with reality. But this man, Sir, had a different kind of reality. He was against public lotteries because he knew that the masses would fall for public lotteries, thinking they were going to make easy money. Thereby they would be deprived of their hard-earned earnings. He was realistic not with the object of exploiting the situation and the weaknesses of the masses, but with the idea of preventing them from going down deeper. His life, Sir, was distinguished by his efforts to improve the living conditions of the masses. Sir, I refer to someone whose views should be more acceptable to those on the Government benches, who have declared that they are so socialistic that there is no one who is more socialistic than themselves, except the Communists. Sir, I am referring to Mr Tan Kah Kee. In 1947, the same issue was in mind - public lotteries in order to clear the slums. "We can clear the slums with State lotteries." I am quoting, Sir, from a paper that is no longer being published, the Sunday Tribune of 15th June, 1947. It was a burning issue then. I would like to read out Mr Tan's views as published in this paper. Said Mr Tan: "Lottery, as we know, is one of the worst forms of gambling. In this case, its evils would assume such magnitude once it is started as to spread harmful effects not only in Malaya and the neighbouring countries but also in places far away." Mr Tan went further: "The ease with which money can be raised by running a lottery is due to the weakness of the people who resort to this kind of get-rich-quick speculation." Sir, he was realistic. I am realistic. "Wherever there is a lottery, the poor will use part of their money to try their luck." Finally: "The prize winners will benefit little from their luck. Money easily earned is easily spent." Sir, perhaps the Government side does not agree with a practical and realistic man like Mr Tan Kah Kee about public lotteries. However, may I appeal to them on this basis: that if after their experiments have been tried out for six months, and in all honesty they find the effects are not good, will they then reconsider the question and give up those measures which not only produce additional revenue, but also produce other evils along with that additional revenue? 2.41 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the Member for Tanglin has been speaking at great length and with great feeling on the subject of State lotteries and off-course betting. Indeed he spoke with such great fervour that I cannot help coming to the conclusion that he has been tormented by some kind of psychological fixation. Throughout his many and varied speeches, I have been trying to trace the roots of this fixation. So far as I can make out, he is troubled about two principal outcomes, which Government's measures would lead to. They are, in the first place, that Government intends to open hundreds and thousands of betting shops. When I interjected with the word "millions", he too agreed that we might open millions of betting shops. That is the first thing that has been troubling him. Now, may I assure him, Mr Speaker, Sir, that the Government does not intend to open even one betting shop? I move on to his second fixation, and that is his fear that it would be our policy to encourage schoolboys and the schoolgirls to bet on horses. When I was a schoolboy, Mr Speaker, Sir, which was of course more recent than when the Member for Tanglin was a schoolboy, I did not get the impression that there was any desire at all among my fellow schoolmates to bet on horses. I attended the school of which the Member for Tanglin is now the principal, and I can only hope that since my graduation from the school standards of behaviour have not declined. The Member for Tanglin went to great lengths to discourse on the evils of betting.

Order. I think we have passed the subject of betting. We are on public lotteries, unless that is the same thing. Mr Minister?

I beg your pardon, Mr Speaker, Sir. He did say a great deal about the evils of gambling and generally the tragic consequences that this could lead to. I would have thought that, if he were genuine in his belief, he would have pressed for the abolition of all types of gambling, including the present system of sales of lottery tickets to members. But this is not what the Member for Tanglin wanted. He obviously has no objection if lottery tickets, possibly horse-racing, is strictly reserved for the delight of a few persons. But the point is that this activity is now practised on such an extensive scale that we cannot afford to ignore the illegal activities, which have surrounded gambling in general. It is because of this that Government is introducing this type of legislation. The Member for Tanglin praised the previous Government for resisting the temptation to legalise certain forms of gambling and to allow for its extension under controlled conditions. Now he is obviously either unaware of or unimpressed by the great harm, which has been done by illegal bookmakers and private lottery syndicates, which are going on on a very large scale. These are major problems which we have to tackle, because they are one of the sources of income for secret society gangsters, and the whole underground apparatus of a gambling organisation strikes at the root of society and demoralises a large number of people. The Member for Tanglin is only interested in the outward manifestations of gambling. So long as on the surface things appear decent, he does not worry about the evil that goes on behind the open facade. Although the previous Government did not take the measure, which we are now taking, the fact remains that gambling in all it forms, particularly in its illegal forms, has been on the increase all these years. And this is principally due to the policy, which the Member for Tanglin entirely approves, that is, to confine the accepted forms of gambling, such as lottery and horse, racing, to a limited circle and allow the whole cancer of illegal betting to spread all over Singapore. Mr Speaker, Sir, I find this attitude most deplorable, and I think I could best express my feelings on the subject if I were to quote from a book which is familiar to the Member for Tanglin. I will read from the New Testament, the Gospel according to Saint Matthew, Chapter 23, Verse 24: "Woe unto you scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites, for ye make clean the outward side of the cup and of the platter, but within ye are full of extortion and excess. Ye blind Pharisees, cleanse first that which is within the cup and the platter that outside of them may be clean also. Woe unto you scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites, for ye are like unto lighted sepulchres which appear indeed beautiful outward but within are full of dead man's bones and all uncleanliness Ye also outwardly appear righteous as a man but within ye are full of hypocrisy and iniquity."

Order. I take it, of course, that that quotation has no direct reference to a Member of this Assembly. Because if it has, it is out of order. Will the Member assure me that there is no direct reference to any particular Member?

There is no direct reference at all, Mr Speaker. It is just the reaction which I feel to the views which have been expressed.

Mr Speaker, Sir, yesterday we were debating on the Betting Bill, and as you have quite rightly ruled, the debate on this particular Bill shall not bring in any reference to betting shops. Sir, yesterday, at least, the Government had some reasonable excuse to introduce such a Bill. It said that it must wipe out the scourge of bookmakers. Hence the introduction of the Betting Bill - to wipe out bookmakers. But if, in the wiping out of bookmakers, it is later considered expedient or necessary that one should expand the activities of legal betting, then it could not be helped, one must face reality. But now let us face the reality of this Bill. This is to give legal blessing to a public lottery. It is not betting at all. It says that any person can now go and buy a ticket in a sweepstake, in a public lottery. Yesterday, Sir, one of the reasons advanced for the Betting Bill was that there was no reason whatsoever why so much money should flow into the pockets of bookmakers. Why should not this money be deflected into the coffers of Government? But in this case, Sir, money has not gone down the drain nor into the pockets of anybody. If I were to buy a ticket in a sweepstake or a public lottery of a turf club of which I am not a member, yet the Government is assured of its 30 per cent tax. There would be no loss of revenue, even if the tickets were to be sold secretly and illegally to non-members. Therefore, this attempt to try to say that we should now legalise public lottery is just the thin end of the wedge. If Government is really so anxious that the money spent on sweepstake tickets by the public is money spent foolishly by the public, and if the Government is anxious to make use of or to cash in on the weaknesses of human nature, then it should begin to think. But perhaps it would be a wonderful thing if the Government could have a state lottery of its own. Then it could have the whole 100 per cent instead of a meagre 30 per cent. This kind of state lottery is evil. It demoralises people. It is bad for the conscience of any good government. And 1 say this, Sir: that in spite of what has been said by the front benchers of the Government, it is significant that their back benchers, although it was their wont to stand up and champion any policy of the Government, have been silent. Perhaps, Sir, it is not so bad that there is still a conscience in the Party members of the P.A.P.

I am a back bencher, Sir, and I have risen up to answer the front bencher of the opposite bench. An hon. Member: They do not have back benchers!

As usual the Opposition always like to, as the Member for Cairnhill has just said, cash in on whatever they think they can cash in on. This is one of the opportunities, which they have. But I would not like to quote the Scriptures, Sir. We all understand what ultimately it really means. They try to paint a picture that they are real saints and that they are trying to protect the public. They try and claim that they can really do something good. Whenever a good Bill comes from the Government bench, they say, "We agree with it." Yet they try to pick holes here and there. And when it comes to an acclaim from the public, they say, "Oh, we also agree with it." When it comes to an issue on which public opinion may possibly be divided, they, of course, straightaway pick on the other side and say, "We are on the morally correct side." This Bill, Sir, is really meant to control and not to allow an extension of public lotteries. The Member for Cairn-hill said that the idea of the other two Bills which, were passed was to wipe out the bookmakers, but that this was to expand betting. Surely he knows the extent of chap-ji-ki that is rampant in Singapore. He will also know, Sir, that a lot of people who are not members of the Turf Clubs have been buying tickets from members of the Turf Clubs. Cases have appeared in the papers where non-members have to go to court in order to sue for what they claim to be their own winnings. This is a common occurrence everywhere. If anybody should care to go to any coffee-shop, or anywhere, they can always buy those tickets. Everybody knows that Social Welfare tickets from the Federation are sold very easily in Singapore. Previously, when the Member for Cairnhill was in power, they never seemed to do anything about it. And now just because it comes from the P.A.P. Government and just because we hope to control something which we know cannot be eradicated, they say it is bad. They talk of realism. Well, this is realism right through. They do not know what it really means. We the P.A.P. are realistic in contradistinction to the idealistic point which they are advocating. The Member for Tanglin also quoted philanthropists, and also talked about selfishness. Psychologically, everybody born is in a way selfish. But the difference between certain systems of government is that in socialism, if there is any selfishness in a person, we try and inculcate into that person how to learn and think of others. In other words, we try and think of things from a socialistic point of view. Just as man is now able to inhibit the other instincts that are inherent in him, so if there is such a thing as selfishness, we must also try and control it. That is the only way of advancement in this world. The Member for Tanglin also mentioned the fact that this Bill was merely introduced in order to obtain revenue. Surely, he knows that Government have many other ways of getting revenue. In addition, when he talked of the Government getting 30 per cent revenue from the lotteries, in actual fact. Government can gain much more revenue from the sale of liquor. What about revenue from the bar houses? What about revenue from samsu, liquor and even opium, if you like, which is not allowed? Why is he not raising any objection to the sale of liquor? The amount of revenue that Government gains from the sale of liquor is very, very great indeed. Surely the Member for Tanglin does not want us to go back to the time, if I may say so again, Sir, when his father was telling him about Johore Bahru and that people had to go across the Causeway in order to indulge in a little bit of gambling. Gambling is in the blood of everybody. If we cannot get rid of it, let us at least try and control it. If in controlling it we get the condemnation of the opposite side, then we say, to put it kindly, that they have a special bee in their bonnet, or that they are merely burying their heads in the sand.

Mr Byrne, in reply? 3.02 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I notice that we have been condemned because, as practical men of affairs, we have sought to have two bites at a cherry at the same time. Mr Speaker, Sir, everybody in Singapore knows this. It is strange that the Members on the Front Bench opposite are the people who appear not to know what everybody in Singapore does know. The public gambling situation in Singapore has two aspects. There are the organisers of bookmaking. There are also the organisers of public lotteries. The organisers of public lotteries are those who promote games like chap-ji-ki, tikam ekor, three digits, four digits, or what have you. They are everywhere in Singapore. They are operating within 50 yards of this Assembly House. Everybody knows that. We have got to deal with that situation. The Member for Tanglin is a moralist and thinks that gambling is quite wrong. We as socialists also say that gambling in Singapore is a social evil. But look at the situation that we find in Singapore. From 1929, there has been legalised gambling in Singapore. The exemption under the Betting Ordinance has been an exemption that we have not introduced. It has `been part of our very lives from 1929. Look at the position of the Turf Club itself. The Club is licensed to carry on gaming, which is restricted to its members. It has three types of membership. There are ordinary members, there are subscribing members, and there are associate members. It could be said that the ordinary members are people who really go there to enjoy the sport of racing. They gamble, but they also take an interest in horse-racing as a sport. The subscribing members go there to bet. They pay a fee of $15 a year. The Government gets a tax of about $5.20 as, entertainment duty. There are the associate members. These people are not permitted on the course. They go there just to participate in the sweepstakes. They are there only for that purpose. It is common knowledge that anybody can go to the Turf Club - he need not be a member - and participate to his heart's delight in gambling if he wants to do so and if he has got that inclination. It is as simple as all that. They pass their badges, to one another to go in. That is the situation which my friend and colleague has just referred to. That is the veneer of respectability. So long as there is that veneer of respectability, the Member for Tanglin is most satisfied. He can go to church and pray all the harder for it. Mr Speaker. Sir, that is the position which we find in Singapore. Coupled with that, there are organisers of public lotteries elsewhere who send their lottery tickets to us. You can go to any petrol kiosk at any time you want. You buy petrol. You can also buy lottery tickets emanating from else- where. That is the situation we find in Singapore. We are socialists. We regard gambling objectively as a social evil. Something must be done about all this. We cannot bury our heads in the sand and say, "Well, God is in heaven and everything is right in the world." We are not that sort of people. That is why we have taken the trouble to introduce the Betting Ordinance to make it difficult for these operators to continue to operate. We have looked very closely into the Common Gaming Houses Ordinance, and we find that the provisions there are sufficient for us to deal with the situation. We are now running all these operators to earth. Is it not better for us to try and control the situation? These are the facilities available in the Turf Club. What we do is to accept the facts as they are. We say, "Well, if that is so, let us extend these facilities." We go for all the clandestine organisers of these types of public lotteries and extend the facilities available at the Turf Club to all and sundry. That is the realistic way of doing things. Why allow these chaps to continue to get huge profits from all this illegal bookmaking? Surely that would be stupid on our part. The other alternative is this. Close down the Turf Club. They go elsewhere, just across the causeway. They operate in the same way. What control do we have over the situation then? We are not talking sense if we do that. Mr Speaker, Sir, when hon. Members say that gambling is evil, demoralising and bad for the conscience, we, the socialists, say that that is so. We have never come here and said that there is any justification for public gaming. We accept the situation as it is and are trying to bring it under effective control and to check all these demoralising influences on our society. Mr Speaker, Sir, I would also like to refer to what the Member for Tanglin has suggested. He says that once this Bill is passed into law, there is nothing to prevent lotteries, emanating from elsewhere, being sold publicly in Singapore. He has not properly looked at the clauses of this Bill. It is quite clear that only tickets sold by an exempted club will not be regarded as tickets that are part of a public lottery. This is clearly stated in one of the clauses. Mr Speaker, Sir, that is the position. We are realists and we have therefore to introduce the Bill to try and bring the situation under control. It has been said just now by the Member for Tanglin that I mentioned to this House yesterday that the House of Commons has passed legislation to permit betting houses to be established in England. But in England they have not gone as far as we are proposing to do. Public lotteries are still illegal in England. But, Sir, we have a different situation here. I do not know what the situation in England is. They there are facing up to their own internal problems. We face up to our own problems. It is quite clear that it would be futile, senseless and stupid on our part if we only went against the bookmakers and left the people who promote chap-ji-ki, tikam ekor and other forms of public gaming alone. Mr Speaker, Sir, we have listened to all that has been said on this matter. Some have got emotional about it. We are rational people. So far, we are quite convinced in our minds that this is the best that we can do in the present situation.

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 Byrne]. Bill considered in Committee.

3.12 p.m. Clause 1 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 2- Question proposed, "That clause 2 stand part of the Bill."

Sir, in clause 2 the new section 23, line 4, there is the word "any": " ... it shall not be an offence for any person to buy a ticket or chance or take part in any public lottery held, promoted, ...". Sir, it was put forward that children in school would not have the chance to buy lottery tickets. If these lottery tickets are on sale and if it is not an offence for any person to buy a ticket, how are the young children to be prevented from buying them? I would like the Minister for Labour and Law to answer that question and tackle the problem seriously. Sir, I have been accused of not facing up to realities. As a schoolmaster with 40 years' experience, I know the habits of boys' very well. During this period of 40 years, things have changed considerably. We have got secret societies organised in schools all over Singapore. That is a reality, which we face today. We know that some boys in some schools are also conducting gambling on their own. If today they do anything like that or they buy lottery tickets which are illegal and they are reported, action is taken against them and the practice stops. But once this Bill becomes law and a schoolboy buys 20 tickets and he sells them to his friends to share the fortune that is supposed to come, and if a teacher says to him, "Sorry, you are not allowed to do that." the answer is given to the teacher's face, "Sir, it is the law of the land." What is the teacher going to say? 3.15 p.m. Sir, I am glad that the Minister for Finance quoted the Scriptures. I hope he will quote them often. But I think he forgot to stress the fact that when one studies the Scriptures, one has got to learn to apply them to oneself first. We should look for the mote in our own eyes before we try to remove the beam from the eyes of other people. I am glad that the Minister read a quotation from the Scriptures and I hope that it will apply to everyone of us.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I find that I have to rise again to speak on this clause. During the Second Reading of this Bill, a Government Front-Bencher and a Back-Bencher tried to explain that it was necessary to have this Bill because Government wanted to control chap-ji-ki, tikam ekor, and so on. Sir, this is the only clause that is left in this Bill. There is nothing in this Bill to say that chap-ji-ki, tikam ekor, and so on, are to be controlled. The control is already there. So it is not right to say that this clause is introduced in order to control chap-ji-ki and tikarn ekor. But it is right to say that this clause is introduced to expand facilities for taking part in public lotteries.

Sir, it is not a case of expansion but a case of rechanneling.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the Member for Tanglin has asked me to state whether it is the intention of the Government to prohibit or restrict the sale of public lottery tickets to school children and to young people generally. Mr Speaker, Sir, it is possible for control to be exercised in the case of betting houses. One can make a rule that people of a certain age should not be admitted into such places. Administratively, it can be done. But in the case of the sale of public lottery tickets, it is not possible to exercise a similar kind of control and even if we try to do so, it would never be effective. If a rule is made that lottery tickets are not to be sold to youngsters, there is nothing to prevent older people from buying them and passing them on to youngsters. Even if it is ruled that a youngster will not be entitled to the prize money on the lottery ticket he buys, what he will do is to pass the ticket on to a grown-up person. So it is not possible to supervise such sales administratively in that way. The other point made by the Member for Tanglin was that we appear to be wanting only to expand the facilities for gaming. Mr Speaker, Sir, I have taken the trouble just now to mention to him that these facilities are already available in the Turf Club. Three types of membership are recognised there. An associate member is a person who can go there but he does not participate in betting. He goes there to participate in the sweeps. I think all that is one big sham. Let us recognise the position and say frankly, "Let there be public lotteries." I have looked through this Bill very carefully, Mr Speaker, Sir. Under the Common Gaming Houses Ordinance, there are sufficient powers to deal with the promoters of these public lotteries, like tikam ekor, chap-ji- ki, and so on. We have all the powers that we want. No additional powers are necessary. All that we have to do is to go for them and bring them down. That is what we are proposing to do. There is practically public gaming in the premises of the Turf Club and their tickets are sold to the public. There is a great difference, to my mind, between purchasing a lottery ticket and placing a bet in a betting shop. Although we, as Socialists condemn gambling - like betting and organising the sale of sweepstake lottery tickets - where is the evil really in buying a lottery ticket for a dollar or fifty cents? It is not as evil as going into a betting shop and placing your bets. One has got to acknowledge that people are human beings. All those people - even the person who places a bet or buys a lottery ticket - are not evildoers just because they do that. It is the people who promote all these things that we are going for. In our campaign, we will have to run these people in and we will have to extend the betting facilities. Incidentally, we will get more money. We acknowledge that. But we do not do all this with the primary object of getting more revenue. Public gaming has reach ed such proportions here that something has got to be done about it and we are taking this course. We hope that we will achieve the objects that we have in view. We are quite determined to bring these activities under proper control and that is why we are seeking these powers from this House.

Sir, I quite agree with the Minister that the buying of a lottery ticket is not evil. I am not thinking of it as an evil. But what I fail to understand is this: how does Government hope, by this Bill, to suppress or catch or arrest or stop these illegal operators? Do Government think that, by having legal operators of their own, they are going to draw the public from these illegal bookmakers to their own legal operators? In that case, as I asked yesterday, what competition can they offer? What I maintain is that they will not be able to draw the crowd from the bookmakers and illegal operators to the legal operators. Unless the Government see a way of achieving that, I myself cannot see how this Bill is going to help them do it.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I was indeed very disturbed to learn from the Minister for Labour and Law when he confessed that, with the operation of this law, the Government would not be able to control the sale of lottery tickets to school children. He said that school children can now buy lottery tickets. As has been pointed out by the Minister, it is only the members of turf clubs who can buy lottery tickets at the present time. No non-member of a turf club would be qualified to buy a lottery ticket from a member unless he or she has confidence' in the integrity of the member. Therefore, the sale of those tickets to a non-member is restricted to the extent of the integrity of the member who hopes to get a ten per cent cut of the prize money. But now to say that anyone - even school children - can buy lottery tickets within the meaning of the law is surely an expansion of, shall we say, facilities for gambling.

Sir, when I put forward the problem to the Minister, I had hoped that he would have been able to find some solution whereby students and young children would not be able to buy lottery tickets and re-sell them. I am sorry he has admitted that it cannot be done and that there is no solution. Sir, we know that the young people comprise more than half the population of Singapore today. Fifty cent and dollar tickets are within their reach. Therefore, when this Bill is passed, it will enable school children to buy lottery tickets freely and flaunt them in the faces of their teachers, saying, "There is nothing, Sir, that you can do to prevent my buying these tickets, because I am not going against the law of the land." And that is going to make it very difficult for educationalists to tell them, "Boys, you must work hard. You cannot depend on luck for success in life. You have got to do it on the basis of industry," because they can very well say, "That is all nonsense. If I buy a lottery ticket for fifty cents and I can get $100,000, I do not have to study any more."

Mr Speaker, Sir, no amount of legislation can prevent school children from buying lottery tickets, just as you cannot prevent them now from smoking or even visiting brothel houses.

Sir, in reply to the last speaker, Although there had been no legislation so far until this Bill was introduced, school children had not been buying lottery tickets. But this Bill is going to encourage them to do so, because the Minister has now openly said that the Government will not be able to control them from buying lottery tickets. In view of that, the Opposition, Sir, will have to vote against this clause.

There is a certain amount of repetition. Perhaps the Minister would like to wind up.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I never said anything of that sort. I did not say that we could not control. I said we could not control effectively. Even if we were to issue instructions that no such sales should be made to school children and young people, there are no means of carrying out those instructions. Suppose it was decreed that any youngster who, obtained a prize on a ticket would not get the benefit of that prize, such a rule cannot be administered. I said before that he wou1d just pass the ticket on to somebody else, possibly an adult, and the latter could collect the money. How is the situation different from that which we know today? Today, youngsters can buy Federation lottery tickets in Singapore quite openly. The Opposition is not fussy about that. It is done openly. There is no fuss about it. Then why all this fuss and bother? We are doing everything to bring the situation under effective control. If you want to deal effectively with gambling, you must recognise that human beings are human beings and that there must be an outlet for them. You cannot go for the promoters only and not provide an outlet. There must be an outlet. As practical people, we say that this is the only way of dealing with the situation as we know it today. 3.30 p.m. Question put, "That clause 2 stand part of the Bill."

Division, Sir. The House divided: Ayes, 28; Noes, 6; Abstention, Nil; Absent, 17. Ayes. Noes. Baharuddin bin Abdul Hamid bin Mohamed Ariff. Haji Jumat. Bani, S. T. Ahmad Jabri bin Buang bin Omar Mohammad Akib. Junid. Lim Yew Hock. Byrne, K. M. Mohd. Ali bin Alwi. Chan Chee Seng. Seow Peck Leng, Chan Choy Siong, Mrs. Miss. Thio Chan Bee. Chor Yeok Eng. Goh Chew Chua. Goh Keng Swee. Abstentation. Kandasamy, G. Lee Khoon Choy. Nil. Lee Siew Choh. Lee Teck Him. Leong Keng Seng. Absent. Lim Cheng Lock. Lin You Eng. Ahmad bin Ibrahim. Lingham, S. V. Chan Sun Wing. Low Por Tuck. Fung Yin Ching, M. Ismail Rahim. Miss. Ng Teng Kian. Hoe Puay Choo, Ong Chang Sam. Madam. Ramaswamy, S. Koh, C. H. Sheng Nam Chin. Lee Kuan Yew. Tan Cheng Tong. Mammen, John. Tee Kim Leng. Mohd. Ariff bin Toh Chin Chye. Suradi. Wee Toon Boon. Ong Eng Guan. Wong Soon Fong. Ong Pang Boon. Rajah, A. P. Rajaratnam, S. Sahorah binte Ahmat, Madam. Tan Kia Gan. Teo Hock Guan. Yaacob bin Mohamed. Yong Nyuk Lin. Clause 2 accordingly ordered to stand part of the Bill. Bill reported without amendment. 3.38 p.m.

Third Reading, what day?

Now, Sir. Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Third time." Question proposed.

Sir, it is indeed a very sad day for the children of Singapore when they come to know that the Government, by this Bill, is encouraging them to take part in State lotteries.

Mr Speaker, Sir, that is a very foolish remark, if I may say so, from a responsible Member of the Opposition. The Government is not encouraging the children of Singapore to buy public lottery tickets. I have stated repeatedly to the House that Government has looked into the whole question and is satisfied that the proposals we have made in this Bill are the only practical way of dealing with a very difficult situation as regards public gaming in Singapore. It is completely false and untrue to say that the Government is encouraging the children of Singapore to participate in public lotteries. The position today is such that there are tickets being sold openly in the streets of Singapore, and it will be no different under the proposals that we have in mind.

Question put, and agreed to. Bill accordingly read a Third time and passed.

Order for Second Reading read. 3.40 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." The primary object of the Bill is to make such amendments of the law as are necessary to enable the International Convention for the Suppression of Counterfeiting Currency to be acceded to by the United Kingdom Government on behalf of Singapore. The International Convention for the Suppression of Counterfeiting Currency was signed at Geneva on the 20th day of April, 1929, but was not ratified by the United Kingdom till 1935, when the Counterfeit Currency (Convention) Act, 1935, was enacted to enable effect to be given to the Convention. The purpose of the Convention is to lay down rules to provide the most effective means for ensuring the prevention and punishment of the offence of counterfeiting currency. Article 23 of the Convention provides that the Convention cannot be ratified by any country unless its legislation and administrative organisations are in conformity with the rules contained in the Convention; and that the Convention cannot be acceded to on behalf of any territory unless the legislation and administrative organisation of that territory are in conformity with such rules. Mr Speaker, Sir, many of the provisions of the Convention are already part of the law of Singapore, but in order to give complete effect to the Convention certain amendments to the Penal Code are required and these are contained in the Bill. Clause 3 of the Bill proposes a definition of "currency note" which follows the definition contained in section 1 (2) of the United Kingdom Counterfeit Currency (Convention) Act, 1935. This gives effect as far as paper money is concerned to Article 2 of the Convention, which defines currency as meaning "paper money (including bank notes) and metallic money, the circulation of which is legally recognised." As respects metal money, the definitions of "coin" and "current coin" in section 230 of the Penal Code are already in accord with the requirements of the Convention. Clauses 2 and 4 of the Bill provide for the seizure and forfeiture of counterfeit currency and coin, as well as instruments or other articles for counterfeiting in order to give effect to Article 11 of the Convention. These provisions are based on section 11(5) of the United Kingdom Coinage Offences Act, 1936, and section 2 of the Counterfeit Currency (Convention) Act, 1935. Sir, I beg to move.

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 Byrne]. Bill considered in Committee.

3.45 p.m. Clauses 1 and 2 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 3-

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, In page 2, line 9, to leave out "and 489D" and insert ", 489D and 489E". The purpose of this amendment, Mr Speaker, Sir, is to extend the definition of "currency note" to section 489E. It has been overlooked. Amendment agreed to. Clause 3, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 4 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Bill reported with an amendment; read the Third time and passed.

Order for Second Reading read. 3.48 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I have His Excellency's permission to proceed with this Bill on a Certificate of Urgency, and I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." When I became the Minister for Labour and Law in June -

Order. Actually, of course, the Certificate of Urgency applies to the Committee Stage and the Third reading. But if the Certificate could be handed in now, I could explain the position. Certificate of Urgency handed in.

The Certificate is in order. I might explain to hon. Members that I have formed the opinion that this Bill is a hybrid Bill, and consequently, under the provisions of Standing Order 65, the Bill should ordinarily, after the Second Reading, be referred to a Select Committee. The Certificate of Urgency, however, takes the Bill out of the ambit of Standing Order 65, and it will consequently be proceeded with, if the Minister so wishes, through the Committee stage and the Third Reading today.

Mr Speaker, Sir, as I said just now, when I became the Minister for Labour and Law in June, 1959, I found to my surprise that the Community Recreation Division, which used to be part of the Department of Social Welfare had been handed over to an employee of the Asia Foundation by the former Government and was being administered from the Singapore Youth Sports Centre. Added to this strange situation, the control of community centres and youth clubs owned and built by Government had by that time completely passed into the hands of community associations and advisory committees under the control of persons closely connected with the former Government who were defeated candidates at the last General Election. So complete was this control that the staff of the Department of Social Welfare were only in name the servants of the Ministry. The result, as could be expected, was a complete standstill in the normal activities of nearly all our community centres. The only activity of note then was the holding of cinema shows for which fees were charged, and it was generally known that these fees were being pocketed by those in control. Mr Speaker, Sir, I decided that this situation should not be allowed to continue and gave instructions that the Department of Social Welfare should reassume control of all community centres and youth clubs in Singapore. This process of taking over was completed in December 1959. Having succeeded in bringing the community centres and youth clubs under departmental control, it is now necessary to associate the people in the management of these community centres and youth clubs and for this purpose it is proposed in this Bill to set up a Corporation by legislation to promote community recreation in Singapore. This organisation would be able to provide trained leaders who would be able to work on the ground amongst the people, popularise the community centres and youth clubs and organise their activities. No community centre or youth club can ever succeed without the active co-operation of the people, and such centres are most successful if they are run by leaders who understand the needs and interests of the people. The Bill before the Assembly is designed to set up a People's Association which will work closely with the Community Recreation Division of the Department of Social Welfare and with associations representing the people which will have members in the Corporation. Clause 2 of this Bill is designed to establish the People's Association as a Corporation to promote community recreation in Singapore. Clause 3 enables the Corporation to take over the assets and the movable and immovable property of the Singapore Youth Sports Centre, which has been wound up. Clause 6 of the Bill sets out the constitution of the Board of Management which will consist of 14 members, with the Prime Minister as Chairman, the Minister for Labour and Law as Deputy Chairman, the Minister for Finance, the Director of Social Welfare as Secretary-Treasurer, six members to be appointed by the Chairman and four members to be elected from among the representatives of the organisations mentioned in the Schedule to the Bill. The Board will therefore have strong Government representation and will have the benefit of the experience of its members who will be drawn from a very wide educational, recreational and cultural field. Clause 10 of the Bill sets out the objects and powers of the Corporation. The objects are "The organisation of leisure and the promotion of youth activities in order not only to develop the cultural, moral and physical potentialities of youth, but also to instil in the youth of Singapore a sense of national identity and a spirit of dedicated service to the community and the organisation and promotion of group participation in social, cultural, educational and athletic activities in order that, the youth of Singapore may be made to realise that they belong not to any particular racial or religious community, but to a Malayan community which transcends communal and racial loyalties." The Corporation has power, inter alia, to appoint committees, officers and servants to carry out its objects and receive contributions from Government and other sources. It can also raise funds on its own. Most important of all is its power to manage or run community centres, youth clubs, boys' clubs and girls' clubs and to organise training for leaders to work in such community centres and clubs. The Bill will not involve Government in any extra financial expenditure. The People's Association when incorporated will be able to draw upon voluntary service more than a Government department would be able to. There are at present 45 community centres and more are being built in all areas in Singapore where there are large concentrations of population without such amenities. With this rapid expansion in the number of community centres and the necessity of providing a planned programme of educational, cultural and recreational activities for the larger numbers, which will be using these centres, it is obvious that an organisation like the People's Association in which associations representing the people are members will be better equipped to take charge of community recreation on such a scale than a Government Department. Furthermore, Government machinery moves slowly and Government servants on their own cannot provide the leadership required for this purpose. A People's Association is clearly the answer. Government is confident that with the establishment of the People's Association, community centres and youth clubs will become popular people's institutions which will help to bring our peoples of various races closer together and thereby assist us in our task of nation building, it is most urgent therefore that the People's Association should be incorporated without any delay. Sir, I beg to move. Question proposed. 3.55 p.m.

(In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, concerning the People's Association Bill which is tabled before the House now, we must thank the Minister for Labour and Law for introducing this significant and constructive Bill which can be regarded as a valuable gift for our National Day. Sir, we are aware that the P.A.P. Government will not follow the previous Government in adopting a negative attitude towards the organisations, letting them emerge and disappear by themselves. Our aim is to initiate the activities of the various organisations, and pay due regard to them. But public funds must be well utilised so as to ensure that they will not be wasted. Therefore, we must count every cent, which is to be spent. Then we will be able to carry out the maximum amount of work with the minimum cost for the benefit of the greatest number of people. From clause 5 of this Bill, we can see clearly that the Government has expressed much concern about the development of the People's Association. Mr Speaker, Sir, one of the reasons why the P.A.P. has today become the governing Party in this House is that we are getting the support of the people of Singa- pore. The people of Singapore have given us their support because of our spirit of dedicated service to them, because we share with them in their vicissitudes and because we work together with them. Our policy is based on this principle. Our attitude now in the discussion of this Bill is also based on this guiding principle. The Schedule on page 7 of the Bill reflects accurately our point of view. In this Schedule we have included scouting organisations, youth organisations, recreational organisations, student bodies or old boys' associations, and the Fine Arts Society. Also the Dewan Bahasa dan Kebudayaan Kebangsaan which was passed yesterday. Although only 45 organisations are set out in the Schedule, yet it has a wide representation from among the existing statutory organisations in Singapore. Sir, the setting-up of the People's Association is a matter worth our attention. It is the first time that the Government and public organisations are shouldering the task of providing communal recreational activities. This is another proof that this Government is determined to encourage people to participate in Government organisations. I believe that with the initiative of the Government, and with the assistance of the people, the organisation and the development of the activities of the People's Association will spread swiftly like fire all over the Island. Sir, it is expected that the activities of the People's Association in the field of culture will be widened. My colleague, the Minister for Labour and Law, has reiterated time and again in the Press that the Government will gradually increase the number of community centres. However, the building of low-cost community centres is based on the Government's economic policy, which is entirely different from the wasteful and unrealistic policy of the past Government. Low-cost community centres will be built up all over the island, especially in the rural areas, where there is hardly any centre. Now the Government is looking for a site and as soon as the building plans are ready, work will begin. The setting-up of community centres is consistent with our pledge to the people. In Part I page 4 of our Chinese pamphlet on P.A.P. policy, we have stated that we need many small units of community centres or clubs in the rural areas. We will look for suitable sites for the building of these centres. The past Government spent a lot of unwarranted money on a few beautiful and luxurious centres in urban areas, which were not used for proper recreational activities. There is urgent need for low-cost community centres in the rural areas so that the rural people can make use of and enjoy the facilities provided by these centres. Sir, the P.A.P. Government will make full use of community centres for the purpose of carrying out the aims contained in clause 10 (1) (b) of this Bill. That is to say, the People's Association will be responsible for the work of organising and promoting culture and education. Singapore has a multi-racial society, yet the past Government disregarded the importance of racial communication and contact. In the past, most of the people who participated in community centre activities were English-educated people. The non-English educated people who participated were much less. This one-sided development is completely contrary to the aim of the People's Association and the community centres. As a result, we find there has been no improvement in communal customs and usage. Sir, the P.A.P. Government will not allow this ailing and negative attitude to continue to develop. The introduction of the People's Association Bill is an announcement of the death of the past ruling power and the start of a new direction and spirit in our work. Mr Speaker, Sir, at present there are four different streams of education in Singapore, which are using their respective mother tongue as a medium of communication. So there is hardly any chance for association and understanding among the students of these various streams except once in a while when there may be some contact at a combined schools sports meet. The mixed schools run by the Ministry of Education are still in an experimental stage. Therefore, we must hurry to take action to check our weak points. The only way to achieve this is to set up the People's Association. Mr Speaker, Sir, the new community centres will open the door to young people of all races and will provide them with an opportunity which they lack in school. In other words, to enable them to make use of the centres for friendly association, study and work. In this way they will better understand their respective custom and usage, which will help to improve communication and promote racial culture. Furthermore, they can make use of these facilities to learn Malay and be proficient in their conversations and writing. This is of great significance in the evolution of a Malayan culture. Mr Speaker, Sir, according to the 1957 population census. 46 per cent of our total population are people who are above 21 years old, whereas the number of people under 21 years comes to 53 per cent. Of this number, 46 per cent are teenagers under 15 years old. Furthermore, the school-going children make up 22 per cent of the total population. Sir, from the above percentages, we can see for ourselves that more than 50 per cent of our population are young people. Therefore, their behaviour and conduct is a decisive factor in the interest and future of our country. That is why the Government expresses much concern about their conduct. Because prior to gaining social experiences, our young people are too simple- minded and their behaviour and ways of thinking are easily influenced by society. We must teach them to realise their importance to society and to instil in them a sense of national consciousness. This is only one half of the work to be carried out by our schools and by the People's Association. The other half of the work will depend on the family. Sir, at present, there are certain drawbacks in our society. Many parents, once they have sent their children to school, leave the education of their children entirely to the school. forgetting their responsibilities towards their children. They fail to pay sufficient regard to their children, so that their children are influenced by the evil forces of society and get themselves involved in criminal activities. If every parent will consider the education of his children as his compulsory responsibility and see to their activities, then I believe that the youth of this country will have a bright future and the State will benefit substantially from it. Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to support the Bill. 4.10 p.m.

(In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to support the People's Association Bill. We are all aware that the setting-up of the People's Association by the People's Action Party is of great significance. We set up this People's Association for the purpose of realising our Party aims. The units to be represented in the People's Association are set out in the Schedule of the Bill. The managing members include representatives from educational, cultural, recreational and old boys' associations. This People's Association can be said to have a full representation of the existing organisations in Singapore. This representation also reflects the Government's attitude. If we can organise all these organisations under the People's Association and popularise it in every corner of the island, then, on the one hand, it will be consistent with our Party aim to strengthen unity among the various races of the people, and, on the other hand, we can raise the cultural standards of our people. The Government has expressed much concern about the living conditions of the people. The Minister for Labour and Law has announced that the Government will build many community centres all over the island. The setting-up of this People's Association will enable the people to participate in community activities. This Association will not only improve communications between the people of all races but will also raise the educational standards and cultural understanding of the people. Sir, let me tell you something about the conditions of the community centres in the past Government and why I support this Bill. In the past, the attitude towards community centres was negative and was a departure from the wish of the masses of the people. They very seldom went to the community centres and made' use of them. I know, from my visits, that certain community centres still have the sign. "Beware of Dogs" hanging on the door. Formerly, good results were expected from grand exhibitions like the Agricultural Exhibition. But, on the contrary, there were instances of gambling like tikam, and facilities were provided for the people to gamble in the community centres. Therefore, it can be seen that community centres in the past were not run on proper lines, Because of this, the P.A.P. Government took over these community centres with the object of uniting the people of different races and to bring them closer to the Government so as to understand its policies. These community centres act as a liaison body between the Government and the people, thereby breaking down the barrier that existed between them in the past. If we have the People's Association, we will then be able to teach these people to become good citizens. Mr Speaker, Sir, in the past, in the guise of community centres, many bad deeds, took place. Therefore, our aim is to unite the people of different races together and to promote friendship among them through cultural activities in order to show them a better way of life. As members of the People's Association, the people will fully realise that they can have their aims satisfied. Therefore, the work to be done will be fully appreciated by them. The community centres will be centres for their activities and they will be able to voice their wishes. Mr Speaker, Sir, I fully support the People's Association Bill.

Mr Byrne, in reply?

Mr Speaker, Sir, in view of the silence of the Members of the Opposition, I do not propose to say anything in addition to what I have already said.

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 Byrne]. Bill considered in Committee.

4.19 p.m. Clause 1-

There is a Note: In page 1, marginal note: after "title", to insert "and commencement". That will be done. Clause 1 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clauses 2 to 4 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 5-

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, In page 2, line 38, after "Chairman;", to insert "and". This amendment is necessary to improve the syntax.

It is a typographical omission. Amendment agreed to. Clause 5, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clauses 6 and 7 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 8-

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, In page 4, line 1, after "doing", to insert "shall". This may be a typographical omission or a grammatical mistake depending on bow you look at these things!

It depends on whether you have blinkers on! Amendment agreed to. Clause 8, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 9-

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, In page 4, line 37, after "paragraph (b)", to insert "of subsection (2)". This was an inadvertent omission, Mr Speaker, Sir. Amendment agreed to. Clause 9, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clauses 10 to 15 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill. The Schedule- Question proposed, "That the Schedule stand part of the Bill."

Mr Speaker, Sir, there have been a few inadvertent omissions. I wonder whether this is another inadvertent omission. The sports movement, the professional movement, international movements like the St. John's Ambulance Association, the Federation of Boys' Clubs and the Girl Guides Association, etc., the educational movement, the cultural movement, the youth movement, the students' movement, and the trade union movement have all been represented. The Minister who professes himself to be the champion of women has omitted the women. I wonder whether that is an inadvertent or sentimental omission. May I explain, Sir, that the Girls' Life Brigade and the Federation of Girls' Club do not actually represent the women, especially the latter which is run by men and women admittedly for the good of young girls. Actually, these clubs do not represent the women.

Girls and women are not synonymous!

Mr Speaker, Sir, we have tried to produce as comprehensive a Schedule as possible and we do not claim, in doing so, that we have been perfect. When the People's Association is constituted, any associations which feel that they should be included could always write in to the People's Association and the inclusion of those associations will be considered. If the Member for Mountbatten will look at clause 5 of the Bill, she will see that there is provision for amendments to be made to the Schedule by notification in the Gazette with the approval of the Yang di-Pertuan Negara.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I am grateful to the Minister for the explanation and the assurance given.

Question put, and agreed to. The Schedule ordered to stand part of the Bill. Bill reported with amendments; read the Third time and passed.

Order for Second Reading read. 4.27 p.m.

Mr Speaker. Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." The Bill repeals the Trade Unions Ordinance but re-enacts its principal provisions with additions and amendments. As will be seen from the Comparative Table attached to the Bill, many of the provisions of the Bill have been taken from the Federation Trade Unions Ordinance of 1959. Federations of trade unions are not included in the definition of "trade union" and, as in the Federation Ordinance; special provisions are made in regard to them in Part VIII of the Bill. The Bill, however, extends to branches of trade unions provisions, which were not formerly extended to them. Particulars of branches and their executive and officers must be included in the application for registration under clause 10, the formation or dissolution of a branch must be notified to the Registrar under clause 27 and changes in the officers of a branch and the situation of its office must likewise be notified to the Registrar under clauses 31 and 32.

The Bill in clause 11 makes important changes in the conditions, which must be complied with by a trade union, which applies for registration. If the trade union is a trade union of employees, it must be an association of employees within one of the categories set out in the First Schedule to the Ordinance; it must (unless this requirement is waived by the Registrar in exceptional circumstances) have at least 250 members; and it must be affiliated to an association of trade unions exempted by the Minister under section 59 of the Ordinance. In the case of a trade union of employees the trade union must be an association of employees within a trade, occupation or industry or within trades, occupations or industries which are in the opinion of the Registrar similar. Moreover the objects, rules and constitution of all trade unions seeking registration must comply with and must not conflict with the provisions of the Ordinance or any regulations made thereunder and the rules and constitution of the trade union must be democratic and provide for proper representation of the members in the management of the affairs of the trade union. The application for registration must state the names, occupations and addresses of the members of the trade union signing the application and the titles, names, addresses and occupations of the officers of the trade union and of each branch of the trade union. I propose, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, to move at the Committee Stage of the Bill an amendment to provide that the application for registration shall also state the names, ages, addresses and occupations of members of the executive of the trade union and of each branch thereof and also of members of a committee provision for which is made in the rules of the trade union. Consequential changes have also been made in clause 14 to the conditions under which the registration of a trade union can be cancelled. Power is given to cancel the registration of a trade union of employees if the trade union is being used against the interests of employees in a trade, occupation or industry in which its members are engaged, or if it has less than 250 members, or if it has ceased to be affiliated to an association of trade unions exempted by the Minister under section 59 of the Ordinance. Moreover, the Registrar is given power to cancel the registration of a trade union if he is of the opinion that, having regard to the existence of another trade union of employees registered in respect of the same category set out in the First Schedule to the Ordinance to which the trade union belongs, it is necessary in the interests of the employees in that particular trade, occupation or industry, to cancel the registration of the trade union. The provisions relating to the constitution of trade unions have also been amended. A person is disqualified in clause 28 from being an officer of a trade union, or any branch thereof or of any federation of trade unions or the person in charge of a subsidiary local office of a trade union, if he is not either a citizen of Singapore or born in the Federation of Malaya or he has been convicted for the illegal expenditure or use of trade union funds or of criminal breach of trust, extortion or criminal intimidation. In this respect, I propose to move an amendment, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, at the Committee Stage of the Bill to provide that a person shall not be a member of an executive of a trade union if he has been convicted for the illegal expenditure or use of trade union funds or of criminal breach of trust, extortion or criminal intimidation. The Bill also provides in clause 29 that a person shall not be employed as an employee of a trade union if he has been convicted of a criminal offence. Power is given to the Minister in clause 30 to exempt any trade union or person from the provisions relating to disqualifications and also to rule that the disqualification arising from conviction shall not apply where he is satisfied that the person convicted has been reformed. In Committee, I shall be moving an amendment to clause 30 to enable the Minister to exempt a union of employers from certain provisions of the Bill where it will be impossible for such union to comply with these provisions. The minimum age for membership of a trade union will be lowered from 18 to 16 years, but members under 18 years of age will not be eligible to vote on certain matters. This is provided for in clause 25. The names and titles of all officers of the trade union and the branch are required to be notified, and changes in the holders of the office or in the title of the office must be notified to the Registrar, who will alter the register accordingly, if satisfied that the provisions of the rules of the trade union, of the Ordinance and of the regulations made thereunder have been complied with. I propose, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, at the Committee Stage to move amendments to clause 31 to provide that changes in the membership of the executive of the trade union or of its branches or of any committee, provision for which is made in the rules of the trade union, shall similarly be notified to the Registrar. The provisions relating to the rules of a registered trade union are amended in clause 33 to provide that such rules must not conflict with the provisions of an award or collective agreement made under the Industrial Courts Ordinance or be such as to prevent or hinder members of the trade union from complying therewith and that such rules must not impose on applicants for membership or members obligations or restrictions which are oppressive, unreasonable or unjust. The rules are required to make provisions for all the matters specified in the Second Schedule to the Ordinance in which paragraphs 3 and 4 are new and require the rules to state the category set out in the First Schedule to the Ordinance or the trade, occupation or industry to which the trade union belongs and the conditions of eligibility for membership. In clause 34 (1), alterations to the rules, which specify the category of trade union or the trade, occupation or industry in which members of the trade union are engaged and the conditions of eligibility for membership, require the consent of the Registrar. In clause 34 (2), other alterations to the rules may be registered if the Registrar is satisfied that they will not cause the rules to be in conflict with the provisions of the Ordinance or the regulations made thereunder. In clause 38 power is given to a trade union to change its name by a resolution of the executive of the trade union. Power is also given in clause 39 to two or more registered trade unions within one of the categories set out in the First Schedule to the Ordinance or within similar trades, occupations or industries, to amalgamate as one trade union and this can be done by a resolution passed at a general meeting of members of each of the registered trade unions after service on the Registrar and all members of the trade union of notice of the proposed resolution not less than 14 days prior to the date of the meeting. After an amalgamation has been effected, any registered trade union within the same category of trade unions may amalgamate with the amalgamated body if the votes of at least one half of the members entitled to vote are recorded at a secret ballot and at least 60 per cent of the votes recorded are in favour of amalgamation. Provision is made for the vesting of property upon amalgamation in the appropriate trustees in accordance with the instrument of amalgamation. Particulars of the trustees of a trade union and of changes of trustees must be notified to and registered by the Registrar. A secretary or treasurer of a trade union may not be a trustee, but a corporation may. It is provided in clause 44 that upon a change of a trustee, which has been duly registered, the trust property will vest in the new trustees without transfer, conveyance and assignment or order of court. Provision has been made, following the Federation Trade Unions Ordinance, to permit a trade union to establish a separate political fund from which payments may be made in furtherance of defined political objects. Only those members who formally accept the obligation to contribute to the political fund will be liable to contribute to it and no payment may be made in furtherance of a political object except from the political fund. This is provided for in clause 47. Where the Registrar has reasonable cause to believe that the funds of a trade union may be applied for unauthorised purposes he may by order freeze the bank account of the trade union. This is provided for in clause 49. In Part VIII of the Bill, two or more registered trade unions within one of the categories set out in the First Schedule to the Ordinance or within similar trades, occupations or industries, may form or create a federation of trade unions by a resolution passed at the general meeting of the members of each of the trade unions. The rules of a federation shall make provisions for the matters specified in the Fifth Schedule to the Ordinance. The objects for which the federation is formed are required to be set out in the rules of the federation, and these must comply with the provisions of the Fifth Schedule. The federation may guide and co-ordinate the lawful activities of its component unions, but has no power to take any active part in conciliation proceedings or in trade disputes on behalf of the trade union. The procedure for affiliation with a registered federation is laid down, and it is provided that the general provisions of the Ordinance relating to trade unions will apply to federations of trade unions except so far as the Minister may otherwise order Power is given to the Minister to exempt an association of trade unions from the provisions of the Ordinance after examination and approval of the rules of such association. The rules of such an exempted association shall not be changed without the written permission of the Minister. This is provided for in clause 59. Trade unions registered under the existing Trade Unions Ordinance will be deemed to be registered trade unions, but the Registrar may within the period of one year from the date of the coming into operation of the Ordinance cancel the registration of such a trade union if, being a trade union of employees, it is not within one of the categories specified in the First Schedule or is not affiliated to an association of trade unions exempted by the Minister under section 59 of the Ordinance or if, being a trade union of employers, it is not an association or combination of employers in a trade, occupation or industry or in similar trades, occupations or industries. The Registrar may also within such period cancel the registration of such a trade union if the rules of the trade union do not comply with or are contrary to the provisions of the Ordinance or any regulations made thereunder or if, being a trade union of employees, it has less than 250 members or has ceased to be affiliated to an association of trade unions exempted by the Minister under section 59 of the Ordinance, or if the proper authority of the trade union has wilfully neglected to provide for the levying or collection of subscriptions and fees from its members; but the Registrar is required in such cases to give notice to the trade union and to give it an opportunity to show cause why the registration should not be cancelled. Federations of trade unions which are registered under the existing Trade Unions Ordinance will be required to reapply for registration within six months of the date of the coming into operation of the Ordinance. If a federation of trade unions fails to do so, or if its application for registration is refused, it shall be deemed to be an unlawful association. A number of miscellaneous amendments have also been made to strengthen the powers of the Registrar. Power is given to him to require a person to attend before him and answer questions and produce documents relating to the existence and operation of any trade union or suspected trade union. Power is also given to the Registrar to inspect ballot papers and other documents used in connection with a ballot and it is provided that all such papers and documents shall be preserved for six months. Sir, I beg to move. Question proposed. 4.48 p.m.

(In Malay): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, speaking on this Trade Unions Bill, I would like to draw the attention of the Minister for Labour and Law to my adjournment speech made in this Assembly in February last. If my memory serves me right, in that speech I stressed that it was essential for the Government to ensure that the officials of a trade union should comprise Singapore citizens only. However, in this Trade Unions Bill, there is an amendment to the effect that persons born in the Federation are eligible to become officials of a trade union. From the point of view of U.M.N.O., the wide opportunities offered, without any specific mention that persons born in the Federation should first become Singapore citizens are undesirable. In its fight to suppress subversive elements in Singapore and the Federation, it is necessary for the Government to keep a watchful eye on the trade union leadership. But we are compelled to seek clarification from the Government on this point. What will be the fate of the Government if the leaders of the trade unions wrest control from them and exercise influence on them? In that situation, I am quite sure, Mr Deputy Speaker, the question of peace will have to be considered not only in relation to the internal security situation, but also in relation to the defence of our State from the Communist threat. We consider it most undesirable for such men to participate in the trade union movement. Therefore, Mr Deputy Speaker, on behalf of the U.M.N.O., we have brought this matter to this Assembly. We have given our views, but we have not received a positive reply from the Minister for Labour and Law. 4.51 p.m.

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, the passing of the Industrial Relations Bill established the future course on which the trade unions in Singapore would follow in pursuing their claims in future. In fact, a new era will begin with the implementation of the provisions of that Bill. The trade unions will have to adhere to sense and logic, and will have to exercise greater care in the preparation of their claims. In the past, the law of the jungle prevailed. Employers recognised and respected larger and stronger unions, but took advantage of the weakness of the smaller and less militant unions. But now the situation has changed. The future prospects of the working class in Singapore depend on the ability of the individual unions to prepare and present a sound case for judgment by an independent court. Sir, I say that it is in this context that we should examine the merits of this Trade Unions Bill before us today. Nobody in his proper senses can deny the fact that when this Bill is passed, and its provisions are implemented, the unification and the strengthening of the workers' movement in Singapore will be helped greatly. In the past, in the good old days of the previous Government, the trade union movement as a whole was one of ridicule. There were more than 200 trade unions in Singapore, each ranging in membership from 30,000 to nothing, and more than 50 per cent of these unions ranged in membership from nothing to only about 250. And in many cases, the smaller unions were yellow and splinter unions. During the elections, the P.A.P. pledged to wipe out these yellow and splinter unions and encourage the healthy growth of the movement. As soon as the Government was constituted, we went about doing this. Today a number of splinter and yellow unions has been forcibly removed from the arena, and there are some on the waiting list. In due course, they will be removed too. Sir, the main features of the Trade Unions Bill are (1) the requirement of a democratic constitution and proper representation of members in the management of the affairs of the unions; (2) the requirement of a minimum number of 250 members for registration and the categories of the unions; and (3) compulsory affiliation to an association of trade unions, i.e., at the moment, the T.U.C. It is important that we encourage proportional representation as far as possible. There are unions in Singapore where a minority manages the affairs of a majority. And it has been found often that not only the views and interest of the majority went unheard, but also suppressed by the use of some constitutional technicalities. For example, the Army Civil Service Union in Singapore, where some 12,000 industrial workers are not properly represented in their executive which is dominated by a minority of clerical workers. And secondly, the require- ment of 250 members for the registration of an employees' union and the necessity to have the unions within the categories set out in the Schedule are vital if we are to have unification of the movement. True, the previous Government was more democratic in that they allowed thugs and black-legs to form unions. Therefore, we had a string of unions operated by racketeers who were ever prepared to break strikes and supply black-legs. Seven workers could form a union. And if the applicants had the blessings of notorious men like Lee Yew Seng, then the Government and employers made sure that they received all the support for the furtherance of the objectives of these people, although their objectives were fundamentally opposed to the aspiration of the workers. Sir, no matter how liberal one decides to be, it is nonsense to allow every Tom. Dick and Harry to form a union, because, finally, what we will have are as many unions as workers, and that would be absurdity at its height. It is a matter of principle to have one union in one industry. This is the basic phenomena in aid of collective bargaining. And any Government worth its salt must endeavour to establish this. It is now almost one year since the election took place and this Government constituted. During this period, many changes have taken place, changes by and large benefiting the workers. The office of the Minister for Labour and Law has been transformed from a bureaucratic agency of the employers in the past to a fair and just institution, ever vigilant to check ruthless employers. Sir, the significance of the change is simply this. In the past the trade unions had not only the employers to face, but also the Government. A Government which claimed to be popularly elected but which had its heart and soul pawned to the employers; whereas now the position has been made clear. The Government is undoubtedly on the side of the workers, and this has been stated time and again, and it has been proved by words and deeds. In requiring 250 members as the minimum number for the registration of a trade union, the Government is being extremely fair, because, in the first place, no thug is going to organise a yellow union and no pimp is going to have the opportunity to organise a splinter union. Because experience has proved that these people are incapable of mustering the strength. But if there should be a legitimate case, which I think would be a remote possibility, because existing unions cover almost all industries, then I am sure the provision will be well met. The Government does not intend to usurp the right of the unions to participate in the unification of the movement, and setting out the categories in the Schedule is merely establishing a basis for the unions to work on. Without the provisions of the Bill and without the eradication of splinter and yellow unions, if we are to hope for the unification of the movement, I would say, speaking from my own experience, that it would take at least ten years for the hope to materialise. Therefore, in brief, what this Bill seeks to do is to propel the development of the trade union movement forward, and to encourage the unification of the movement. And I am certain that with the passing of this Bill and with the implementation of its provisions, we will have a stronger, a healthier and a unified movement in a very short time, perhaps in about a couple of years' time. Thirdly, on the question of compulsory affiliation I would say this. Whether compulsion is democratic or not is futile to ask. What is important is whether it is desirable. Slogans on democratic principles are beautiful but they are meaningless if the results they produce are undesirable. The Constitution of the T.U.C. has been amended and the organisation is being geared to meet the new situation. The future, as I envisage it, will create a democratic centralization of the movement. But there are all sorts of wild talk in town. Wild talk about the so-called 10 Tall Men. But this is far too stupid to demand attention and to require clarification. But what I wish to point out is this. In the final analysis, it is not the Secretary-General or the Secretariat of the T.U.C. which will decide, but the workers themselves. The political pace in Singapore is set and dictated by the working class. Governments may change, personalities may fade, but the grim reminder of reality is the temper of the working class, which will be the deciding factor, and history will continue to be made. Mr Deputy Speaker (Mr G. Kandasamy): Order. I shall suspend this sitting until 5.30 p.m. Sitting accordingly suspended at 5.02 p.m. until 5.30 p.m. Sitting resumed at 5.30 p.m.

Order read for resumption of debate on Question, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." Question again proposed. 5.31 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, in moving the Second Reading of the Bill, the Minister gave a very sober account of the reasons that prompted the Government to introduce this Bill. But it was left to a backbencher to take it upon himself to speak on behalf of the Government and to go into matters, which were not touched on by the Minister in his speech at all. As was to be expected, there was reference made of the work of the previous Government vis-a-vis the trade union movement. The previous Government was accused of being on the side of employers, of trying to choke the healthy growth of the trade union movement and of a number of other crimes perpetrated against the trade unions in Singapore. But, Sir, if one were to be honest with one's self and if one were to go through the records of the industrial strife that took place during the life of the previous Government, one would have arrived at the conclusion that it was a lamentable fact that the trade unions in Singapore at that time had been misguided and had been made use of by people who did not have the interests of the country nor the interests of the workers at heart. Sir, I do not think it is a good thing that we should go into detail as to what the previous Government had done or had not done. Let us rather confine ourselves to the Bill that is before the House. The Bill, as the Minister has said, has incorporated a number of sections that are already in existence and also sections of the Trade Unions Bill in the Federation. The Bill, however, has departed in two directions. One is that it is now felt that the officers of a trade union should only come from those who are citizens of Singapore or people born in the Federation of Malaya. Another one is that a trade union, if it is to be registered, must first of all be affiliated to the Trades Union Congress, which obviously will get exemption from the Minister under clause 59. The Minister also goes on to say that any registered trade union can have its registration withdrawn if it is no longer affiliated to the T.U.C. Sir, it has been pointed out in this House by the Member for Kampong Kembangan that the time has come for control of the trade unions to be in the hands of the citizens of Singapore, and I feel that clause 28 introduced by the Government does not go far enough. On the one hand, Sir, we will be debating later on on the Citizenship (Amendment) Bill. In that Bill we are going to be asked to approve steps to make it more difficult for people to become citizens of Singapore. Citizenship, Sir, is and must be the very treasure of a man living in Singapore. It should open to him, and it has opened to him, many gates of opportunities in Singapore. If it is really the desire of the Government to make it more difficult for people to become citizens of Singapore, surely, the same must be made in this instance, that in so far as the control of the trade unions is concerned, it should be left in the hands of people who are citizens of Singapore. The fact that the Government has, by this Bill, made it possible for people born in the Federation to become officers of a trade union -

Order. I was just wondering whether it would not be more convenient if those remarks could be made in the Committee stage where there is, in fact, a proposed amendment dealing with the matter being raised now. The Member for Cairnhill, of course, is perfectly entitled to carry on if he wishes to in that strain. But I thought it would be much more convenient if he would discuss the point in Committee, where there is opportunity to speak more than once; otherwise, there might be considerable repetition.

I agree with you, Sir. But I have brought it up because in the Second Reading of the Bill, the Minister touched on this point. I will, however, bring up this particular subject when the clause is being discussed in Committee. But one has the feeling, Sir, that in trying to throw the officership of trade unions open to people born in the Federation, it is just to make this law suit the needs of the P.A.P. Surely, Sir, in legislating, the Government should always pay attention to the needs of the country rather than the needs of the Party in power. But one comes to the conclusion that, because of this particular clause and of another clause, clause 30, against which I will speak, all these things are done to suit the P.A.P. Sir, one cannot divorce one's mind from the fact that before the Second Reading of this Bill, all steps have already been taken by P.A.P. trade union leaders to control the Trades Union Congress. If one were to believe what one read in the newspapers, then one would come to the conclusion that there was great rejoicing in the minds of the Front Benchers of the Government when they were addressing a mass rally on May Day. It was the Minister for Labour and Law who said, "From now on, no trade union can exist, unless and until it is affiliated to the T.U.C." Sir, I have no objection to insisting or requiring that a registered trade union should be affiliated to the T.U.C. That is taking the right step to encourage a healthy trade union movement and to unify the movement. But to say that unless and until a trade union is affiliated to the T.U.C. it cannot be registered is just to say that the Government is prepared to allow the administration of this important part of the law to be given to the T.U.C. It will no longer be possible for the Registrar of Trade Unions to say, "We register you", or "We cannot register you." It will just be left to the T.U.C. to say that. The hands of the Registrar of Trade Unions will be tied. Of course, I am sure the Government now feels that, because the T.U.C. is in the control of its Party members, it will not be difficult to use that as an extra arm to choke any opposition from trade unions, which do not desire to be affiliated to the T.U.C. for obvious reasons. Sir, Members will remember that not very long after the P.A.P. came into power, the Minister for Labour and Law said, "We will do everything we can to encourage the growth of national unions." That was said about some 8 or 9 months ago, and from what I can see, the encouragement of the growth of national unions since then has been a failure. There have been so few national unions formed. In fact, there has been an attempt on the part of the P.A.P. to start an amalgamated union of public employees. That is to say, a national union for all public employees. I do not think that union has made any headway, because many trade unions do not and cannot have confidence in that amalgamated union of public employees in so far as it is run and controlled by the Party in power. There is a clause, Sir, in this particular Bill which says that it shall be an offence on the part of an employer to encourage the establishment of any trade union and to encourage any trade union leader to do things which are inimical to the trade union movement. And yet here we have the Government as an employer organising a trade union to encourage its civil servants to join their trade union. Sir, the Member for Thomson has tacitly admitted, thereby insisting, that unions should affiliate to the T.U.C. "It is not democratic. But what is democracy after all? Let us see if it is desirable." And he left it at that. He should have continued and said, "It is desirable in the interest of the P.A.P. that trade unions should be forced to join the T.U.C. which is, after all, as it is today, an organisation or another arm of the P.A.P. 5.46 p.m.

(In Malay): Mr Speaker, Sir, in the last five years in Singapore, we have witnessed several trade disputes and incidents affecting the labour movement. What were the reasons? The past Government encouraged the formation of trade unions in factories to such an extent that there existed two or three trade unions in each factory. The purpose of these unions was to cause conflict among them and the workers themselves. That is how yellow unions came to be formed. Mr Speaker, Sir, the Member for Cairnhill said that the T.U.C. was nothing but an organisation merely to hoodwink the people in order to obtain publicity. But we have seen how the previous Government made use of its henchmen to help the employers to oppose genuine trade unions, which were fighting for the rights of the workers. Mr Speaker, Sir, the Bill that is before us today is a Bill, which is designed to protect the workers and the trade union movement in Singapore. With the passing of this Bill, I am confident that the safety of the people and of the trade union movement in Singapore will be ensured, although the Opposition still feel uneasy. However, the Government is determined to show, by deeds, its sincerity to the people and to the Opposition. We are not afraid of accusations levelled against us if we are confident that what we are doing is good for the people. The Government will continue to do its good work in order to gain the confidence of the people. 5.51 p.m.

(In Malay): Mr Speaker, Sir, I wish to speak on the Trade Unions Bill before us this afternoon, although there may be allegations made against me that I have no right to speak on trade unionism on the grounds that I am not a trade union leader. I am not particularly concerned with the rights of the trade union movement or with matters concerning trade unionism in Singapore, but I wish to speak in the interest of the people of Singapore. As the object of this Bill is to consolidate the trade union movement and to protect and safeguard the interest of the workers, nobody can deny that the trade union movement in Singapore: should be unified in the interest of the workers. However, there has been marked dissatisfaction expressed by certain sections of the trade union movement with the attitude of certain trade union leaders whose tactics appear to indicate that they will make use of the power at their disposal to coerce every trade union to join their trade union. Mr Speaker, Sir, if this kind of attitude is adopted by the trade union leaders who are in power today, we cannot blame some of the workers who are reluctant to take part in this unified trade union movement. For example, Mr Speaker, Sir, I wish to draw the attention of this House to the Sunday Mail of 1st May: (In English): "One of the leaders, Inche Buang bin Omar Junid, P.A.P. Assemblyman who is Secretary-General of the T.U.C. (Accounts), said that there were some workers who preferred to go home and sleep after their day's work; others who preferred to help their employers. `To these people I say it is better that you join a union because if you don't, we will fight you and wipe you out.'" (In Malay): Mr Speaker, Sir, it should not be taken for granted that speeches of this nature will frighten those who refuse to be coerced. As people, they have the right to choose to speak and to engage in any way of life that is lawful. They will not be frightened in the least, because, if compulsion is used to match strength with strength, then those who have faith in godliness will be prepared to fight any form of compulsion. Mr Speaker, Sir, one of the provisions in the Bill compels trade unions to be affiliated to the T.U.C. and many trade unions have expressed their dissatisfaction with the state of affairs prevailing in the T.U.C. But, unfortunately, these trade unions cannot voice their grievances for the reason that it seems that in the State of Singapore there are many forms of control and there is coercion - not only in the field of trade unionism but also (we have seen the action of the Government) in the field of education, and so on. But we, on the Opposition, have faith in democracy. The present Government is a majority Government elected by the people. If the people are not happy with the present Government, I think this is not the place to oppose it. If the Government think it fit to consider and weigh our views and amend their ways, they can withdraw so that Singapore can be built up by people who owe complete allegiance to the State. There is another matter, Mr Speaker, Sir, to which I would like to draw attention. We still remember the tactics employed by trade union leaders five years ago in an attempt to bring the workers into their orbit. In the presence of the masses, they are prepared to talk about making sacrifices, to thump the table, toss their caps in the air, and make fiery speeches. If he is a Sikh, for instance, he is prepared to shave his beard in the presence of the masses as though to indicate that he is a genuine trade union leader. But as stated by the Member for Cairnhill, where are they heading for? Are they sincerely leading the workers of Singapore to prosperity? This is the question, and this has been the cause of concern among the masses. 6.01 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, when the first Trade Unions Ordinance, indeed the present Trade Unions Ordinance, was introduced in this country in 1941, it was introduced by a Colonial Government. The purpose and the desire of that Government was to create only an impression that trade unionism was allowed in the Colony, that they could go to the international forums, like the International Labour Organisation, and say, "Yes, we have introduced trade unionism." But a colonial Government, as everyone knows, is nothing but an agent or an administrative machinery for the capitalists who exploited our country. It was clearly and cleverly designed that the Trade Unions Ordinance would never be given the opportunity for a strong, effective, organised and disciplined movement to be created, but that at all time we would have a trade union movement that was splintered, weak and ineffective. That was the position, one might say, until September 1959. When the Trade Unions Ordinance was introduced, which made it possible for any seven persons to form a union, then right from the word go there was no possibility of creating a good and strong union. If any person was disaffected with democratic decisions arrived at by a union, all he had to do was to gather another six friends of his and form a union. When that was done, the employers were not very slow at seizing the opportunity before them. Thus we found racketeers, opportunists, political adventurers - everyone joining in the game and forming unions. Employers, too, found it more profitable to have unions led by their own agents and to make side deals with them than to negotiate with the genuine unions and reach agreement. Mr Speaker, Sir, the root of the riots which took place not long ago was inter union rivalry. There was a company union - a yellow union - a union deliberately created by the employers for the purpose of destroying a good, genuine union, which had the majority support of all the workers in that industry. In that set-up, Sir, it was natural that Government had no intention whatsoever of creating a trade union centre or a Trades Union Congress as we find it in other countries. Indeed, in Singapore for a long time, before the Trades Union Congress was registered under the Trade Union Ordinance, there was discussion between the Government and the trade unions whether the T.U.C. should be registered under the Societies Ordinance or under the Trade Unions Ordinance. Finally, when it was decided to register it under the Trade Unions Ordinance, it was nothing more than another union. It did not have more powers than any other union in Singapore. Among the 225 unions in Singapore, the T.U.C. was just another union. Not only did the Ordinance make and keep the T.U.C. so, but also the officials of the Ministry of Labour, and even the political chiefs, kept the T.U.C. in that manner. I remember, Sir, the T.U.C. representatives being invited to discuss certain labour problems. At the same meeting one would find representatives of some unions which never had a membership of more than 200. How then could the T.U.C. claim to be speaking for all labour, and how could the unions want to affiliate with the T.U.C. when they knew that they themselves could represent all labour, depending on who was the political chief of the Government? Sir, previously we had trade union advisers who were sent to our country to advise trade unions on how to organise trade unions and how to set up rules. But no one needs trade union advisers from another country to come here and advise us on how unions should be set up. There are men in Singapore capable of organising and managing unions. But what was the role of those trade union advisers? Their role was nothing but to kill militancy and to destroy any coordinated action among the unions. Sir, the Member for Cairnhill touched on the subject of the T.U.C. and said that the trade unions should affiliate with it. Yet in the same breath he said that affiliation to the T.U.C. should not be made compulsory. As long as it is possible for unions to remain in Singapore, get all the benefits that the T.U.C. can provide, and yet not bear the responsibility for that work, then there will be unions who will not affiliate not because the members want it so, but because the leaders want it so. The Member for Cairnhill also touched upon unions being created by Government the T.U.C. being led by the Party men. As usual, Sir, he has been trying his best not so much to put facts before this House, as to put out the party propaganda line. In September 1959 there were 225 unions. Of this number, over 60 unions were splinter or yellow unions. Now, if these unions had been allowed to exist, we would have found ourselves no doubt in the same position as the people found themselves in 1956 and 1957. So rightly this Government had the Ordinance passed whereby splinter and yellow unions can be de-registered. That is one aspect of the job of creating a unified movement. In this Bill, it has been provided that the number of persons who can form a union has been increased from 7 to 250. This has been deliberately done in order to ensure that unless and until 250 workmen in a particular category or occupation are desirous of forming a union, then no union should be registered. It also affords the possibility, at the time of re-registration, for so many other unions whose membership is now below 250 to be cancelled. In this way, it will be possible to create national unions, unions which do not poach on each other's territory, unions which will have a specified industry or organisation or craft from which they can recruit members. The trade union movement has been classified into 19 industrial groups, and the unions which are on the register will be placed according to the membership in each one of these groups. But the rules for federation and amalgamation have been simplified particularly the rules for amalgamation, thus showing a preference for amalgamation of unions within each category. Clause 11 specifically makes it difficult for the re-registration of smaller unions, and prevents the creation of splinter and yellow unions. Together with clause 7, and the amalgamation clauses, it will be possible to effect amalgamation within the several unions in each category. And we hope that in the not too distant future we will have only 19 unions representing all the workers in Singapore. This, I am sure, will make it possible for the prevention of rivalry between unions. Sir, many unions made representations to the Rendel Constitution Commission on the position of trade unions in our country, and the question of permitting trade unions to set up political funds. I was a member of the delegation, together with the present Minister for Labour and Law and the present Minister for Finance, which presented a case for a trade union political fund. Though we tried to show that trade unions all over the world had the right to set up political funds and use such funds in the interest of the workers in promoting legislation, and publishing literature of a political nature, we were not successful with our case. We are, therefore, happy to note that this Government has now made it possible to set up political funds. When all this is done, when all these splinter and yellow unions have been taken off the register, there will still be some unions whose constitution is so cunningly devised that the rank and file can at no time, even if they dislike and disapprove of the leadership, remove their leadership. It is, I think, the most important thing in a trade union that the rank and file members should at all times have the right and the means to change the leadership whenever that leadership is not working in the interest of the members. But there are unions in Singapore whose constitution does not provide such means. Therefore, in this Bill when mention is made of the growth of a democratic trade union movement, it simply means that the workers - the rank and file members - should have adequate representation at all levels. Unfortunately, Sir, the unions which have the type of constitution which I have mentioned are led by aliens, by men who are not citizens of this country and who do not owe loyalty to this country; but the members of these unions are predominantly citizens of our country. We must make sure that the trade union movement at all times is in the hands of our people, that it is led by the people of this country. Only then can we have a trade union movement that is conscious of the interests of the people of this country. Sir, the Member for Cairnhill said that the Government created a national union for Government workers and he mentioned specifically the Amalgamated Union of Public Employees. I want to make it clear, Sir, that Government did not create this Union. This Union was created by the amalgamation at the first stage of two unions and at a subsequent stage 10 other unions amalgamated and created the A.U.P.E. There were 39 unions serving Government and City Council workers in September 1959. Today, Sir, there are only 25 unions on the register, together with the Amalgamated Union of Public Employees, which goes to show that a large number of unions have amalgamated one way or another to create the Amalgamated Union of Public Employees. Today, the membership of this Union is over 8,000. The total membership of those unions which have not amalgamated does not reach 8,000. How can the Member for Cairnhill say that A.U.P.E. has failed? That this Union, supposedly created, as he has claimed, by Government, has failed when it has a total membership exceeding the total membership of the other unions? I would also like to say something more in connection with the Amalgamated Union of Public Employees. This Union has claimed recognition on behalf of three groups of workers in Government and the City Council, and it is the Government with whom we are negotiating for recognition. We have not yet succeeded in getting that recognition. If this Union was created by Government, then it would be the easiest thing for Government to grant recognition to all grades of Government and City Council workers. The Member for Cairnhill and the Member for the Southern Islands touched upon May Day. I can understand the feelings of the Member for Cairnhill, Sir. May Day 1960 will stay in the memory of all workers - maybe it will stay in the memory of Members of the Opposition too - because never in the history of our country did so many workers, as one newspaper put it, over 50,000 workers, attended a May Day rally. This rally was organised after the T.U.C. Constitution was adopted at the delegates' conference and after the officials of the T.U.C. were elected - not before, Sir. If I had known and I am sure if the officials of the T.U.C. had known, that Members of the Opposition were so much interested in May Day rallies, then we would have made it possible for them to attend and thereby experience the spirit, the sense of loyalty, the sense of unity that was displayed at the rally. We might think about it in any case for the next rally. Sir, over 50,000 workers have endorsed the T.U.C. Constitution and have given support to the new officials. It happens that some of the officials are members of the People's Action Party. If the Singapore People's Alliance had trade unionists who were honest, dedicated and hard-working I am sure that today in the T.U.C. we might have found some of them. But, unfortunately, they did not produce any man of that calibre. If it is the P.A.P. which has the trade union leaders, and if it is the P.A.P. trade unionists who have the overwhelming support of the workers, it is not the fault of this Government at all. Leaders are elected as to how the workers want it. Sir, the Member for the Southern Islands touched upon compulsory membership of unions. I would like to state here that we must correct the old state of affairs where 100 workers became members of a union and 300 workers remained outside and yet at the same time enjoyed the benefits of what the 100 workers had fought for and never had to shoulder their responsibility. The trade unions must correct that state of affairs. But membership of trade unions will not be compulsory. But I am sure the trade unions will make use of the Industrial Relations Ordinance whereby awards by the Industrial Arbitration Court will be made only to members of the unions. I am sure that if negotiations are concluded along those lines, then workers who are now not member of trade unions and who see the benefits which will accrue to them if they become members of trade unions will no doubt join the trade unions. But it will be wrong to say that anyone in the trade union movement will compel a member or worker to become a member of the trade union. Sir, the Industrial Relations Ordinance has imposed certain responsibilities on the trade union movement. It takes the trade union movement and employer away from the situation which prevailed many years ago and brings them to the point where collective bargaining, negotation, conciliation, or arbitration, should be the mode of the day. If the unions' aspirations are to be met successfully, then the unions must be in a position to be able to present facts and figures to the Industrial Arbitration Court and, on the basis of sound reasoning, to get fair awards. In order to do this, it will not be possible for any single union to organise, for instance, research facilities in Singapore to organise workers' education in order to educate the workers, to understand the arbitration machinery, to understand the conciliation machinery, or to understand collective bargaining. This, therefore, will have to be the responsibility of a Trades Union Congress. If the Trades Union Congress is weak, if it is just one out of many unions, if it has only about 30 unions out of 100 unions, then it will not have the means to provide such facilities, nor will it be able to present, on behalf of labour, any cohesive policy at all. But industrial peace with justice, if it is to have meaning and hopes of realisation, it is necessary that there should be a certain amount of discipline within the movement. The discipline should be a discipline within the movement. The discipline should not be a discipline that is imposed but it should be a discipline that is created within the movement and accepted by all unions and workers alike. This is very important if industrial stability is to be maintained. We hope, Sir, that the new T.U.C., with its new constitution and with this Bill that makes it possible for all unions to affiliate with the T.U.C., will have the resources and the organisation not only to perform the services so essential but also to maintain discipline that is so essential for our country and the economy of this country. Sir, I support the Bill. 6.29 p.m.

Mr Speaker. Sir, I would have thought that this Bill was to bring about unity among the trade unions. We also consider this a very desirable objective. But, Sir, there are two other questions which worry the minds of other unions in Singapore. One is this, Sir. In which direction is this united organisation going? For which destination is it heading? Sir, naturally, it is more economical to use one bus instead of 20 buses. But, if one bus is going to Pasir Panjang and another bus goes to Katong and the passengers are not given the right to choose the bus and they are all asked to get into the bus for Pasir Panjang -

Helicopter!

- the Minister for Labour and Law may not like it, because he wants to go somewhere else in another direction. So there are workers who begin to wonder after the May Day rally speeches whether they are going to be compelled to join a union which they do not like, because the union is heading in the wrong direction. Under this Bill, will they be compelled willy-nilly to hop into the bus that takes them to the wrong destination, at least in their eyes? I believe, Sir, in a democratic country we should try to persuade and encourage people to unite, but we should never force them to unite. If, by chance, because of disagreement as to the destination workers in the same occupation want to go into two different buses, I think it is only proper that they should be allowed to go into two different buses until they decide on going in the same direction or towards the same destination. But to compel all workers to go into the same bus heading for the same direction or destination, just because one old lord says it must be done, is not democratic. Supposing some workers feel that they do not want to become trade union members at this particular juncture, will they be penalised? In the May Day rally, speeches were made indicating that every worker must be unionised; otherwise, he might be wiped out. In regard to a particular union, the second question arises. Will this union be compelled to join one particular association of trade unions? Sir, under clause 59 of this Bill, I see it is quite possible for the Government to approve more than one association of trade unions. But in practice, will the Minister give an assurance that it will be done, or is it the intention to give a monopoly to one particular association of trade unions? What happened a few weeks ago, Sir, the creation of the ten tall men in trade union circles has caused some misgivings, because if it is the intention to be democratic, then surely before the ten tall men are elected or appointed, others should be given a chance to come in. Then they can elect the ten tall men. But now the ten tall men have been elected for five years. If there is going to be one association of trade unions, with all the top men already appointed, what inducement is there for others who are not already in the bus to come in?

They missed it!

Sir, several trade unions have sent in representations complaining that although they have got a membership of more than 250 (one has got a membership of over 1,500), their registration has been cancelled or has not yet been approved. Sir, I would like to ask the Minister for Labour and Law - I hope he will forgive me for asking questions like a student - whether the principles of this Bill contravene certain human rights listed in the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights. If these are the fundamental human rights, I am sure this Government, which is now self-governing, should respect these rights. Under Article 20 (1), "every one has the right of freedom, of peaceful assembly and association." I take it that one has got the right to join any union that he likes. "(2) No one may be compelled to belong to an association." And Article 23 (4) says, "Every one has the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests." If he feels that his interests are not being protected by a particular trade union and he wants to join another trade union or another association of trade unions, does this Bill say that he cannot do that?

Mr Byrne, in reply? 6.36 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I am of the opinion that very little that was said by the Opposition side really requires any answer at all. Mr Speaker, Sir, the Member for Cairnhill has quite a long record of activity in trade unionism. He has claimed to have made a study of this Bill. He has told this House, Mr Speaker, Sir, that this Bill is founded on the present Trade Unions Ordinance as well as the Trade Unions Ordinance, 1959, of the Federation of Malaya. He has indicated to this House that this Bill departs only in two ways from the present law and from the law of the Federation. Mr Speaker, Sir, it is not my function to educate him in trade union matters. But I would draw his attention to the Comparative Table which has been published together with this Bill. He will find there that this Bill departs in 17 ways from the present Trade Unions Ordinance and from the Trade Unions Ordinance, 1959, of the Federation of Malaya. Mr Speaker, Sir, he has stated that the membership of the executive and the officers of trade unions should be restricted to Singapore citizens. Now, Mr Speaker, Sir, he -

Order. Could I suggest to the Minister that that point could be dealt with in Committee, as there is a definite amendment on that?

Mr Speaker, Sir, I will deal with this point in Committee. The Member for Cairnhill has also dealt with clause 59 of the Bill, and that matter could also be dealt with in Committee. On the general principles of the Bill, Mr Speaker, Sir, I think the Member for Kampong Kapor has dealt with them most ably, and I do not propose in any way to add to what he has said.

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 Byrne]. Bill considered in Committee.

6.40 p.m. Clause 1 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 2-

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, In page 2, line 40, to leave out "industry or calling" and insert "occupation or industry". Mr Speaker, Sir, this amendment is necessary to reproduce the same sequence of words as occurs in clause 11 (1) (b) and clause 14 (b) (vii) and elsewhere in this Bill. Amendment agreed to.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, In page 3, line 23, after "trade", to insert ", occupation". This is a similar amendment, Mr Speaker, Sir. Amendment agreed to.

There is a note about the resetting of the type*. That will be done. * The note reads as follows: In page 3, lines 22 to 28, to reset as follows:- "(d) the promotion or organisation or financing of strikes or lock-outs in any trade or industry or the provision of pay or other benefits for its members during a strike or lock-out, and includes any staff committee appointed to deal with the employees and employers;". Clause 2, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clauses 3 to 9 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 10-

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, In page 5, to leave out lines 36 and 37 and insert "of all members of the executive and officers of the trade union and of each branch of the trade union and of every member of a committee provision for which is made in the rules of the trade union." Mr Speaker, Sir, the purpose of this amendment is to require the union, when it applies for registration, to furnish details of the titles, names, ages, addresses and occupations of the executive as well as of the officers of the trade union and of the branch and of every member of the committee, provision for which is made in the rules of the trade union. Amendment agreed to. Clause 10, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. 6.45 p.m. Clause 11- Question proposed, "That clause it stand part of the Bill."

Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to touch on paragraph (c) of sub-clause (1) of this particular clause. Sir, under this clause, before a trade union can be registered, it must comply with certain facts in order to satisfy the Registrar. Paragraph (c) says that a trade union must, first of all, be affiliated with the T.U.C. I said during the debate on the Second Reading of this Bill that while it is a good thing that trade unions should be asked -

Order. I do not think the clause itself specifically says that a trade union must be affiliated with the T.U.C. Paragraph (c) reads: "...is affiliated to an association of trade unions exempted by the Minister...".

Yes, Sir, but it has been pointed out by the Minister in his speech as to what it means. If we leave it at "... an association of trade unions exempted by the Minister ...", it means that a trade union must seek affiliation with the T.U.C. even before it is registered. It has to become an affiliate of the T.U.C. before qualifying for registration. I think it should not be so. If it is the genuine desire of the Government to promote a unified and a united trade union movement, so long as a trade union qualifies to be registered under the various paragraphs of sub-clause (1) and that union must seek affiliation with an association of trade unions exempted by the Minister, then it should be incumbent upon that association of trade unions to approve the application for registration of that trade union. That should be the right way to go about it. Otherwise, it would mean that the administration of the Department of the Registrar of Trade Unions is dependent upon the whims and fancies of the leaders of the association of trade unions exempted by the Minister. I would urge upon the Minister that it would be more desirable and less reprehensible if it is laid down that so long as a trade union qualifies to be registered by the Registrar under the provisions of all the other paragraphs of sub-clause (1), the first step to be taken by that union on registration is to seek affiliation with the T.U.C. and then the; association of trade unions exempted by the Minister must approve the affiliation. Otherwise, the work of registering that union is just left in the hands of the association of trade unions exempted by the Minister.

Mr Speaker, Sir, we have had considerable experience of what went on before and we are determined to see that that situation is not reproduced in the future. We say right here and now regarding the proposal in the Bill that a trade union will first have to be affiliated to the association of trade unions exempted under the provisions of clause 59 before it ever appears on the register, that this what we want. We cannot accept the position that a union should be registered first if it qualifies for registration and then it is to seek affiliation. That accounted for all the industrial unrest we have had in the past. If the unions could do this sort of thing, we would get the position developing again where the association of trade unions would just become one out of 225 unions. We will never allow that situation to develop again.

Sir, I am afraid the Minister missed my point. Even before a trade union could be considered for registration by the Registrar of Trade Unions, it would have to get the blessing of the T.U.C.

Correct.

Even if the association of trade unions exempted by the Minister were to feel that the trade union seeking registration does not contravene the other paragraphs of sub- clause (1), yet it could still say `No', because it happens that the person or persons who are organising that trade union do not happen to share the same political beliefs as the leaders of the present association of trade unions that will be exempted by the Minister. It is more proper that the Government should do its job. It should register a trade union if it feels that it is the right thing to do and not place all sorts of obstacles before its registration is approved. And once registration is approved, it should be incumbent upon this registered trade union and upon the association of trade unions exempted by the Minister that they should be together, instead of leaving the whole administration of the registration of a new trade union in the hands of the association of trade unions; exempted by the Minister, unless, of course, the Minister is now going to say that the association of trade unions to be exempted by the Minister is going to be an organisation of the Government.

Mr Speaker, Sir, all these specious reasons are well known to us. We are quite used to all these antics Mr Speaker, Sir, in clause 59 - we do not even mention the T.U.C. as you have pointed out - we only state that associations of trade unions can apply for exemption from any or all of the provisions of this Bill. We leave the trade union movement absolutely free, as a whole, to form their own association, and when they have done so, they apply for exemption under clause 59. Their rules are looked into by the Minister, and if he has no objection to these rules, then they are exempted from registration. Once this body is exempted from registration, it cannot change its rules without the approval of the Minister. That is the situation we want. We have set up the various categories of unions. We have left the unions completely free. Those who want to form federations within these categories could do so if they please. We say, Mr Speaker, Sir, that if we fall into the trap of agreeing to what the Member for Cairnhill is now trying to suggest to this House, we will be in exactly the same position as we were, and that is what we will never agree to.

Sir, I really fail to understand what the Minister is trying to say. He says in this House that he has made no mention of the T.U.C. whatsoever and that any association of trade unions can apply for exemption from registration under clause 59. But, Sir, it was only on May Day that the Minister said, "In due course, every trade union must be affiliated to the T.U.C." Come, come! I hope the Minister is not going to treat us like children to the extent that we do not know what the Minister has said outside and inside this Assembly. He should be bold enough to say, "This is the T.U.C. that I want. This is the organisation that I want to make use of, because it is at present under the control of members of my Party." Why not come out boldly and say it blatantly? Do not treat us like children. How can it ever be possible to say that if we were to take out paragraph (c) we would be coming back to the same position as before? If a trade union complies with all the provisions set out in paragraphs (a) to (f), it com- plies with all that the Government requires. Where then is the trap? We take exception only when it is said, "It must be affiliated with the association of trade unions exempted by the Minister first." I suggest, Sir, that when a trade union is registered, then that is the time to seek affiliation, and that even when it seeks affiliation the T.U.C. must, under its rules to be approved by the Minister, allow for its application for affiliation. It has already happened, Sir. A registered trade union applied for affiliation to the T.U.C. one month ago and no approval has so far been given. Is the running of the Department of the Registrar of Trade Union to be left in the hands of the T.U.C., or is the Government now going to say that the T.U.C. is a branch of the Government?

Mr Speaker, Sir, nobody has ever said that the T.U.C. is a branch or an arm of the Government. All this is complete nonsense. Mr Speaker, Sir, we are realists. We know what went on before and we are determined to see that the people who played this dirty game will never be allowed to play it again. We are determined that before any trade union is registered in our Ministry it has a clean name, and it can get that clean name only when it is affiliated to an association of trade unions that is exempted from the provisions of this Bill. Otherwise, what will happen is this. These unions will be on the register and they will seek affiliation. And if they cannot get affiliation, they will carry on. You will then get a split leadership in the trade union movement. That is the sort of thing the Member for Cairnhill delights in.

Surely, Sir, the Minister is capable enough to put on the certificate of registration a condition that the trade union must seek affiliation to the association of trade unions to be exempted by the Minister within a period of three months. Or, shall we say, an approval could just be given in writing to that effect and when the affiliation actually takes place, then the certificate of registration may be issued. Can it not be done in that way?

Mr Speaker, Sir, we have taken a lot of pains to cleanse the trade union movement and we do not want .a situation to arise where it can get dirty again. We say that a trade union will first have to seek affiliation to the association of trade unions that is exempted under the provisions of this Bill, and that only after it seeks and gets the affiliation will it then come on to our register.

Question put, and agreed to. Clause 11 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clauses 12 and 13 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 14-

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, In page 8, line 13, to leave out "levy or collect" and insert "provide for the levying or collection of". Mr Speaker, Sir, as the words stand in the clause, the provisions are unduly restrictive, because the leadership of a trade union may get into trouble for neglecting to levy or collect subscriptions. Whenever any subscription is in arrears, they would be offending against that provision. For that reason, Mr Speaker, Sir, we have got to make this amendment. Amendment agreed to. 7.00 p.m. Question proposed, "That clause 14, as amended, stand part of the Bill."

Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise to draw the attention of the Minister to sub- paragraph (ix) of paragraph (b) of this clause, at page 8 of the Bill. This sub-paragraph means, Sir, that if any trade union, which is already affiliated to an association of trade unions exempted by the Minister, is suspended or kicked out by this association, then ipso facto it shall lose its registration. I would not like to go all ever the ground again, but as I have said just now, I would urge upon the Minister to see to it that the rules of the association of trade unions that is to be exempted by him should be quite stringent in so far as the expulsion of an affiliated member is concerned. It should not be so easy and free for this association to say, "I do not happen to like your face; I do not happen to like the way you do things. It is not a question of principles, it is a question of personal dislikes. Out you go, and you are no longer a registered trade union." I am sure the Minister would like to give his assurance that in going through the rules of this association before he exempts it, he will see to it that the rules are stringent enough in so far as the expulsion of the affiliated members is concerned.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I think the Opposition must give us a certain amount of credit for being responsible people. Sir, this is a discretion that will be judiciously exercised.

Question put, and agreed to Clause 14, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 15 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 16-

There is an alteration to the marginal note*. That will be done. * In page 9, marginal note, to leave out "period of notice of intended cancellation or determination of appeal" and insert "specified period". Clause 16 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clauses 17 to 24 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 25- Question proposed. "That cause 25 stand part of the Bill."

Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to seek clarification from the Minister as to what the proviso at page 12 of the Bill means. It is clearly stated, Sir, at the beginning of the clause at page 11, that only a person under the age of 21 years but above the age of 16 years can become a member of a trade union. And yet the proviso says, "unless provision be made in the rules thereof to the contrary". Does it mean that in some unions membership may be open to people under 16 years?

Sir, this provision has been taken from the Federation Trade Unions Ordinance.

The rules made by the Minister under this Bill or the rules of the trade union itself?

The rules made by the trade union.

Question put, and agreed to. Clause 25 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clauses 26 and 27 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 28-

Before I call upon the Minister, there appears to be a typographical omission in line 3 of the amendment. The expression "local office" should really read "subsidiary local office". In clause 2, we find "the subsidiary local office" and not "the local office". I trust hon. Members have made that alteration now. Having done that, hon. Members will also have noticed that the Member for Cairnhill has given notice of two amendments. I understand that the purport of those two amendments could be contained in an amendment, which he proposes to move to the Minister's amendment. I trust that is correct.

Yes, Sir.

I will now call upon the Minister to move his amendment. Mr Byrne.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, In page 12, line 41, to leave out from "(1)" to the end of line 18 in page 13 and insert - Sir, should I read the amendment*? * The amendment reads as follows:- In page 12, line 41, to leave out from "(1) " to the end of line 18 in page 13 and insert- "A person shall not act as an officer of a trade union or any branch thereof or of any federation of trade unions or as the person in charge of a subsidiary local office unless he is either a citizen of Singapore or a person born in the Federation of Malaya. (2) A person shall not act as a member of the executive or as an officer of a trade union or any branch thereof or of any federation of trade unions or as the person in charge of a subsidiary local office if -

Is the Minister satisfied that the Order Paper correctly sets out his amendment?

That is so, Sir.

The Minister need not read it then.

The purpose of this amendment, Mr Speaker, Sir, is to make the disqualifications that are applicable to an officer of a trade union also applicable to the members of the executive. Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out, be left out."

Mr Speaker, Sir, I am not objecting to the Question to leave out the words proposed to be left out. But I will move my amendment when the Question is proposed to insert the words proposed to be inserted.

Question, "That the words proposed to be left out," put, and agreed to. Question proposed, "That the words proposed to be inserted, be there inserted."

Mr Speaker, Sir, I have given notice of an amendment to the original clause, but in the light of the amendment now proposed by the Minister, I beg leave to move a separate amendment. Amendment handed in.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move an amendment to the amendment proposed by the Minister. The amendment proposed by the Minister does not go far enough to the point where I had originally tabled my amendment. I feel that not only the officers of a trade union but also the members of the executive should be limited to citizens of Singapore only. The amendment of the Minister says that any person, before he can be an officer of a trade union, must either be a citizen of Singapore or a person born in the Federation of Malaya. I have said just now that if it is really the intention of Government to see that only citizens of Singapore are given every opportunity to help in the welfare of this country, surely it is important that in the trade union movement officials and members of a trade union should be citizens of Singapore. Later on at this sitting, or maybe at the next sitting, we will be debating the Singapore Citizenship (Amendment) Bill whereby the Government is proposing to make it more difficult for a person to become a citizen of this State. Therefore, I say to the Government: if we really want to see to it that we give a meaning to Singapore citizenship, let us confine the members and officers of the executive of a trade union to citizens of Singapore only.

Will the hon. Member please move formally?

Sir, I beg to move, To leave out lines 1 to 7 inclusive and there to insert- "A person shall not act as an officer or a member of the executive of a trade union or any branch thereof or of any federation of trade unions or as a person in charge of a subsidiary local office if -

Mr Speaker, Sir, we have always been accused of being undemocratic in all the things we do. The Member for Tanglin has said just now that there are some workers who want to go about their business in 20 different buses and that we want to put everybody into one bus. The Member for Cairnhill has said that we are trying to turn the T.U.C. into another arm of the P.A.P. Mr Speaker, Sir, in the case here, we have shown that we are liberal-minded, but nevertheless, we are still accused. Mr Speaker, Sir, we have repeatedly shown in this House that we are realists. We look at the situation as we know it today. Who are in the trade union movement? There are people who are aliens. As my friend and colleague, the Member for Kampong Kapor, has said, there are many people who are aliens in the trade union movement. They may be aliens - some of them do not owe any loyalty to the country - but they are nevertheless in the movement. Now we have been very rational in our approach to this problem. We make a distinction between the officers of the union and the executive committee. We say that it is very necessary that people with their roots in this country should qualify to become officers in any trade union. A person who is born in the Federation of Malaya may not be a citizen of Singapore, but nevertheless he has his roots firmly in this country. We say that he should qualify to be an officer in a trade union equally with the citizen of Singapore. We have given a definition to the term "officer". It means the main officials of any executive committee, such as the president or chairman, the vice-president or vice-chairman, the treasurer, the secretary, the assistant treasurer, the assistant secretary, the paid officials in those categories such as paid secretaries or assistant secretaries, paid treasurers or assistant treasurers. Those are the people who qualify to be officers. Now in the executive committee itself, there might be people who are aliens who are not citizens of Singapore. They could serve on the executive committee. We are not unreasonable and say, "Get out of it now. We want everybody who is a citizen to be on the executive committee of the union." That is being very unfair. We desire the same thing that the Member for Cairnhill desires. We want to arrive at a position where every member of the executive is a citizen of Singapore. But we approach the problem in a practical way. We do it step by step. When we want to do things step by step, we are accused of being undemocratic. The whole thing becomes complete nonsense when you argue on that basis.

Sir, when the new citizenship law came into force in 1957, 327,000 people became citizens of Singapore. People who are born in the Federation of Malaya could become citizens of Singapore with just a period of two years' residence here. People who are born outside Commonwealth countries will have to have a longer residential qualification. But most of them have already become citizens of Singapore. Those who have not become Singapore citizens are only a very few. They have not `become Singapore citizens because they do not wish to, or because they have not got their residential qualification to apply for citizenship. Surely, Sir, if we really want to give a meaning to Singapore citizenship, if we really want to see to it that the running of this country is left in the hands of people who are citizens of Singapore, then let us face facts. Let us say - it should be so - that before you can become an officer or a member of the executive of a trade union, you must be a citizen of Singapore. Sir, the fact that it is open to people who are born in the Federation who have not yet become citizens of Singapore would make one come to the conclusion that because some of the ten tall men in the T.U.C. are not yet citizens of Singapore, this provision in the Bill is therefore made just for them and for the Government of the day.

Mr Speaker, I have just heard a submission from an irresponsible person that Bills are drafted to fit in with the desires of a political party We are responsible people here. We are trying to do the right thing by the people of Singapore. And I have heard it said just now that what we are trying to do is being done with ulterior motives, Sir. We are not concerned here with ten tall men. We are concerned with the merits of this Bill, and the merits of what we are trying to do. I think it is quite unfair and improper for anybody without any evidence whatsoever to cast doubts on our motives.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the Minister has called me irresponsible and unfair and that I have no evidence. If the Minister would be good enough to say that the ten tall men are all citizens of Singapore, I stand corrected, and I will extend my sincerest apologies to him. Amendment to the amendment negatived.

We are back to the original amendment of the Minister.

Question, "That the words proposed, to be inserted, be there inserted," put, and agreed to. Original amendment accordingly, agreed to. Clause 28, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

There is an alteration in the marginal note*. That will be done. There is a consequential amendment to renumber sub-clause (2)+. That will be done. * In page 12, marginal note, to leave out "Officers." and insert "Executive and officers.". + In page 13, line 19, to leave out "(2)" and insert "(3)". Clause 29 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 30-

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, In page 14, line 13, at end, that a new paragraph (c) be added in the terms of the wording that appears in the Order Paper*. *The new paragraph (c) reads as follows: "(c) exempt any association or combination of employers applying to be registered as a trade union from the provisions of paragraph (b) of subsection (1) of section 11 of this Ordinance or any trade union of employers deemed to be registered under the provisions of subsection (1) of section 77 of this Ordinance from the provisions of subsection (2) thereof or any officer or member of the executive of any registered trade union of employers from the provisions of subsection (1) of section 28 of this Ordinance.".

Shall I speak on the new paragraph, Sir?

The new paragraph (c) is now before the House.

Sir, I find it difficult to understand this new paragraph. I understand certain parts of it, but I cannot understand some part of it. In this new paragraph, why should reference be made to paragraph (b) of subsection (1) of section 11? That particular paragraph refers to a trade union of employees. It has nothing to do with a trade union of employers at all. So why say that this trade union of employers should not be affected by a paragraph that refers to a trade union of employees? It is making confusion and I am confounded.

Perhaps the Member for Cairnhill should read paragraph (b).

Paragraph (b) of subsection (1)?

Yes. If the Member for Cairnhill will read clause 11(1) (b) right through, he will find that it also deals with an association or combination of employers.

This amendment, Sir, is proposed to make it easy for trade unions of employers, so that they will not have to go through the process of re-registering. It is difficult to insist that officers of a trade union of employers should be citizens of Singapore or persons born in the Federation. That I agree. I agree to this amendment, but I give notice that I will be speaking on the other two parts of this clause. Amendment agreed to. Question proposed, "That clause 30, as amended, stand part of the Bill."

Sir, I have given notice that I will speak against paragraphs (a) and (b) of clause 30. Clauses 28 and 29 lay down very clearly that a person should not be a member of a trade union if he is this, that and the other. And there is a proviso in clause 29 giving power to the Minister to allow a person to become an employee of a trade union. After having laid down in black and white certain conditions which must be observed before a person can become an officer of a trade union, or a member of the executive, or an employee of a trade union, why should the Minister now want power to say that, if it is found that there is a man who is good enough to be an officer of a trade union even though he may not be a citizen of Singapore, even though he may not be born in the Federation of Malaya, he can become an officer of a trade union. This takes it far afield. There is no restriction. It is left to the Minister to say "Yes, you can, because I think you are quite all right."

Mr Speaker, Sir, I have proved my point, but after a waste of a lot of time. The Opposition Member never took the trouble to read the Bill. If he had, he would have found that this clause has been taken from the Federation Ordinance. There are occasions, Mr Speaker, Sir, where the Minister can make an order granting exceptions from the provisions of clauses 28 and 29. Under the provisions of this clause, all that it seeks to do is this. 7.30 p.m. It is quite possible for instance for the case of an employee who has been convicted of a criminal offence to be considered by the Registrar. The Registrar might say that he should not be employed because of his previous bad record. He has power under the provisions of clause 29 to appeal to the Minister. But over-riding all that, Mr Speaker, Sir, is this power of exemption that is given in clause 30 to the Minister, and that is identical with the provisions of the Federation Ordinance, Sir.

Mr Speaker, Sir, when it suits the Minister he makes reference to the law of the Federation, but when it does not suit him, he does not do so. In the Federation, the restriction is to citizens of the Federation of Malaya. It is not as what we have in clause 28.

Question put, and agreed to. Clause 30, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 31-

Alteration to the marginal note* - that will be done. Mr Minister? * In page 14, marginal note, after "of", to insert "members of the executive and".

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, In page 14, line 16, after "the" where it secondly occurs, to insert "members of the executive and of the". May I take them all together, Mr Speaker, Sir, because they refer to the same matter?

Are they all connected?

Yes.

Perhaps we can take them en bloc, unless any Member wishes to suggest an amendment to any other line. Hon. Members indicated dissent.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the purpose of this amendment is to require notice of the members of the executive of a registered trade union to be placed on the notice boards of the offices of the union or its branches, and also to require the Registrar to be informed of the change of holders of the post of officers, members of the executive committee, and members of committees. Amendment agreed to. Further Amendments made: In page 14, line 19, after "the" where it first occurs, to insert "members of the executive and of the".-[Mr Byrne]. In page 14, line 21, after "be" to insert "a member of the executive or".- [Mr Byrne]. In page 14, line 23, after "or", to insert "a member of a committee provision for which is made in the rules of the trade union or when".-[Mr Byrne]. In page 14, line 26, to leave out "officer" and insert "member of the executive or officer or member of a committee".- [Mr Byrne]. In page 14, line 29, to leave out "officer" and insert "member of the executive or the officer or the member of the committee". -[Mr Byrne]. Clause 31, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clauses 32 to 38 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 39- Question proposed, "That clause 39 stand part of the Bill."

Sir, I seek clarification from the Minister. Two or three registered trade unions can amalgamate and become an amalgamated trade union, and these two or three trade unions can still function as autonomous trade unions. That is how I read it. The amalgamated union, formed by the amalgamation of these two or three undissolved trade unions, will have to seek registration as a trade union. That is in the last two sentences of sub-clause (4) of this clause. That is to say, before this amalgamated trade union can be registered, it has to affiliate to the association of trade unions to be exempted by the Minister. If such a state of affairs is to arise, does it not mean duplication? The member unions of this amalgamated union are already affiliates of the T.U.C., and because they are amalgamated, they are a second affiliate of the T.U.C. How much money have they to pay? How much voting are they allowed? Would it not mean that, for the purpose of registration, it is a trade union, and therefore as a trade union under clause 11, it has to be affiliated to the T.U.C.?

Mr Speaker, Sir, all this is being done deliberately to waste as much time as possible.

Order. I do not think the Minister should take that attitude. That is perhaps alleging an improper motive. Let us deal with this calmly and quietly.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the intention of this clause is quite clear. Any two or more registered trade unions can amalgamate as one trade union. The word is "one" trade union. When the trade unions decide to amalgamate, they will form one trade union, and the next move is to get affiliated -

No. It is not so.

- to the association that is exempted under the provisions of clause 59. Then they come on to the register. What is the difficulty?

I am afraid I do not understand, Sir. These two unions can amalgamate even without dissolution. Therefore, the two unions still exist.

Mr Speaker, Sir, there are provisions in this Bill dealing with amalgamation and there are provisions dealing with federation. In Part VIII of the Bill you will see how a federation is formed. In clause 39 you will see how an amalgamation is formed. When the trade unions amalgamate, Mr Speaker, Sir, they cease to be separate unions. They are separate components before they are amalgamated. But once they have amalgamated, they become one trade union. The position is quite unlike that of a federation. If the Member for Cairnhill will only take the trouble to look at paragraph 3 (o) of the Fifth Schedule in page 41, that clearly shows what a federation is. The components of a federation keep their separate identities.

Sir, if the Hon. Minister will take the trouble to look at line 8 on page 18, he will not have to make such a lengthy speech in reply to the simple question 1 asked. On this particular line it is said that two or more unions can amalgamate without dissolution. If the unions are not dissolved, therefore the unions are still there. Is that not so?

Mr Speaker, Sir, just now the Member for Cairnhill jumped to the conclusion that I was quite wrong when I referred to clause 11 (1) (b) and he said that it only refers to employees and there is no mention of employers in it. When he took a second look, he saw how right I was. Mr Speaker, Sir, here also he has jumped to the wrong conclusion. The words used here are that two or more unions can amalgamate and become one trade union with or without dissolution or division of the funds of such trade unions. That is very clear, Sir.

Mr Speaker, Sir, surely the two things are separate - with or without dissolution of the unions and the division of the funds of the unions. What the Minister is attempting to do is to read "dissolution or division of the funds" as one, which makes complete nonsense.

Mr Speaker, Sir, it is very clear. The words used are, "Any two or more registered trade unions within one of the categories . . . may become amalgamated as one trade union". If they are amalgamated as one trade union, they cannot keep their own identities. How can they keep their own identities? How do you get one trade union if there are in fact two? It is as simple as all that, Mr Speaker. "With or without dissolution or division" relates to the funds of the unions and not to the identities of the unions, Mr Speaker, Sir.

Sir, the only course I can suggest to the Minister, if he is going to dissolve the funds, is to put it in nitric acid or burn it up.

If that is what you want, you can have it.

Question put, and agreed to. Clause 39 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clauses 40 to 48 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 49-

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, In page 23, line 25, after "deposited,", to insert "to". This is to correct a grammatical mistake, Sir. Amendment agreed to. Clause 49, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 50-

There is a typographical emendation - in page 24, line 32, "trustee" to read "trustees". That will be done. Clause 50 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clauses 51 to 53 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 54-

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, In page 26, line 31, to leave out "the officers of the federation" and insert "all members of the executive and officers of the federation and of every member of a committee provision for which is made in the rules of the federation". Mr Speaker, Sir, this amendment is similar to the amendment that I have already moved to clause 10 (2) (d) on page 5, Sir. Amendment agreed to. Clause 54, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clauses 55 to 57 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 58-

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, In page 28, line 16, after "societies", to insert "or mutual benefit organisations". This amendment is necessary, Mr Speaker, Sir, because of the Mutual Benefit Organisations Bill, which will soon be enacted. Amendment agreed to. Clause 58, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 59- Question proposed, "That clause 59 stand part of the Bill."

Mr Speaker, Sir, I find that under this clause the Minister may exempt any association of trade unions from any or all of the provisions of the Bill, but I do not find there any power to withdraw the exemption. In other words, once you have exempted an association, the exemption holds good till eternity, unless there is amending legislation. Again, Sir, in sub-clause (3) of this particular clause, it says: "Any trade union or federation of trade unions may by resolution of its executive affiliate...". Why not come out with the truth that trade unions must affiliate? There is no more discretion left to a trade union or federation of trade unions whether or not to affiliate. They have to affiliate. So why say "may" and make it sound better? They must and they have to affiliate.

I do not propose to go over the ground I have already covered. Mr Speaker, Sir. I only wish to point out that the association of trade unions must first apply to the Minister for exemption from registration. After he has considered the rules and is satisfied with them, he grants the exemption under the provisions of this clause. It is provided in sub-clause (2): "An association of trade unions which is exempted by the Minister under subsection (1) ... shall not change its rules without the written permission of the Minister"

With due respect, Sir, I think the Minister has not answered the question raised by the Member for Cairnhill whether, in the event of the Minister having exempted an association of trade unions and he subsequently feels that they are not doing the right thing either by him or by the country, its registration should be withdrawn. The question is whether under the Bill that can be done. The second question which I myself would like to ask is whether the Minister would grant exemption if there were more than one association of trade unions seeking exemption under sub-clause (2)?

Mr Speaker, Sir, it is by implication that if an association of trade unions changes its rules without the permission of the Minister, it is no longer exempted. The exemption is subject to those conditions. It ceases to be an exempted association of trade unions if it changes its rules without permission. On the second point, Sir, I would say quite firmly here that it is the intention of Government to exempt only one association of trade unions from registration.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the Minister is saying that he has no power to withdraw the exemption so long as the association of trade unions does not amend its rules without his sanction. This is a rather dangerous exemption. If exemption is given to an association of trade unions and future events prove that such an association is not working in the interest of the country as a whole, surely the Minister should have the power to withdraw that exemption. If he has no such power, then we will be having this Frankenstein in our midst.

Mr Speaker, Sir, we have considered all this ad nauseam. In the Federation, associations of trade unions are registered under the Societies Ordinance. Under our present law, we require associations of trade unions to register under the Trade Unions Ordinance. In this case, we do not require any registration. We exempt on application for exemption. The exemption is granted on certain conditions, but the associations of trade unions cannot change its rules without the permission of the Minister. If it breaches those conditions, it is no longer exempted.

Question put, and agreed to. Clause 59 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 60 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 61- Question proposed, "That clause 61 stand part of the Bill."

Sir, under clause 61, there is no mention made of gazetting any formation of a federation of trade unions. Surely the formation of a federation of trade unions is an important event and the workers of Singapore should be made aware of the registration of such a federation.

Mr Speaker, Sir, in my Second Reading speech on this Bill, I pointed out to this Assembly that a federation of trade unions is not a trade union for the purposes of this Bill. The trade unions will be registered and their registration gazetted.

Question put, and agreed to. Clause 61 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clauses 62 to 71 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 72-

Mr Speaker. Sir, I beg to move, In page 33, line 13, after "officer", to insert "or member of the executive". It is felt, Mr Speaker, Sir, that members of the executive should be subject to the same penalties as officers. Amendment agreed to. Clause 72, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clauses 73 to 75 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 76-

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, In page 34, line 35, to leave out "71" and insert "72". That is a mistake, Sir. Amendment agreed to. Clause 76, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 77-

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, In page 35, line 32, after "(b)", to insert "and in paragraph (c) ". This was inadvertently left out, Mr Speaker, Sir. Amendment agreed to. Clause 77, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clauses 78 to 80 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill. First Schedule-

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, In page 36, line 33, to leave out "Harbour Board" and insert "Port Workers". This is a more apt description of the category. Amendment agreed to. First Schedule, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Second to Fourth Schedules inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill. Fifth Schedule-

There is a Note: In page 40, line 37, to leave out "law" and insert "laws". That will be done. Fifth Schedule ordered to stand part of the Bill. Bill reported with amendments; read the Third time and passed.

Order for Third Reading read

Notice has been given by the Minister for Home Affairs that he desires to delete clause 5 of the Bill and wishes to introduce a new clause. The Bill accordingly stands recommitted to a Committee of the whole Assembly in respect of clause 5 thereof and of the new clause. Any other Member who wishes to propose other amendments or other new clauses or any schedules may now give notice of his desire. No other Member giving notice-

Committee Stage, what day?

Now, Sir.

The Assembly will now resolve itself into a Committee on the Bill. Bill considered in Committee.

7.59 p.m. Clause 5- Question proposed, "That clause 5 stand part of the Bill."

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to introduce a new clause.

We are still on clause 5. If the Minister wishes to make his speech, he can do so, explaining why clause 5 should be deleted. He may prefer to make his speech after the introduction of the new clause.

I will do that, Sir.

Question put, and negatived. Clause 5 accordingly disagreed to. New clause- 'Amendment of Section 13, of the Pawnbrokers section 13. Ordinance is hereby amended by inserting immediately after subsection (4) thereof the following new subsections:- "(5) The Minister may by order amend the rate of profits and charges specified in Schedule B to this Ordinance. (6) All orders made under subsection (5) of this section shall be published in the Gazette and shall be presented to the Legislative Assembly as soon as may be after publication and if a resolution is passed pursuant to a motion notice whereof has been given for a sitting day not later than the first available sitting day of the Assembly next after the expiry of three months from the date when such orders are so presented annulling the orders or any part thereof as from a specified date, such orders or such part thereof as the case may be shall thereupon become void as from such date but without prejudice to the validity of anything previously done thereunder or to the making of new orders.".'.-[Mr Ong Pang Boon]. Brought up, and read the First time.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the clause be read a Second time." -

Order. Moment of interruption. Thereupon Mr Speaker left the Chair of the Committee and took the Chair of the Assembly.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to report that the Committee has made some progress on the Bill, and beg leave to sit again on Monday, 16th May.

So be it.

Resolved, "That this Assembly do now adjourn."-[Dr Toh Chin Chye]. Adjourned accordingly at Eight o'clock p.m.