Hansard, 1961-03-22

The following Members have, under the provisions of subsection (2) (g) of section 42 of the Singapore (Constitution) Order in Council, 1958, obtained from the Speaker, permission to be or to remain absent from sittings of the Assembly:- Mr Tan Kia Gan (Paya Lebar), Minister for National Development - from 6th to 14th March, 1961. Mr Lim Cheng Lock (River Valley) - from 20th March to 3rd April, 1961.

asked the Deputy Prime Minister to state whether, and why Indonesian Rhio waters are now closed to Singapore coastal vessels, to what extent this has affected the employment of Singapore seamen and Singapore's economy, and what the Government proposes to do to assist the people adversely affected.

As far as the Singapore Government is aware, Indonesian waters are not closed to Singapore coastal vessels. We have not received any indication that there is any such ban on non-Indonesian vessels.

Mr Speaker, Sir, is the Deputy Prime Minister aware that the new conditions imposed are such that they practically make it difficult for Singapore seamen to be employed on Singapore vessels going to Indonesian waters?

What is the Member for Tanglin talking about? I have just said that we do not know for a fact that non-Indonesian vessels are being prohibited from entering Rhio waters. I do not understand what conditions the Member for Tanglin is referring to.

It seems to be a different question anyway.

Is the Deputy Prime Minister aware that such a report appeared in the local Press?

The trouble with the Members of the Opposition is this; that they follow the footsteps of the Member for Tanglin and believe that every printed word is the gospel truth. I would, however, recommend him to read the less sensational parts of the newspapers.

Mr Speaker, I have not yet got an answer to my question.

What the local Press publishes is not my business. I have given an answer.

No Ministerial responsibility. Tun Lim.

It is because of the report in the local Press that there has been disquiet in the minds of the people concerned. Surely, if there has been no such knowledge on the part of the Government that there is such a restriction, then it would be advisable for the Government to set at rest the minds of those people who are misled by the Press?

The answer is very simple. Supposing the local Press reports that a space ship from Mars has landed at Bukit Timah Heights in Singapore. I suppose Members of the Opposition will also ask questions in the Assembly.

The landing in Singapore of a space ship from Mars does not affect the rice-bowls of the people of Singapore, but the banning of ships in Indonesian waters does.- [Interruption].

Order. I think we are entering into a debate. Inche Mohamed Ali.

asked the Minister for Health what is the number of mobile clinics operating in the City Area and in the Rural Areas; and whether the treatment given by such clinics is free of charge.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I have been asked to reply. It is presumed that the question refers to travelling dispensaries and not travelling clinics. In which case, the answer is that no mobile or travelling dispensaries are operating at present in the City area. There are, however, four travelling dispensaries operating in the rural areas, and the treatment given in these travelling dispensaries is free.

(In Malay): Mr Speaker, is it the intention of the Government to increase the number of travelling dispensaries?

Can the Member please repeat the question?

(In Malay): Mr Speaker, is it the intention of the Government to increase the figure mentioned?

Mr Speaker, Sir, can I please ask the Member whether he is referring to these travelling dispensaries in the City or the rural areas?

(In Malay): Concerning the four travelling dispensaries operating in the rural areas, I wish to know whether the number mentioned will be increased.

Mr Speaker, Sir, it is not envisaged that the number will be increased, but the Government will build more clinics in the rural areas to serve the people. It is felt that a travelling dispensary is only a very temporary provision for the medical services compared to a rural clinic.

(In Malay): Mr Speaker, according to the information supplied, the medical treatment given is free. But to the best of my knowledge, some time ago 50 cents was charged for each treatment. When will such fees be waived?

As I mentioned previously, there were two types of travelling dispensaries. One was the city travelling dispensary and the other was the rural travelling dispensary. The city travelling dispensaries were previously controlled by the City Council, and it was necessary for those who attended the city travelling dispensaries to pay 50 cents for treatment. Since 1959, however, because of better services being provided in the City, it was deemed unnecessary to carry on with the city travelling dispensaries. Hence all the travelling dispensaries were shifted to the rural areas. Therefore, no payment was asked for.

asked the Minister for Finance to state the number of Government quarters (a) occupied by Government employees, (b) rented out to non-Government employees, and (c) still vacant; whether the renting out of vacant quarters to non-Government employees has been stopped and the reasons for this decision.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the number of Government quarters occupied by Government employees is 6,280. The number of Government quarters rented out to non-Government employees is 47. The number of Government quarters currently vacant is also 47. The renting out of quarters to non-Government employees other than the Polytechnic employees recruited from overseas has stopped since July 1960. The reason is that the remaining quarters are being reserved for officers and experts in various technical lines now being recruited from overseas.

asked the Minister for Finance to state the number of serving Malay officers who were promoted to the Executive Service in February 1961.

No serving Malay officers were appointed to the grade of Executive Officers in February 1961. But two Malay Executive Officers were promoted as Higher Executive Officers in that month.

Could the Minister confirm, Sir, that in February 1961, 33 officers were promoted to the Executive Service with effect from 1st January, 1961, and that none of these officers were Malay officers?

I confirm.

asked the Minister for Finance to state the number of serving Malay officers who have been promoted to Divisions I and II of the Public Service since May 1960.

Mr Speaker, Sir, since May 1960, the numbers of serving Malay officers who have been promoted are as follows: (a) Two officers from Division I Timescale to Division I Superscale. (b) Two officers from Division I Lower Grade to Division I Higher Grade. (c) Three officers from Division II to Division I. (d) One officer from Division II Lower Grade to Division II Higher Grade. (e) Three officers from Division III to Division II. In addition, the following numbers of Malay serving officers have been approved for promotion. As soon as formalities are completed, these officers will be notified of their promotions:-

asked the Minister for Finance to state the number of Malays recruited to the General Clerical Service since November 1960.

Mr Speaker, this question refers to the number of Malays recruited to the General Clerical Service since November 1960. The answer is that no recruitment of any officer has been made in the General Clerical Service since November 1960. Advertisements inviting applications for the General Clerical Service were published on 29th December, 1960. Selection is now in the hands of the Public Service Commission who will make the necessary arrangements for interviews and so forth.

Would the Minister indicate if some of the new applicants would come from the Malay community?

Mr Speaker, Sir, I have not seen the forms of application, so I can give no indication. But I would say it is quite likely that they would include a number of young men and women of the Malay race.

asked the Minister for Culture whether he will hold a National Language Week or Month.

Mr Speaker, Sir, we have a number of schemes to popularise and teach the National Language, and the holding of a Language Week is one of them. The Head of the Dewan Bahasa dan Kebudayaan Kebangsaan is working on a scheme to make people more conscious of the need to learn the National Language. In the middle of this year, we will be introducing Suara Singapura, which will be held to stimulate interest in the understanding of the National Language. However, I cannot indicate at the moment what form the Language Week will take, because we must take into consideration the special conditions in Singapore. Singapore is largely a non-Malay speaking territory and so a campaign of this kind, while stimulating the people to use the national language, should not cause undue inconvenience to administration and business. Furthermore, the campaign must be planned in such a way as to make it easy and practical for non-Malay speaking citizens as well to participate in it effectively. In fact, the effectiveness and usefulness of such a campaign would be lost if it is of so ambitious and complex a nature that the majority of the people cannot participate in it, not because they do not want to but because it demands things beyond their capacity.

(In Malay): Mr Speaker, Sir, could the Minister concerned state definitely when a National Language Week or Month will be held this year?

Mr Speaker, Sir, I have said earlier that I cannot indicate at the moment when and in what form the National Language Week would take, but we are working on it and as soon as the necessary arrangements are made, we will publicise the fact.

(In Malay): Could the Minister not even give a slight indication as to whether it is possible to hold the National Language Week some time this year?

Mr Speaker, Sir, when this Government makes a promise, it keeps its promise. Therefore, I would not like to give any specific date, but we shall certainly try to do something along these lines during the course of this year.

asked the Minister for Education whether he has any plan for building a Government school in the Malay Farm area of Alsagoff Estate.

The Malay Farm area is very congested and it had not been possible in the past to get unencumbered land suitable for school development here. The Government is, however, building a 24-classroom primary school at Jalan Kaki Bukit. This new school is expected to be completed in August this year, and it will serve the children in the Malay Farm area as well. We hope to purchase in the very near future another site for the erection of two Government schools which will not only cater for the children in the Malay Farm area but also for those in the Geylang Serai area. A site has recently been acquired in Jalan Kembangan for a 24-classroom primary school which is expected to be ready by early 1962. It should be explained that each 24-classroom primary school will be able to accommodate more than 2,000 students in both sessions.

"to continue in operation and to amend the Offences relating to Vehicles Ordinance, 1960", presented by the Minister for Home Affairs (Mr Ong Pang Boon); read the First time, to be read a Second time on Wednesday, 26th April, 1961, and to be printed.

"to abolish the Education and Improvement rates leviable by local authorities", presented by the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Finance (Mr Low Por Tuck) (on behalf of the Minister for Finance); read the First time, to be read a Second time on Wednesday, 26th April, 1961, and to be printed.

"to amend the Post Office Savings Bank Ordinance (Chapter 106 of the Revised Edition)", presented by the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Finance (Mr Low Por Tuck) (on behalf of the Minister for Finance); read the First time, to be read a Second time on Wednesday, 26th April, 1961, and to be printed.

"to amend the Police Force Ordinance, 1958, (No. 32 of 1958) and to repeal Part XV of the Ports Ordinance (Chapter 208 of the Revised Edition)", presented by the Minister for Home Affairs, (Mr Ong Pang Boon); read the First time, to be read a Second time on Wednesday, 26th April, 1961, and to be printed.

"to amend the Inquiry Commissions Ordinance (Chapter 52 of the Revised Edition)", presented by the Minister for Labour and Law (Mr K. M. Byrne); read the First time, to be read a Second time on Wednesday, 26th April, 1961, and to be printed.

Resolved, "That item No. 8 on the Order Paper be proceeded with immediately before item No. 3."-[Dr Toh Chin Chye.]

Order for Second Reading read. 2.54 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, this Bill and the following Bill which I will be moving for Second Reading concern certain esoteric points in the law of conveyancing. As regards the Land Titles Ordinance, I would like to remind the House that it was first passed in 1956 and it was not brought into operation until 1st December, 1960. As from that date, under section 8 of the Ordinance, all land alienated by the Crown will be brought under the provisions of the Ordinance and certificates of title will be issued in lieu of Crown instruments. However, since 1956, there have been a number of surrenders by land developers under section 11 of the Crown Lands Ordinance for the purpose of sub-dividing their land into smaller lots for building purposes. Some 1,200 lots in the case of the Sembawang Hill Estate and another 1,000 odd lots in the case of the Serangoon Garden Estate have already been sub-divided. In both these cases, Crown grants have not yet been issued for each subdivided lot as time is taken for the survey of the land to be completed. However, in the meantime, buildings which have been erected on the lots have been sold and most of these properties are under mortgage. Under section 8 of the Land Titles Ordinance, there is no provision for the registration of mortgages or other encumbrances created before the issue of the Crown grants. The purpose of the present Bill is to provide the machinery whereby these mortgages or other encumbrances can be protected by notification on the land register kept in the Land Titles Registry. The new section 8A. (b) [clause 2] of the Bill puts the responsibility of informing the Registrar of the existence of any mortgage or other encumbrance on the person interested, and paragraph (c) enables the purchaser of the mortgaged property to be registered as proprietor without an order of the Court. This provision is similar to section 13 (6) of the Ordinance. Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time."

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. - [The Prime Minister]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed.

Order for Second Reading read. 2.58 p.m.

Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." Section 8 of the Land Titles Ordinance States that after the commencement of the Ordinance any person who has become entitled to land upon alienation by the Crown for an estate in fee simple or for an estate in perpetuity or for a leasehold term of not less than 21 years, can require the Collector of Land Revenue to furnish to the Registrar of Titles a certificate to that effect. The Registrar shall thereupon bring the land under the provisions of the Ordinance as therein directed, and shall deliver the triplicate certificate of title to the person entitled thereto. This complicated provision really means that the Collector of Land Revenue is under a duty to give a certificate to the Registrar of Land Titles who then registers it. But in the case of a statutory land grant issued under section 4 (1) of the Crown Lands Ordinance, the Collector of Land Revenue will be faced with this difficulty. Under section 2 of the Ordinance, a statutory land grant is defined as a grant in perpetuity, but in Schedule A, the Form provides for an estate in fee simple by virtue of the words of limitation on "his heirs and assigns for ever". This means, Mr Speaker, Sir, that the Collector will either have to follow the words of the Form, in which case it will be contrary to section 2; or if he goes according to section 2, he will not be going in accordance with the Form and Schedule A. This anomaly has existed since the original Crown Lands Ordinance was passed in 1886. I do not wish now, Mr Speaker, Sir, to labour the House with the intricacies of the difference between a grant and a fee simple and "his heirs and assigns for ever". But I can assure the House that there is a conveyancing difference in the terminology used. For the peace of mind of conveyancers and the Registrar of Land Titles, it is now proposed to remove this anomaly so that the Collector of Land Revenue can certify with certainty that the person to whom Crown land is being alienated is entitled to a grant in perpetuity. Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move.

Question put, and agreed to. Bill accordingly read a Second time and committeed to a Committee of the whole Assembly. Assembly immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. -[The Prime Minister]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. 3.02 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I have His Excellency the Yang di-Pertuan Negara's recommendation to proceed with this motion*. *The motion reads as follows: That this House, in appreciation of their work to preserve peace, and prevent civil war and foreign intervention in the Congo, resolves that a sum of $10,000 be donated to the cheer of troops of the Federation of Malaya serving under United Nations command in the Congo. At the last Assembly sitting, when my colleagues the Minister for Culture was moving his motion for a sum of $10,000 for the Aid to Algeria Fund, the Member for Cairnhill remarked in the course of the debate that, whilst we were ready to make a gesture to the people of Algeria, we appeared unwilling to make any gesture to the troops of the Federation of Malaya serving in the Congo. I had on that occasion, Sir, stated that we would be happy to contribute to the Cheer Fund for the Federation troops in the Congo, and this motion of $10,000 is to ask the House for authority to make that contribution. Since we last met, the situation in the Congo has been contained by the determined stand of the uncommitted nations not to allow the Congo to become a cold war arena. Members will now know that since then the Indian Government has decided to send several thousand combat troops to serve under the United Nations Command in the Congo. This step has put a brake on the trend to withdraw troops under the United Nations Command from the Congo. Had the trend continued, a grave situation of civil war plus foreign intervention on all sides of the civil war could well have led to a dangerous world situation. Mr Speaker, Sir, this token of $10,000 is our appreciation for the efforts made by all in the cause of peace in Africa. Question proposed. 3.05 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise to welcome the motion before the House, and the welcome is the greater because it is as a result of what the Opposition had suggested during the debate on the motion on Algeria at the sitting on 22nd February, and not at the last but one sitting. Sir, the Prime Minister has said that in the course of the debate on the motion on Algeria, I remarked that the Government appeared to be unwilling to contribute towards this Congo Cheer Fund. I did not say so. I just suggested that the Government perhaps could favourably consider donating a contribution towards the Congo Cheer Fund. The Prime Minister in his reply that day, Sir, while welcoming the suggestion, did try to suggest something which I did not suggest. He suggested that I suggested that money should be contributed to the Berita Harian Congo Cheer Fund. Surely, Sir, as the Prime Minister should know, when a government contributes any money towards anything, it is for that government to write to the government of the recipient country and send the donation through that channel, it does not have to employ any other channel. Sir, we are very happy that the Government, in this instance, has acted so promptly on a suggestion from the Opposition, and we thank the Government for that.

Mr Prime Minister, in reply?

I have nothing to add to the rather intricate explanation that the Member of the Opposition has given.

Question put, and agreed to. Resolved, That this House, in appreciation of their work to preserve peace, and prevent civil war and foreign intervention in the Congo, resolves that a sum of $10,000 be donated to the cheer of troops of the Federation of Malaya serving under United Nations command in the Congo.

Order for Second Reading read. 3.08 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, -

Will a Minister signify the recommendation of the Yang di-Pertuan Negara?

I so signify.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." Diphtheria is a serious health problem in Singapore and some 600 cases of the disease occur annually with over 50 to 60 deaths. Both the occurence of the disease and deaths are preventable by immunisation, and this Bill is designed to improve preventive measures by making immunisation compulsory for infants and children. Since 1938 in the City area and after the Second World War in the rural area, it has been the policy to encourage parents to accept inoculation against diphtheria on a voluntary basis. Unfortunately, the response has not been as encouraging as expected. Only approximately 50 per cent of the new-born every year obtained immunisation by the voluntary method. For the effective eradication or reduction of diphtheria, it is necessary that 90 per cent of the children should be immunised. Thus, it is considered to be appropriate at his stage to require compulsory immunisation of all infants and children by primary and booster diphtheria inoculation as defined in clause 2 of the Bill. Compulsory immunisation by legislation is neither new nor unorthodox. Children are required to be immunised against diphtheria in such countries as Japan, Canada, Germany, France, the U.S.S.R. and Yugoslavia, and it has been the experience of these countries that such compulsory immunisation sharply decreases the incidence of the disease. In the main immunisation will be effected by requiring every child to be administered with primary diphtheria inoculation within 12 months of birth. Alternatively, every child resident in Singapore, who is under the age of seven years and who has not been immunised against diphtheria, will be required to do so under clause 5 of the Bill. Booster diphtheria inoculation, which means a further inoculation against diphtheria for a person who has received a previous inoculation, will be made compulsory for every child residing in Singapore on attaining the age of four years. Provision is also made for a child to obtain a second booster inoculation upon entry to Primary School. Clause 6 refers to booster inoculation. Clauses 3 and 4 of the Bill are to ensure that inoculation and intra-dermal test (to test the susceptibility of a person against diphtheria) shall be carried out by qualified persons. Also notification of such inoculation and tests must be made to the health authority in a prescribed manner. Clause 7 will enable the postponement of diphtheria inoculation if the child is unfit or has acquired immunity or has been shown not liable to diphtheria by means of the intra-dermal test. Clause 8 makes it clear that a guardian, which is defined as the person having custody of the child, must present the child for inoculation. Diphtheria immunisation will be given free of charge at all Government Maternal and Child Health Centres, but provision is made in clause 9 of the Bill for intra-dermal tests and inoculations to be administered by private medical practitioners at the expense of parents or guardians who choose to obtain inoculation through private doctors. To ensure success, some means is required to inform parents of new-born children that they must obtain immunisation under the Bill. Hence, clause 11 provides that the Registrar of Births and Deaths shall issue, after registering a birth, a notice to the guardian directing his attention to his responsibilities. I may say that the Registrar goes through the same procedure in respect of compulsory small-pox vaccination under section 48 of the Quarantine and Prevention of Disease Ordinance. Clause 12 provides for penalties for persons who refuse or fail without reasonable excuse to submit to the provisions of the Bill. There are also penalties for obtaining false certificates. You will note, Mr Speaker, Sir, that no prosecution in respect of any offence shall be instituted without the written sanction of the Director of Medical Services. According to modern medical practice, it is desirable to cease inoculation in the event of an outbreak of other infectious disease such as poliomyelitis. That is why clause 13 provides for the suspension of any or all the provisions of the Bill as a public health measure. Likewise clause 14 provides the Minister with power to declare any area as an area of outbreak of diphtheria, and thereupon to require compulsory inoculation of all children under 12 years of age residing therein. In such an emergency, immunisation shall be free of charge. Clause 15 provides for the making of regulations generally for carrying out the provisions of the Bill, and includes any fees or charges that it may be necessary to levy for the purpose of carrying out the provisions of the Bill. Among other things, the Minister is also enabled, under clause 15, to regulate the preparation or preparations to be used, the number of occasions they are to be administered, the mode of administration and so on. It is necessary for the Minister to prescribe a maximum fee to be charged by practitioners who administer any intra-dermal test or inoculation. This is to ensure that there shall be a standardisation of fee and that, in any emergency, no variation of fees shall be allowed. Of course, such prescription of fees would not be made unless a situation to warrant it should arise. In conclusion, I would say that this Bill represents an important step in the fight against diphtheria, towards eradication of this disease in Singapore by the compulsory immunisation of infants and children. Mr Speaker, 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. -[Dr Sheng Nam Chin]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed.

Order for Second Reading read. 3.20 p.m.

Mr Speaker. Sir, I have His Excellency the Yang di-Pertuan Negara's recommendation for this Bill; and I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." Sir, the principles set out in the Bill follow those of the Women's Charter Bill which was introduced in the last Session of the Legislative Assembly. That Bill was referred to a Select Com mittee, but before the Report of the Select Committee could be adopted, the Legislative Assembly was prorogued and the Bill, therefore, lapsed. The opportunity has been taken to reconsider the details of the Bill in the light of representations made before the Select Committee on the former Women's Charter Bill. The result is that a number of detailed amendments have been made to the Bill. As I propose to move that the Bill be referred to a Select Committee, I do not want, at this stage, to do more than summarise the main changes that have been made. It is now proposed to make provision for the appointment of Assistant Registrars who will be public officers and who will assist the Registrar, and who will be able to exercise all the powers of the Registrar. The definition of "Registrar" has been amended to include Assistant Registrar, and clause 25 of the Bill provides for the appointment of Assistant Registrars. The list of prohibited degrees of marriage is now set out in the First Schedule to the Bill. This follows the provisions in the Federation's Civil Marriage Ordinance, and makes it clear which parties are prohibited from marriage. In order to enable marriages in extremis to be solemnized, power is given to the Minister to delegate the power to issue licences to marry. It is proposed that this power be delegated to the heads of religious denominations to enable them to give power to solemnize marriages in extremis. Provision is also made for a religious ceremony to be performed in addition to a civil marriage. The provision to enable the Minister to delegate the power to issue licences is contained in clause 20, sub-clause (4), and provision for religious ceremonies in marriage is made in clause 23. The provision relating to the rights and duties of husband and wife have been modified, and the reference to equal rights and the ownership and management of the family properties in clause 45 of the Bill has been omitted, as it was suggested that this might be inconsistent with the provisions relating to the property rights of married women. The original proposal to register all marriages not previously registered has been abandoned. It is now proposed to provide that the Women's Charter shall not affect the validity of marriages solemnized before the 2nd day of March, 1961. The Bill also provides that those marriages which are valid under the law, religion, custom or usage under which they were solemnized shall be deemed to be valid under the provisions of the Ordinance for the purposes of Part IX of the Ordinance, so that the provisions relating to divorce shall be applicable to them. Sir, I beg to move. Question proposed. 3.23 p.m.

(In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, we are workers preparing to reform society. I, representing thousands of women in Singapore, wish to express my support of the Bill and to thank the Government, especially my colleague, the Minister for Labour and Law, who has re-introduced the Women's Charter today. The Women's Charter fully indicates that the P.A.P. Government is firm in trying to solve women's problems. We are a socialist Government. For the past 22 months of government, we have tried our best to reform the backwardness of women. Today, in this Assembly here, we want to express the attitude of the Party towards women, and also to express the views and the attitude of the Government. In the 1959 general election, the P.A.P. Government said women's problems are problems to be resolved after the general election. We have clearly expressed out attitude towards women's problems in our Party's Manual. We realise that we have to wait until a true and just society is established before we can resolve women's problems. In a non-socialist government, it is very difficult to find any equality. The difference between men and women presents a problem. In a socialist society, women will not be exploited. This is the kind of society that we the P.A.P. want to establish. In a just and equal society, the P.A.P. is determined to try its best to organise all the people to fight for a common aim. It is indeed a very difficult and long-term task to establish this happy society. For example, at present women's problems are difficult to solve because women have been oppressed in the past. Take Singapore for instance. At present there exist feudalistic ideas and systems. Many colonialistic ideas still exist. Therefore, women's problems are still very difficult to solve because women are faced with these hardships. Nowadays, the opportunities for the education of women are very rare and greatly curtailed. This is because many people still regard women as only suitable for work in the home and not outside in society. Therefore, women's opportunities to participate in society are very little. Their lot in life is simply to work very hard in exchange for a bare meal. Under these circumstances, they have been oppressed and exploited by the capitalists. Women live in ignorance, and do not see their own future. Many women waste their money in superstitious beliefs and gambling. They are oppressed without realising it. In the rural areas, women's conditions are even worse. Many women villagers do not know what their relationship with society is. After more than one hundred years of colonialistic control, they still do not know their difficulties. Education to the village women means nothing to them. They base their hopes on gambling like chap-ji-ki and other games and superstitious beliefs. Let us see the women in the city area. Except the labourers, women in other walks of life still suffer oppression. Their opportunities are not equal. For example, career women are treated as flowers in a vase. They are not treated equally. Many employers treat women as beautiful decorations. Because of society's inequalities, women regard themselves as decorations and only suitable for work in the home. Many men marry more than one wife. Therefore, women do not enjoy full equality in the home. They do not enjoy political equality. When they are helpless, they are abandoned by their husbands and deprived of their basic rights. Because of the above-mentioned facts, women's problems will have to be solved. However, there still exist some different conditions in our society. It is very important to solve all these problems. We have here many races- Chinese, Malay, Indian and so on. Since every race has its peculiarities, traditions and customs, there exist different forms of women's problems. We cannot solve all these problems with one method. We have to solve them with a common method. Take, for example, religious problems. We should be very careful in solving them. We, the P.A.P. Government, fully respect the religions and rights to all races. So we must be very careful, when trying to solve the religious problems of women, not to go against their religious beliefs. The Government has re-introduced the Women's Charter. What are its effects upon the women's movement? Firstly, the Women's Charter will prevent husbands from abandoning their wives. The Bill will not allow a man to marry more than one wife. If a husband abandons his wife as he likes, then he will be punished, because abandoning a wife will have adverse effects on the family as well as on society as a whole. We must make a united effort to build a good family and a good society. This Bill will arouse the emotions of all the women in Singapore who are suffering and make them realise the fact. We must fight for equality among men and women. This Bill will also enhance women's position in society. It will give the women's movement a very flat and level road on which to travel. It will strengthen the confidence of women in building a good society. This Bill also rectifies the many mistakes made in the past. Although this Bill will not provide for equal pay among men and women, it will, however, make them fully realise their political, educational, cultural, and economic equality in society. This must be made possible if a good society is to be established. Until all this is realised, we cannot find another society in which all these conditions can be fulfilled. This Bill acts as a lighthouse on the road to building a good society. It will make us work harder to attain a better society. I must clearly point out here that when the Bill becomes law, many of the women's problems will be finally resolved. This shows that the women's movement has a very good beginning. Therefore, thousands of women must, under these good conditions, arouse other women, who are suffering, to work together and partake in the building of a society which will be for the welfare of all the people, and to unite with all the other people in building a happy Malaya, it is only with this object in view that we could build a good society. We of the P.A.P. have suffered hardship and have tried our best to fulfil our Five-Year Plan. We introduce this Bill in order to uphold the rights of women, so that all their problems will be easily resolved. At the same time, we have tried our best to discover the inequalities of men and women in the civil service. We pay great attention to women's problems. These problems were not looked after by the previous governments. Finally, let us, all the sisters in Singapore, try our best and make use of our lives to work hard for the emancipation of women so as to build a just and equal socialistic society. 3.40 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I am glad the Minister for Labour and Law seems to take an interest in the welfare of women. I must congratulate him. What a really wise step he has taken, by incorporating in the Women's Charter the advice of the Members of the Opposition. You will remember, Sir, that when the Women's Charter came up for debate in the last Session here, the Minister called me names, such as "a chameleon", when I pointed out the inadvisability of having the compulsory registration clause. I was ridiculed when I pointed out that this clause would cause hardship to the poor. I am, therefore, extremely happy today, Sir, to see that the Minister now seems to have changed his views and has begun to see eye to eye with the Opposition. Instead of compulsory registration, we now see in the new Charter, for want of a better phrase, "automatic registration" for all marriages which took place before the 2nd of March, 1961. In view of the fact that the Government in the past has been very much inclined to adopt the attitude that Sir Ivor Jennings and Lord Hailsham have always warned us against, i.e., the attitude that the Opposition can never be right and the Government can never be wrong, I feel that the Minister for Labour and Law deserves special commendation for having the courage to incorporate the advice of the Opposition in the Women's Charter, when he thinks that the Opposition is right. I was also happy, Sir, to note that the Prime Minister himself has acted on the suggestion of the Member for Cairnhill regarding the Congo donation. We hope, Sir, that this is a sign that Government is at last beginning to realise the importance of parliamentary democracy. I would however, Sir, like to make a few observations regarding the other sections of the Women's Charter and to draw the attention of the Minister for Labour and Law, who I sincerely hope is genuinely interested in the welfare of women and children, that the mere passing of a law protecting the rights of women is not at all sufficient. While it is true, Sir, that statutory law is essential, it is the implementation of the law that matters. In this connection, Sir, I hope you will permit me to quote Miss Dorothy Moses, Regional Social Services Officer of the United Nations Economic Commission for Asia and the Far East, when she said this two months ago in Australia. She said: `In many countries, such rights exist only on paper and remain more in the form of good intentions, since there is often a very large gap between legal provisions for such opportunities and actual practice. In actuality, women in many countries, especially in the South-east Asia region, are still ignorant and backward and, therefore, remain deprived of their proper rights. They are also an easy prey to exploitation.' I do not know what exploitation she means, Sir; probably- An Hon. Member: Husband!

-it even includes political exploitation-

To do the washing!

She went on to say, Sir, that this situation, if left unremedied, forms a vicious circle. [Laughter] I am sorry to see so much fun made of this statement of an expert from the United Nations, Sir. `where the circumstances that force women to live under these down-trodden conditions continue unchanged, since women are unable to change them unless they are helped to do so.' So if the Government of Singapore were requested to produce a report or paper on the legal status of women, political franchise for women, eligibility of women for public office, their access into administrative careers, their civil liberties, their economic rights, their right to retain their nationality after marriage - I can envisage the glowing report that the Singapore Government is able to produce. While statutory law in Singapore - contrary to what the Lady Member on the Government Bench has said - gives women their full rights, there is not a single clause on paper that prevents women from exercising these rights; but (and a very big but at that, Sir) are these rights being exercised? Are women given the opportunity to exercise these rights? I say they are not. Far from helping women to exercise these rights, there is actually discrimination by the Government against women. For example, Sir, policewomen who have served faithfully and efficiently for 12 years are still serving as Inspectors only while their men contemporaries have reached at least the rank of A.S.P. When I drew the attention of the Government at a previous sitting to women not getting equal treatment in Government service, what was the reply from the Minister for Finance? He said he believed that while all men are all equal, some men are more equal than others. Sir, I ask you, what is the use of passing grand statutory laws that give women their rights when, in practice, every effort is made to prevent them from exercising them? Sir, even the hon. Lady on the Government Bench did agree that women can be exploited without their realising it. I hope the Government is not taking advantage of this. May I again quote Miss Dorothy Moses? She said: `Women have a resignation to their lot and also feelings of dependency and insecurity which they have developed over a period of suppression of their true selves. It thus becomes evident that if changes are considered desirable, women are to be helped to overcome their resistance to them.' It has been universally accepted, Sir, that the economic independence of the woman of today has been to a very great extent responsible for giving her a self-sufficient sense of security to come forward and shoulder her share of responsibility as a good citizen of the State. If this is true, Sir, then the deprivation of equal remuneration for equal work is certainly not only an obstacle which prevents the woman from utilising the rights granted to her by the statutory law of the State but also deprives her of the opportunity to play her true role as an associate to her husband in the keeping of her home as required by the Women's Charter, and also in the building of a Malayan nation as promised in "The Tasks Ahead". One would expect to find in a Women's Charter machineries which will help the woman to exercise her rights fully as a human being and to give her the opportunity to play her true role as a good wife, a mother and a citizen. Sir, we support wholeheartedly the idea of one man one wife. But I am afraid, Sir, that I do not see how this Charter gives political rights to women when they already exist, otherwise the hon. Lady on the Government Bench and I would not be standing up here talking. She also says that the Charter educates women. I am afraid I cannot see how this Charter educates women. And she says the Charter makes women work harder. I thought this is not the reason why Government is putting in this Charter - only to make women work harder - instead of giving them a rest! Sir, I am afraid I must say this Charter falls very short of what one might expect from a Women's Charter, and I do hope the Select Committee will see its way to making it worthy of its name. 3.50 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, after hearing two charming ladies on opposite sides arguing against each other, it is only a foolish man who dares to step in between! Sir, this is a Charter meant for women, and it is significant the Minister did not say much when moving the Second Reading of the Bill. It was left to the Lady Member for Delta who stood up and her very first words were, "We thank the Government for doing this." And she ended up by saying, "We, the P.A.P. Government, are doing this." Therefore, may I suggest that she need not thank herself for what she thinks she is doing, because self-thanks are no thanks at all? Self-praise is no praise at all. I felt that I had to step in because she said, "The previous Government did nothing for the women." I think it was because of the previous Government that there are so many women sitting in this Assembly. She said that there were no political rights for women. Does she not know that these political rights have been given to women even before the P.A.P. came into existence? Even before the P.A.P. came into existence, there were these rights going as far back as 1948 when the first elections were held. She said that not enough education rights were given to women. May I point out that there are so many women, including the ladies on the opposite side, who have been educated under administrations that were not P.A.P.'s? Sir, she was trying to point out that women have been suffering a lot of things under previous administrations, and that therefore it is up to the P.A.P. Government to do what it can to protect the rights of women. We agreed last year that it is right that one man should have one wife. That is all the Charter seeks to do - one man one wife. The Charter goes further, no doubt. It protects the property rights of women. Other than that, there is nothing in the Charter that readjusts the inequalities and injustices that the Lady Member for Delta would have us believe are in existence. Although the property rights are supposed to be protected under this Charter, it does not give full protection at all. Although a wife under this Women's Charter can claim that she has a legal right to the property of her husband, yet there is nothing in this Charter to prevent the man to will his property before he dies to another woman who is not his wife. Where then is the protection to the legal wife of the man? Where then is this protection which the hon. Lady Member for Delta says the P.A.P. is giving to the married women of Singapore? The Government says, "One man should have one wife." We know, Sir, in this present world which man dares to have more than one wife, but there is nothing in this Charter to say that a man cannot have mistresses. The Deputy Prime Minister has pointed that out. What is there in this Charter to prevent a man from having a legal wife and having three charming ladies outside as mistresses? Where then is the protection?

When did I say that?

The Deputy Prime Minister asks when he said it. May I refer him to Hansard? I have it here, but I would not want to waste the time of this Assembly by quoting what he has said and what he has now forgotten what he has said. Sir, we support the Bill. But there is one more thing in this Charter - the divorce laws. A man married under some ancient custom does not have the right to seek divorce in a court of law other than a separation by agreement. But with this Women's charter, it will be made easier for a man or a woman to be divorced. I do not know whether it is a good or a bad thing. But the hon. Lady Member for Delta says it is a good thing, and perhaps it is a good thing. Sir, I would just like to refer to clause 32 of the Bill which states: `Nothing in this Ordinance or rules made thereunder shall be construed to render valid or invalid merely by reason of its having been or not having been registered any marriage which otherwise is invalid or valid.' A question was asked during the debate last year, and it was pointed out that that clause was necessary because of the compulsory registration of marriages which took place before 2nd March, 1960. Now, there is to be no compulsory registration. Under the new clause 166, it is only valid marriages which shall be deemed to be registered under this law. Where then is the necessity for clause 32? It makes it more confusing. It says that although you may be properly married and properly registered, yet that registration can be valid. It had substance last year when there was the intention of compulsory registration. Now that there is no intention of compulsory registration, I hope the Minister will consider this in the Select Committee. Sir, in spite of all that a man may want to say, there is one thing I would like to say to the ladies in this House and elsewhere; and that is, that it is the hand that rocks the cradle that rules the world, and not the man. 3.58 p.m.

(In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I did not intend to make a speech because I did not know the Opposition Members would make any criticism. But I want to stress the point that I must take part in this debate, instead of just listening to speeches, since the Member for Cairnhill and the Member for Mountbatten have said certain things with regard to the Women's Charter and they have caused some laughter. I do not understand why, on the one hand, the Opposition Members support the Women's Charter and, on the other hand, they are not satisfied with it. I do not understand why they are averse to and so critical of the Bill. We have already stated that this Bill is re-introduced to suit existing circumstances, and that it will have a great effect on the rights of women and so on. Mr Speaker, Sir, in this debate, I have a certain feeling which it is difficult to describe. This Charter has been under consideration for a very long time. We have re-introduced it and it is having its Second Reading today. I support the Women's Charter because it is a very healthy and progressive Bill. No matter how a person views it, he will see that it is not detrimental to the people of Singapore. We must recognise this fact. Why is it a progressive Bill? It is because it can remove all the maladies in regard to women's problems under the Rendel Constitution and under the old administration. But now the re-introduction of this Bill in this Assembly is a fact that we cannot deny. Therefore, it is a progressive Bill. Although we cannot say that this Women's Charter has any concrete effect on our sisters, yet we understand clearly that we must support this Bill as long as it is not detrimental to the people but is beneficial to the people. But here I feel that I have the responsibility to-

Order. I trust the hon. Lady will not think I am rude if I ask her to modulate her voice. I am getting rather deaf!

(In Mandarin): Although this Women's Charter Bill is very grand in name, we must recognise the benefits it can provide. I think it is necessary to elucidate a few points in regard to this Bill. Why do some people think that the Women's Charter cannot have a very great effect on our sisters? Because under the present circumstances we cannot achieve very great results by this Bill, because in the present political situation in Singapore, democracy is still affected by the colonialists, and our aims and long-term policies have not been realised. Therefore, how could we deal with women's problems? Because all these women's problems are related to our circumstances, the history of our present age, we therefore cannot have very great assistance in respect of the carrying into effect of this Women's Charter, because we are limited by our constitution and our prevailing circumstances. I hope all people could understand our viewpoint, i.e., they should not misunderstand our intentions regarding the re-introduction of this Women's Charter. They must not think that we have not given consideration to it before re-introducing it. Here I must second the decision of all our sisters in casting away doubts and other misgivings in relation to this Bill and women's rights. I must also stress that we must not have very rosy dreams. We must not hope too much beyond reasonable logic, because we women are under oppression by two sides. Therefore, we cannot see an immediate practical improvement by the re-introduction of this Bill. Anyway, I can see this Bill is a progressive one and it will contribute to the welfare of our sisters so as to enable them to carry on their struggle. I fully support the hon. Member for Delta who has said the re-introduction of this Bill will enable us to carry on our duty in respect of women's contribution to society. For this reason, I feel very honoured that our P.A.P. Government has re-introduced this Women's Charter. 4.06 p.m.

(In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, today we are re-introducing this Women's Charter. We have been attacked by the Opposition Members, but we the P.A.P. base our efforts on reality. Their unsatisfied criticisms do not merit our attention. The problems of women have been neglected in the past. In Singapore, after 140 years under colonial rule and under the former Lim Yew Hock Government, they had not paid much attention to the problems of women. Did they feel sorry for it, especially our Member for Mountbatten, when they were governing this country? Had they done anything beneficial for women? That is why today they are still shouting criticisms at us. These criticisms will not contribute anything constructive to this Bill. They had let us down. They had disappointed us. And in regard to the stand adopted by the P.A.P. to solve women's problems, we would like to carry out this job in stages. Only we the P.A.P. Government has the courage to attempt a solution. Is there any other Party which dares to take up this problem? We are proud of our stand. We have clearly written down and declared in our Five-Year Plan what we will do for the welfare of women. We want true equality between men and women, just as what our colleagues have said: that the solution to the problems of women will have to await the coming of a true socialist society. I want to explain these points to the Opposition Members. We have said before that under a more just society, there are no women's problems. But we have not come to a socialist society. That is why we have women's problems. If we reach that stage, then we believe we shall improve the lot of women. According to the principle of a social evolution, people are equal, irrespective of their religion, creed or sex. There will not be any exploitation of man by man. All this will be abolished. This will be so only under a more just society. If you want to raise the economic and social standing of women, then we have to work hard. Our policy is a long-term one, and I will only point out one thing. We do not say that we can solve all the women's problems at this stage. What we say, we mean. But regarding this Women's Charter, the Opposition Members have said that they cannot recognise that our intention is good. In dealing with the details of the Charter, we may have made some mistakes, but any good thing will have to be considered so many times. As for the criticisms on clause 166, they cannot say that our intention is a bad one. One who has been liberated from double oppression knows full well the problems of women. Therefore, we are proud that we are re-introducing this Bill. 4.12 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I had not intended to enter into this controversy and pronounce an opinion on matters on which I am not fully an expert. But, nevertheless, since the Member for Mountbatten has quoted me somewhat erroneously, I am afraid I feel obliged to stand up and say a few words. I did not recollect quoting in this Assembly that famous passage from George Orwell about the equality of men. But I did remember, when discussing pay differentials between men and women teachers, that I did say that while we agree that women workers are equal to men, there are occupations when men are more equal. I think the Member for Mountbatten, in taking up the example of women Inspectors, merely brings out the point which I am trying to develop. She says that women Inspectors remain in the ranks for 12 years or more, while many men Inspectors have been promoted to higher grades. But surely that is just the point. Let us suppose a Member of the Assembly is in a difficult position. Let us say he is about to be assaulted by some tough gangsters. Would he prefer then, in that situation, Mr Speaker, Sir, to have by his side a very robust man police officer, or one of the women Inspectors? I have no doubt that-

Let us have a robust woman Inspector!

I have no doubt at all where my choice would lie in the extremity of that situation.

That depends on the locality!

The equality of women has been pursued so far that you do find even women members of secret societies. But I think that is not the equality that we are trying to encourage in the Women's Charter. Therefore, in the conditions of service, there must be regard to differential ability, and, therefore, different terms of pay. But what has always struck me as rather curious is the regulation about retirement which requires women to retire at an earlier age than men. I did raise this point once in this Assembly. I said that the vital statistics of all countries prove beyond all doubt that women live longer than men, by at least five or ten years; and, therefore, they should retire five years later than men, not earlier. We would not want to have large numbers of our population living on Government pensions for decades. So the Member for Mountbatten will be delighted to know that I brought up this matter with my colleagues, and although I could not gain my point that women should retire at a later age, we reached a compromise and agreed that women and men should retire at the same age. Now to be more serious, Mr Speaker, Sir, if I can go back to the theme, and it is a serious theme. I do not think Members of the Opposition were justified in making remarks about the women Members on the Government side so lightly, and on occasions so derisively. We agree that this Women's Charter, like any other piece of legislation, gives only the protective framework. In itself, it cannot establish any new social codes of behaviour. But the difference between women Members on the Government side and Members of the Opposition is that our Members, in the course of their work and in the course of their lives, have come across so many examples of inequality and oppression of women. These phrases are not the catch phrases of politicians or people who go abroad to attend conferences on the equality of women. They see this as part of their common experience, and, therefore, to them this is a real problem, a genuine problem, and one that requires immediate and determined action. This piece of legislation is only the beginning. But the more basic work - and this is the point that women Members on the Government bench have been stressing - the more urgent need is to arouse the consciousness of women in our society, so that they can more effectively stand up for their rights, and it is only the women who can do so. However well disposed a man is, you can be sure that there is in his unconscious mind some lurking dread whether or not the Government, with the best of intentions, might not have gone too far. But I would say that both the women Members and the men Members on the Government benches treat this as a very real and genuine problem. When they talk about women, they do not think in terms of women who play mahjong, or who give charity balls or who do occasional social work in order to justify their existence. We are thinking of women in poor families in the slums, in families where the sons are given education in preference to daughters, where the old force of the patriarchal family still remains, and it is for this reason that the P.A.P., as a political Party, has developed a conscious policy in regard to women. It is not, as I have said, an academic problem, but it is a real one, and Members on the Government Front Bench are fully aware of it and treat it as a real and genuine issue. Mr Byrne rose -

Will the Minister please wait for one second? I do not know whether anyone else wishes to speak. No other Member wishes to speak? Mr Byrne, in reply.

Mr Speaker, Sir, from what the Member for Mountbatten has said this afternoon, I note she has receded from the former position that she took up in this House when the former Women's Charter Bill was introduced. On that occasion, Mr Speaker, Sir, she said in this Assembly that the Women's Charter Bill was a fraud on the women of Singapore; that, in fact, there was nothing new in the proposal that there should be monogamy in our community; that it was a shame for the Charter to be introduced in this form, in the sense that provisions for the suppression of brothels were included in the Bill which purported to be a Women's Charter. Mr Speaker, Sir, this Bill, as I have pointed out before, is worthy of the description of being a Women's Charter. For the first time, if it is approved by this Legislative Assembly, there will be monogamy in our community. Hitherto, the practice of a man being restricted to one wife has been restricted only to those who are Christians. The greater bulk of our population are not Christians. If this Bill becomes law, Mr Speaker, Sir, it will, for the first time, introduce this new principle in our community. There is no point in our talking about the rights of women and so on unless the woman is first regarded as the mistress in her own home. If she has to share her home with somebody else, you cannot say that that is an ideal community, that that is a community where the interests of women are well served. Mr Speaker, Sir, right through this law, if it is looked into carefully, I have no doubt all these points could not have escaped the attention of the Member for Farrer Park. He has been very silent this afternoon. He knows this Charter better than any other Member of the Opposition, because he spent quite long hours with us in the Select Committee proceedings which went to 250 pages. He will realise, and I have no doubt he does realise, that this Bill is worthy of the description which we, as the Government, have applied to it. Mr Speaker, Sir, the Opposition have now said that they are glad to know that we have profited by the advice they have given us. They have said it is a good thing we have now dropped the provisions with regard to the re-registration of former marriages. Mr Speaker, Sir, we had every intention of referring the former Bill to a Select Committee from the very beginning, and we did do so. We wanted to invite comments not only from Members of the Opposition on the provisions of the Bill, but also comments from all interested parties. We did receive quite a number of representations from members of the general public and, as a result of those representations, Government has decided to drop the provisions regarding re-registration. Mr Speaker, Sir, the Member for Cairnhill has said just now that this is not the document that it claims to be, in the sense that whether we have this Charter or not, a man is always free to will his property to any person he wants. Mr Speaker, Sir, for the first time, a similar right is given to a married woman under the provisions of this Bill. I would refer the Member for Cairnhill to clause 47 (1) of the Bill in which it is provided that: `A married woman shall, in accordance with this Part of this Ordinance, be capable of acquiring, holding and disposing by will or otherwise of any movable or immovable property as her separate property, in the same manner as if she were a feme sole, without the intervention of any trustee.' The position of a married woman then is equated in all respects with that of her husband under the provisions of this law. Mr Speaker, there are a large number of provisions in this law which protect the interests of women and children. I need only refer to Part VII of the Bill which deals with the question of maintenance of wife and children; Part VIII which deals with the enforcement of maintenance orders; Part IX which deals with divorce; and the last sections of the Bill which deal with the protection of women and girls generally. Mr Speaker, Sir, if I may refer again to what the Member for Cairnhill said just now. He thought that clause 32 is unnecessary. I would submit, Mr Speaker, Sir, with respect, that clause 32 is very necessary, because although registration gives one the right to regard a marriage as being a valid marriage, there might be circumstances which have occured which, if proved, would be able to establish that though registered, the marriage is not a valid marriage and that provision is, therefore, necessary in a Bill of this nature. Mr Speaker, Sir, I call the attention of the House to the fact that the operative date of the Bill has been put forward to the 2nd March, 1961, and that has been done to regularise those marriages which have taken place under customary law between 2nd March, 1960, (when this Bill was first introduced) and the time when this Bill will be passed into law. Mr Speaker, Sir, I would also like to inform the House that since the original Bill was introduced, there have been more marriages solemnized in the Registry of Marriages than there have been in the last six years. So from that alone, it would indicate that this Bill is, by and large, well supported by the whole of our community, and that they have now accepted the position that monogamy is to be their rightful lot. Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move.

Question put, and agreed to. Bill accordingly read a Second time. Committed to a Select Committee consisting of Mr Speaker as Chairman and seven other Members to be nominated by the Committee of Selection -[Mr Byrne].

4.30 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move the motion standing in my name*. The Women's Charter Bill, 1960, was referred to a Select Committee in the last Session of this House. The Select Committee in its Report stated: `Your Committee are of the opinion that, at this late period of the Session, it is not possible to bring their consideration of the Bill to a satisfactory conclusion. They have therefore agreed to present this report of the representations received and the Minutes of Evidence taken before them and to recommend that should a similar Bill be introduced in the next Session and should the Bill be committed to a Select Committee, this report be referred to that Select Committee for consideration.' The Women's Charter Bill has been redrafted in the light of the representations made, and it has been introduced in this Session. As the Bill is being referred to a Select Committee, I move, *That the Report of the Select Committee on the Women's Charter Bill presented to the Assembly in the previous session and contained in Paper L.A. 16 of 1960 be referred to the Select Committee on the Women's Charter Bill.

Question put, and agreed to. Resolved, That the Report of the Select Committee on the Women's Charter Bill presented to the Assembly in the previous session and contained in Paper L.A. 16 of 1960 be referred to the Select Committee on the Women's Charter Bill.

Order for Second Reading read. 4.32 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I have His Excellency's recommendation to proceed with the Bill. I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." Members will recall that on 15th August last year, this Assembly passed the Development Loan (Local) Ordinance, No. 50 of 1959, which was to enable the Government to raise locally loans not exceeding the value of $100 million to finance in part the cost of projects under the Development Estimates. You will be glad to know that under this Ordinance, three loans totalling $70 million were successfully floated. In our development planning, loan capital is expected to be a major source of finance. As Members would have noted from the Government's financial talks with the United Kingdom Government in 1960, it is the intention to raise loan capital both locally as well as from external sources. Members would know, that in this context, the United Kingdom Government agreed to provide to the Singapore Government Exchequer loans of up to �5 million or $42.5 million to meet part of our capital expenditure under the Development Plan. The Development Plan itself was prepared last year and completed before my departure in August to the United Kingdom for financial talks. The original Plan covered a five-year period, 1959/1964. As a result of further discussions with the World Bank Mission who visited Singapore last September, and taking into account the result of our financial discussions with the U.K. Government, it was necessary to revise in detail some aspects of the Plan. I referred to this matter in my last Budget Speech. The work of revision was an intricate operation. However, the exercise was completed by the end of January of this year and the Plan is now with the Government Printers. I intend to present the Development Plan at the next sitting of the Assembly for its approval on the 12th of April. Because of the lapse of time since the original Plan was prepared, it is necessary to restrict the Plan period to four years, i.e., 1960/64. To finance the Plan expenditure, loans will be raised both locally and overseas. The original Development Loan (Local) Ordinance, 1959, does not provide for loans raised externally. The Bill now before the House provides, in section 3, for the raising of loans in the London money market and for Exchequer loans negotiated with the Secretary of State. Should we have occasion to raise loans from other external sources, such as the World Bank or the Import and Export Bank, it may be necessary either to pass amending legislation or to introduce new legislation. These matters are being examined in my Ministry. But it is best to leave that as a separate exercise and deal with it as and when the occasion arises. The Bill before us, in addition to providing for loans raised in the United Kingdom, also raises the ceiling from $100 million to $400 million. This is a substantial sum. But the amount is well within the borrowing capacity of the Singapore Government provided the yield from our revenues continues to expand, as it had done in previous years, and provided also that strict control is maintained over annually recurrent expenditure to avoid waste. The Development Plan provides for a total expenditure of $871 million in the years 1960/64. I do not wish to enter into a discourse on the development plan as this is properly a subject for the next sitting of the Assembly. But I may perhaps be permitted to say a few words on the urgency of the problem. The main outline is familiar enough to all thinking persons. I am talking about the outline of the problem and not the outline of the plan. Here we are in the small island State with no natural resources. Our population is expanding at a prodigious rate. Unless something is done immediately, and on a scale unprecedented in our history, a decline in standards of living in Singapore is inevitable. No country in the world owes Singapore a livelihood. They have even less responsibility to assure our prosperity. Our standard of living, one of the highest in Asia, is due to the exertions of our own people, their thrift, industry and ingenuity. But today Singapore faces a problem that she has never had to face before. In the past, when things were really bad, large numbers of the population returned to their homeland, for the great majority of the population in pre-war years, for instance, was of immigrant origin. So we saw in the great depression of the 1930's the spectacle of hundreds of thousands of people returning to China and India. But today our population is a settled one. There is no place for us to escape to, should things go bad. Hence it is the responsibility of the Government to ensure that everything will be done within the limits of its capability to build for the future. The Bill before us enables the Government to build up the sinews of the economic strength of the State. The effort that has to be mounted is an immense one for there is no easy way out, faced as we are in a very tight situation in which the population is outstripping our resources. I shall deal with this theme in greater length at the next sitting of the Assembly when I present the Development Plan. In the meantime, all I need say is that this Bill is intended to make possible the mobilisation of our financial resources to make this Development Plan effective. Sir, I beg to move. Question proposed. 4.40 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the Hon. the Finance Minister, in moving the Second Reading of the Bill, informed the House that the intention of this Bill was to increase the ceiling which had been set for the previous Development Loan (Local) Ordinance, No. 50 of 1959, from $100 million to $400 million. He also informed the House that under the previous Ordinance, $70 million had already been raised, leaving $30 million still to be raised. Sir, I wonder if the Finance Minister could inform the House whether it is the intention of the Government to raise $400 million under this Ordinance, and to raise another $30 million under the previous Ordinance; or what the intention of Government is. Under this Bill, although the explanatory statement says that it replaces the Development Loan (Local) Ordinance, 1959, it does not repeal that Ordinance. Therefore, it could well be that the Government, if it chose, could raise the full $400 million under this Ordinance and go for the balance of the $30 million under the Development Loan (Local) Ordinance, 1959. The Schedule is not concerned with any repealing section. It is merely a Schedule concerned with the definition of the expression "local stock". So that if this Bill is passed, the Government will, in effect, have at its disposal two Ordinances under which they could raise loans up to $430 million, if they felt so disposed. I am not saying that they should not raise that loan but, if the ceiling which the Government propose for the development loan over the next four years is $400 million, then it appears that the Government could, under the statutory provisions, if this Bill is passed, draw on another $30 million. That is the first point, Sir. The second point is a matter of detail on clauses 3 and 4 which I will raise in Committee when the Bill is moved into Committee.

Dr Goh, in reply.

Mr Speaker, Sir, just to clarify the point raised by the Member for Farrer Park. It is not the intention of the Government to make use of any surplus arising from the previous Development Loan Ordinance.

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. -[Dr Goh Keng Swee]. Bill considered in Committee.

4.45 p.m. Clause 1 to 3 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 4 - Question proposed, "That clause 4 stand part of the Bill."

On a point of information, Sir, Clause 4 reads: `The principal moneys and interest represented by stock issued...'- the words "represented by stock issued", I take it, would refer to the stock issued under clause 3 (2) (a) - '...or by a loan raised in the United Kingdom, under the provisions of this Ordinance, are hereby charged upon and shall be payable out of the Consolidated Fund and assets of Singapore.' This clause 4 takes in clause 3 (2) (a) and (b), omits (c), and says that anything in connection with clause 3 (2) (a) and (b) "are hereby charged upon and shall be payable out of the Consolidated Fund and assets of Singapore." But clause 4 leaves out: `by means of loans made at the request of the Minister by the Secretary of State under the provisions of section 2 of the Colonial Development and Welfare Act, 1959.'. Mr Speaker, Sir, if you will be good enough to look at clause 6, you will see that it deals specifically with loans raised under clause 3 (2) (c). Clause 6 reads: `Any, loan raised under paragraph (c) of subsection (2) of section 3 of this Ordinance shall be on such terms as may be agreed between the Minister and the Secretary of State and shall be repaid by equal annual instalments of capital and interest combined so that such loan shall be repaid within the period for which the same was granted.' Sir, clause 4, as it now stands, does not state whether or not moneys raised under clause 3 (2) (c) become payable out of the Consolidated Fund. So the question I ask the Minister for Finance is this. If it is not payable out of the Consolidated Fund, then out of what fund would he propose to repay any loans incurred under clause 3 (2) (c)?

I do not think I can accept the interpretation of the Member for Farrer Park. Clause 4 will not have any relevance to loans raised under clause 3 (2) (c) - that is, Exchequer loans. I would have thought that Exchequer loans would have come within the definition of loans raised in the United Kingdom under the provisions of the Bill, and therefore would be chargeable to the Consolidated Fund.

If the interpretation of the Minister for Finance is correct, then that is so. What he said would be correct. But it does look as if a loan raised in the United Kingdom under the provisions of this Bill, as drafted, refers to: `The loan hereby authorised or any part of it may be raised either- in London by the Crown Agents in accordance with the provisions of the General Loan and Inscribed Stock Ordinance;'. Now any loans negotiated between the Minister and the Secretary of State appear to me not to be covered by the phrase in clause 4 "or by a loan raised in the United Kingdom". It appears to me that that phrase could only refer to clause 3 (2) (b). But if the Minister is satisfied that the phrase "or by a loan raised in the United Kingdom", in fact, covers clause 3 (2) (b) and (c), then, of course, I have nothing further to say. But if it does not, then the question will arise: out of which fund would he pay any loans which he negotiates with the Secretary of State?

I can assure the Member for Farrer Park that unless the cost of servicing and interest payments on loans are chargeable to the Consolidated Fund, we are not likely to get any money from that.

Question put, and agreed to. Clause 4 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 5 to 17 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill. The Schedule ordered to stand part of the Bill. Bill reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed.

4.52 p.m.

7nbsp; The Deputy Prime Minister (Dr Toh Chin Chye): Mr Speaker, I beg to move, That Standing Order No. 93 be amended by adding at the end of paragraph (6) thereof the following paragraph:- 'Committee of Privileges (7) (a) There shall be a Committee to be known as the Committee of Privileges to consist of the Speaker as Chairman and seven Members to be nominated by the Committee of Selection, as soon as may be after its appointment, in such manner as shall ensure that, so far as is possible, the balance between the Government benches and the Opposition benches in the Assembly is reflected in the Committee. There shall be referred to this Committee any complaint of breach of privilege or any matter which appears to affect the powers and privileges of the Assembly. It shall be the duty of the Committee to consider any such matters to them referred, and to report on them to the Assembly. (b) Whenever the Assembly is not sitting a Member may bring an alleged breach of privilege to the notice of Mr Speaker who may, if he is satisfied that a prima facie breach of privilege has been committed, refer such matter to the Committee which shall report thereon to the Assembly.'.

Hon. Members are no doubt aware of sub-paragraph (b) of paragraph (4) of Standing Order No. 93 which reads: `If a notice of motion involves any proposal for the amendment of Standing Orders, the notice shall be accompanied by a draft of the proposed amendments and the motion when proposed shall stand referred without any question being proposed thereon to the Standing Orders Committee and no further proceedings shall be taken on any such motion until the Standing Orders Committee has reported thereon.' Accordingly, in accordance with that sub-paragraph, the motion now stands referred to the Standing Orders Committee.

Resolved, "That this Assembly do now adjourn to 12th April, 1961."- [Dr Toh Chin Chye.] Adjourned accordingly at 4.55 p.m. to Wednesday, 12th April, 1961.