Hansard, 1961-06-14

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:- Dr Sheng Nam Chin (Nee Soon), Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Health - 31st May, 1961. Mr Chan Sun Wing (Upper Serangoon), Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister - 31st May, 1961. Mr Ong Chang Sam (Choa Chu Kang) - 31st May, 1961. Mr Leong Keng Seng (Serangoon Gardens), Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Education - 31st May, 1961. Mr Tan Cheng Tong (Jalan Kayu) - 31st May, 1961. Mr G. Kandasamy (Kampong Kapor), Deputy Speaker, - for seven weeks from 4th June to 23rd July, 1961. Mrs Seow Peck Leng (Mountbatten) - from 4th June to 30th June, 1961. Madam Chan Choy Siong (Delta) - from 12th to 15th June, 1961. Mr Ong Pang Boon (Telok Ayer), Minister for Home Affairs - from 12th to 15th June, 1961. Mr Yong Nyuk Lin (Geylang West), Minister for Education - 14th June, 1961.

I have to report that I have been informed by His Excellency the Yang di-Pertuan Negara that, on the days stated, he assented to the following Bills:- 30th May, 1961. Punishment of Kidnapping Bill; Penal Code (Amendment) Bill; Police Cadet Corps Bill; Women's Charter Bill; 31st May, 1961. Offences relating to Vehicles Bill; Legislative Assembly Elections (Special Provisions - Anson Election) Bill; Economic Development Board Bill. 5th June, 1961. Land Acquisition (Amendment) Bill.

Honourable Members are informed that there will he published in the final issue of the Official Report of Assembly Debates of the present Session a record of attendances of Members at sittings of the Assembly and Sessional and Select Committees during the Second Session of this, the First Legislative Assembly of the State of Singapore.

asked the Minister for Home Affairs to state (i) the total number of new voters in the revised electoral register for the Electoral Division of Anson; and (ii) the numbers of such new voters as have been transferred from each of the other Electoral Divisions, giving the numbers Division by Division.

In answer to the learned doctor, may I say that the number of new voters who were not found in the 1959 register for the electoral division of Anson but who will appear in the electoral register for 1961 will be 2,268. There are also 221 claims submitted by persons during the inspection of the registers for the period 8th to 22nd May. If these claims are valid, then 221 more names will also appear as new voters in the 1961 electoral register before Polling Day. As to the second half of the question, the Statistics Department has not classified figures according to transfers from one constituency to another. The average increase for each constituency is 2,700 voters. 2.34 p.m.

"to provide for the licensing and regulation of the business of banking, and to amend certain provisions of the Companies Ordinance (Chapter 174 of the Revised Edition)", presented by the Minister for Finance (Dr Goh Keng Swee); read the First time, to be read a Second time on the next available sitting day, and to be printed.

2.35 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move. That this House considers that in any legislation in respect of the grant of leases of agricultural land, provision should be made in the case of working coconut and rubber estates, whereby the tenant should be given the option of either a lease at economic rent or a licence to occupy the land for specific user such as rearing of poultry or pigs, with the right to possession and enjoyment to the coconut or rubber remaining in the landlord. Mr Speaker, Sir, the House will recall that two Bills - the Agricultural Leases Bill and the Control of Rent (Amendment No. 3) Bill - went to Select Committee and, arising out of the representations in the Select Committee, a curious phenomenon has come to light on which considerable ingenuity and time will have to be spent to work out the rights of the interested parties. Out of an estimated 30,000 acres of the Master Plan's agricultural belt, an estimated one-third, or 10,000 acres, is covered by coconut and rubber plantations. In nearly all these plantations there is, de facto, a situation where the landlord has let out not the land but a licence to tenants or squatters to rear pigs, poultry or fish, whilst retaining possession and tapping his rubber or collecting his coconut. Therefore, the provision to allow a tenant to acquire a lease from the landlord at an economic rent, subject to certain maximum safeguards on behalf of the tenant, will work an obvious injustice in that, first, the tenant never had enjoyment of either the coconut or the rubber, and his rent (the base upon which the maximum economic rent is tied), because he did not enjoy the fruits of the coconut and the rubber, was a nominal one. Therefore, to grant the tenant a lease would be to exclude the landlord from possession and enjoyment of his crop - be it rubber or coconut - and give the tenant something which he never had, never was entitled to, and never expect-ed to be entitled to. Therefore, it is being considered now - and I am recommending this to the House - that in any legislation in respect of the grant of leases of agricultural land, provision should be made, in the ease of working coconut and rubber estates, whereby the tenant should be given the option of either a lease at economic rent, or a licence to occupy the land for specific user such as the rearing of poultry or pigs, with the right to possession and enjoyment to the coconut or rubber remaining in the landlord. In other words, what we hope to achieve would be, in effect, to give the tenant a licence which is irrevocable for a specified term of, say, 12 years, but the licence will specify the user to which the licensee is entitled. I mean, if he has been rearing chickens or pigs, he will continue to rear chickens or pigs, but the landlord will continue to collect his coconut and rubber. The alternative is for the tenant to pay the whole economic rent and he collects the rubber and the coconut. I am unable to say that we can produce legislation which will please all parties, but I do suggest that if we are to do justice in this case, this is the only way in which we can ensure that conditions are created in which farmers are given if not security of tenure, then security of user of land for specified purposes to carry out activities in agriculture - be it poultry-farming or pig-rearing - and, at the same time, allow the landlord to continue to derive that interest in the land which he always had, namely the collection of rubber and coconut. It is the intention of the Government to allow the two Bills to lapse. The House will be prorogued sometime in the near future. In fact, it was prorogued last year after the May sitting. But for various reasons which have to do with legislation, we have taken this sitting in June. After the prorogation, it is hoped that new Bills will be introduced which will incorporate these new clauses. By tabling this motion, I am, in fact, inviting a debate - I hope a constructive one - as to how we can equitably work out our policy of giving encouragement to agriculture but under terms and conditions which would not impose an unnecessary radical change in the proprietary position of land-ownership or the enjoyment of the fruits of the land. I would like to mention here that several representations have been made in the Select Committee, a number of which are unacceptable to us as the Government. I can only say now that we cannot hope to push such legislation through without, in principle, accepting the fact that there is an interference of the right of ownership to land, and that by this legislation we are, in fact, interfering with the absolute right of ownership to land. There have been representations from private estates and the Land and Housing Development Association saying that to push through these new provisions would, in fact, be to foist statutory tenants on landlords, that they had bought land which had no tenants prior to 1947, and that therefore they would be deprived of a reasonable expectation of their ability to get rid of their tenants as and when they wished to build. I am afraid that, in principle, we cannot consider all such representations if we are to pursue the objects of the Bill, but we can, to a certain extent, meet periphery representations as to the workings of the Bill. For instance, representation has been made on the point that for the Bill to have the phrase "economic rent" and, at the same time, to tie down economic rent to a maximum of a certain percentage over present rent is, in fact, a contradiction in terms. Logically it is. Certain amendments in this respect to make it less illogical but nevertheless still practical are being considered. On the side of the tenants, they also would not like any maximum mentioned, not for the reason that they think the maximum is not to their advantage, but that they feel there would be a tendency for landlords always to insist on the maximum in negotiating for leases. Both the representations - the one from the landlords that the maximum rent being tied to present rent and economic rent is illogical, and the other one from the tenants that maximum rent should never be mentioned at all because it would incite landlords to demand the maximum - are being considered, and provision will be introduced in the new Bill which will, we hope, meet the objections from both parties insofar as they can be reconciled. There was also representation that there should be not just one arbitrator who is a Government official, but that there should also be a tribunal - one representing the landowners and one representing the tenants. And it is proposed to introduce a provision whereby in cases where the arbitrator deems it necessary, he can call upon the services of the tribunal to assist him. But in normal cases where he does not deem it necessary, he can proceed by himself. The-

Order. I am just wondering whether the Prime Minister is not going perhaps away from the motion itself. In fact, I think he is inviting a debate on the Report of the Select Committee. If he carries on in this strain, then, of course, he will invite a debate on the whole of the Select Committee's Report and all the representations which have been made. The motion itself seems to confine the aspect of this problem to the grant of leases vis-a-vis working coconut and rubber estates.

Just as you like, Mr Speaker. I had no intention to expand the scope of the motion. I only wish to give the Members of the House, and through the House the parties interested, a brief impression of the deliberations which are taking place on the representations that have been put in. But the one question upon which I would ask for a debate is that of resolving those cases, covering about one-third of the land, where at present there are two persons enjoying the rights of user of the land. Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move. Question proposed. 2.48 p.m.

Mr Speaker. Sir, I can quite appreciate the difficulty encountered by the Government in the introduction of that Bill which went to Select Committee. We did encounter such a difficulty during our time, and we support the principle of seeing to it that, in so far as the tenant who has been using the land for a specific use is concerned, he should be allowed to continue that tenancy for that specific use. But one anomaly may creep in when the occupier of that land, who is using it to raise poultry, wants a lease for rubber estate and coconut estate. He may be made use of by competitors who would like to break up the estate, and I do not know in what way that can be met. Of course, on the whole, we support the principle of this motion.

Is there any other Member who wishes to speak? Does the Prime Minister wish to reply?

No, Mr Speaker. I do not wish to reply. I have fairly stated the position of the Government. At a later date, there will be provision to incorporate these provisions in a new Bill.

Question put, and agreed to. Resolved, That this House considers that in any legislation in respect of the grant of leases of agricultural land, provision should be made in the case of working coconut and rubber estates, whereby the tenant should be given the option of either a lease at economic rent or a licence to occupy the land for specific user such as rearing of poultry or pigs, with the right to possession and enjoyment to the coconut or rubber remaining in the landlord.

Order for Second Reading read. 2.51 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I have His Excellency the Yang di-Pertuan Negara's recommendation for the Road Traffic Bill, and I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." Hon. Members will know that in accordance with the policy of the Government, action is being taken to integrate the functions of local authorities in Singapore with those of the Government. In regard to the Bill which is now before the House, we are concerned with the integration of the various functions and processes which relate to the administration of road traffic in general and to the office of the Registrar of Vehicles in particular. The responsibility, Sir, for these functions and processes is at present shared between the Government and the local authorities. It will in future lie solely with the Government. This entails a transfer to the Government of the responsibility for all those functions previously exercised by the City Council and the Rural Board. The existing Road Traffic Ordinance provides for the registration and licensing of motor vehicles and is not concerned with the registration and licensing of non-motor vehicles. At present, it is the City Council which is the licensing authority for the purposes of registration and licensing of motor vehicles, and the executive officer responsible for the various details of registration and licensing is the Registrar of Vehicles, an officer of the Council. The functions relating to the licensing of drivers is at present vested in the Police. The existing Road Traffic Ordinance also contains provisions governing the use by vehicles of Singapore's highways, as, for example, the provision of parking places; the emplacement of road traffic signs; and the restrictions placed from time to time on the use of roads. In connection with the operation of these provisions, the highway authority is the City Council, and the Police, who have the general responsibility for the operation of these provisions, are required to exercise such responsibility in consultation with the City Council. The existing Municipal and Local Government Ordinances contain provisions for the registration and licensing of non-motor vehicles such as carts, trishaws and bicycles. There are also provisions regulating the conduct of personnel who drive such vehicles, as well as provisions which regulate the operation of public service vehicles, as, for example, hired cars or taxis as they are commonly known. Now, Sir, may I briefly state the situation which will arise on integration? The City Council will cease to exist. Responsibility for the Registry of Vehicles will he transferred to the Deputy Prime Minister's portfolio. The Municipal Ordinance and the Local Government Ordinance will be repealed, and it will be clearly necessary for alternative legislation to be enacted to replace all those provisions, under which the Registrar of Vehicles functions at present, in respect of non-motor vehicles and of public service vehicles. I must explain, Sir, that although the direct effect of integration will be the transfer of the Registry of Vehicles from the City Council to the Government, there have also been other operations which, although they have no direct bearing on integration, have nevertheless been undertaken in the context of such integration. First, the responsibility for the issue of ordinary driving licences will be transferred from the Police to the Registrar of Vehicles. Secondly, whereas at present the responsibility for enforcement of the provisions of the Road Traffic Ordinance is shared between the Police and the Registrar, this responsibility will in future devolve wholely on the Police. Thirdly, the function of compounding traffic offences will be transferred from the Police, who now exercise it, to District Judges and Magistrates. The Minister is empowered to make rules to prescribe, inter alia, the offences which may be compounded and the amount which may be offered by way of composition in respect of any such offence. It is proposed to set out in such rules a scale of amounts which may be offered by way of composition for such offences, and, within the limits specified, District Judges and Magistrates will have discretionary power to offer the offenders such amounts as they think fit with a view to compounding the offences in question. For any compoundable traffic offence which is repeated, the scale of composition rates will he increased for a second offence and for third and subsequent offences. I would add, Sir, that in amending the Road Traffic Ordinance the opportunity has been taken to bring certain traffic offences in line with the legislation in the United Kingdom and in the Federation of Malaya. It is also proposed to introduce a system of service of summonses by registered post, which is designed to conserve Police manpower. Further, the provisions of the Road Traffic Ordinance are to be extended to two areas, the Naval Base and Pulau Bukom, with the concurrence of the authorities concerned. At this juncture, I would like, for a moment, to revert to the subject of the registration and licensing of non-motor vehicles which was previously carried out under the provisions of the Municipal Ordinance, but which, as the Bill now before the House envisages, will in future be carried out under the provisions of the Road Traffic Ordinance. Now, Sir, a perusal of Part I of the existing Road Traffic Ordinance will show that the Ordinance already provides satisfactory machinery for the collection of revenue by way of registration and licence in respect of motor vehicles. It seemed both simple and appropriate to adapt this machinery for the collection of revenue in respect of non-motor vehicles as well. Under the existing provisions of the Municipal Ordinance and Local Government Ordinance, non-motor vehicles (except bicycles) were either registered annually or taxed annually, or both. In future, it is proposed that these non-motor vehicles (except bicycles) will be treated exactly in the same way as motor vehicles, that is to say, registered once and for all and licensed annually. The method adopted in the Bill was generally to remove the word "motor" from the provisions of Part I of the Road Traffic Ordinance, which, ipso facto, makes that Part applicable to all vehicles. The level and quantum of licence fees will be designed so that these fees will be equated to the tax previously paid. The licensing of public service vehicles - taxis and buses - is a quite separate exercise, and a new Part II has been introduced in the Bill for this purpose. This new Part reproduces the corresponding provisions of the Local Government Ordinance. With regard to the transfer from the Police to the Registrar of Vehicles of the function of issuing driving licences, the deletion of references to the Deputy Commissioner of Police, who was the previous licensing officer, and the substitution therefor of references to the Registrar of Vehicles in sections 13 to 21 of the Road Traffic Ordinance (which correspond to clauses 13 to 21 of the Bill) has given effect to the intention. The definition of roads in section 2 of the Road Traffic Ordinance has been amended, as hon. Members will observe on a perusal of the definition of "road" in clause 2 of the Bill. A "road" now includes any road in Pulau Bukom and any road within the Naval Base. As I explained earlier, the effect of this definition will be to extend the provisions of the Road Traffic Ordinance to these two areas. Finally, I would like to draw the attention of hon. Members to clauses 24 to 28 of the Bill which relate to reckless or dangerous driving; driving without due care or reasonable consideration; causing death by reckless or dangerous driving; driving while under the influence of drink or drugs; and being in charge of a motor vehicle when under the influence of drink or drugs. These provisions, as I mentioned earlier, have been brought into line with Federation and United Kingdom legislation. It is worthy of note that a specific penalty is now provided for causing death by driving a motor vehicle recklessly or at a speed or in a manner which is dangerous to the public. Apart from the amendments to which I have referred, the Road Traffic Bill retains the form and substance of the present Road Traffic Ordinance. For convenience of reference, I have caused to be placed at the end of each clause of the Bill which corresponds to a section in the Road Traffic Ordinance, the section number of the Ordinance, except in cases where the provision is a new one not previously contained in the Ordinance or is based on other legislation. Sir, I beg to move. Question proposed. 3.01 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, there is only one aspect of the Bill which I wish to deal with and which the Minister passed over quite cursorily in his Second reading speech. That is the question of the removal of the power to compound from the Police into the hands of a District Judge or a Magistrate. Sir, I am not questioning the desirability of the provision of the power to compound, but what is exercising my mind, Sir, is whether it is desirable to transfer this power to compound from the Police, as it now exists, to a District Judge or a Magistrate. I had hoped that the Minister would give some reason for this transfer of power from the Police to a Magistrate, but, unfortunately, he did not touch upon it. I do not know whether the Government are, on principle, objecting to a Government servant exercising the power to compound, or whether they are thinking that the power to compound in the hands of a District Judge or a Magistrate might be used more expeditiously and to the satisfaction of all parties concerned. Sir, we have heard in this House how difficult it is to get work through the Courts, because they are congested, and the difficulty of getting Magistrates and District Judges. If that is a correct statement, Mr Speaker, Sir, I am wondering whether a transfer of the power to compound from the Police to the Magistracy would not involve the Magistracy in more work and, therefore, tend to inconvenience the public in so far as these offences in respect of which compositions could be effected are concerned. I myself do not know how many of such offences are compounded per day or per week, but if the number is large, Mr Speaker, Sir, then I feel that possibly this provision, however desirable it may be in principle, might lead to the position where, because of the bottleneck in the District Courts, work will be held up. Now, the clause as worded here in the Bill, Mr Speaker, Sir, envisages the offences being spotted by the Traffic Police, and where the offences are of a nature where compounding is possible, then I take it the Traffic Police will then refer them to the District Judge or the Magistrate as the case may be, and then the Magistrate, I take it, would have to issue notices to the persons concerned offering them a composition in respect of the offence. All this means work in the Magistracy, and whether that is going to lead to a bottleneck and clogging up of the clearance of these offences, I myself am not in a position to say. But I pose the question to the Minister, and if he is reasonably satisfied that this is not going to cause dislocation, then I have nothing further to say. But I wish to make this point, that if the Government is introducing clause 79 merely because it objects to a Government servant exercising this power, then I would like to remind the Hon. the Minister that under the Customs Ordinance the power to compound is still with the Senior Customs Officer.

No other Member wishes to speak? I would suggest that perhaps a more convenient way of dealing with the subject raised by the Member for Farrer Park would be in Committee, because it only deals with one clause, and when we come to clause 79, perhaps the Minister would like to reply then. We are debating now the general principles of the Bill. Does the Minister wish to reply to that now? It is the only point.

No.

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.

3.06 p.m. Clauses 1 to 5 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 6 -

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, In page 7, line 9, to leave out "possess or". The intention, Sir, is that only bicycles which are actually used on roads should be registered and not, for example, children's bicycles. Amendment agreed to. Clause 6, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clauses 7 to 9 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 10 -

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, In page 11, line 28, after "exists", to insert" in relation to the use of the motor vehicle". The policy of insurance must be in relation to the use of the motor vehicle, and these words are added to make the intention clear. Amendment agreed to. Clause 10, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 11 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 12 -

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, In page 13, line 16, after "be", to insert "guilty of an offence under this Ordinance and shall be". This, Mr Speaker, Sir, is a drafting improvement. Amendment agreed to.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, In page 13, line 17, to leave out "possesses or". This is for the same reason as I gave in clause 6. Amendment agreed to. Further Amendment made: In page 13, line 33, after "be", to insert "guilty of an offence under this Ordinance and shall be".-[Mr Byrne]. Clause 12, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 13 -

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, In page 14, line 26, to leave out "a Commonwealth Force" and insert "the navy, army or air force of a British Commonwealth country". "Commonwealth Force", Sir, is not defined, and it is therefore preferable to use the term, "navy, army or air force of a British Commonwealth country". Amendment agreed to. Further Amendment made: In page 14, line 31, to leave out "a Commonwealth Force" and insert "the navy, army or air force of a British Commonwealth country". -[Mr Byrne]. Clause 13, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 14 -

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, In page 17, lines 6 to 8, to leave out "(where the person disqualified is the holder of a driving licence granted by the Registrar)". Mr Speaker, Sir, these words are really redundant as all provisional licences are to be issued under sub-clause (2) of clause 14. Amendment agreed to. Clause 14, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clauses 15 to 19 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 20 -

There is a note: In page 20, line 12, to leave out ", or" and insert "or.". That will be done. Amendment made: In page 20, line 15, after "be", to insert "guilty of an offence under this Ordinance and shall be". -[Mr Byrne]. Clause 20, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 21 - Amendment made: In page 21, line 32, after "be", to insert "guilty of an offence under this Ordinance and shall be". -[Mr Byrne]. Clause 21, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clauses 22 to 26 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 27 - Amendment made: In page 26, line 16, after "be", to insert "guilty of an offence under this Ordinance and shall be".- [Mr Byrne]. Clause 27, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 28 - Amendment made: In page 26, line 38, after "be", to insert "guilty of an offence under this Ordinance and shall be". -[Mr Byrne]. Clause 28, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 29 ordered to stand part of the Bill. 3.15 p.m. Clause 30 -

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, In page 28, line 6, to leave out "or trailers". It is provided by clause 31 (1) that a motor vehicle can only draw one trailer. The words "or trailers" are therefore redundant in this clause. Amendment agreed to. Amendment made: In page 28, line 8, to leave out "each" and insert "the". -[Mr Byrne]. Clause 30, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 31 -

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, In page 28, line 29, after "vehicle", to insert "other than a heavy locomotive or a light locomotive". The intention is that a heavy or a light locomotive can draw more than one trailer - the number is to be regulated by Rules under clause 46 (k). It is therefore necessary to except heavy and light locomotives in clause 31 (1). Amendment agreed to. Clause 31, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 32 -

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, In page 29, line 2, after "the", to insert "driving". The licence referred to here is a driving licence. Amendment agreed to.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, In page 29, line 20, after "Ordinance", to insert "or any rules made thereunder or any offence in connection with the driving of a motor vehicle". The words "offence under this Ordinance" are unduly restrictive. The existing Road Traffic Ordinance speaks of "any offence in connection with the driving of a motor vehicle". It is proposed, therefore, to add the words "or any rules made thereunder of any offence in connection with the driving of a motor vehicle". Thus an offence under section 304A of the Penal Code would be covered by this clause. Amendment agreed to. Clause 32, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 33 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 34 -

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, In page 31, line 31, after "with", to insert "any of the provisions of". This is a drafting improvement. Amendment agreed to. Clause 34, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 35 -

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, In page 32, line 14, after "with", to insert "any of". This is a drafting improvement. Amendment agreed to. Clause 35, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clauses 36 to 42 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 43 -

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, In page 35, line 43, to leave out "found doing any act referred to in" and insert "reasonably suspected by him of having committed or of attempting to commit an offence under". This also is a drafting improvement. Amendment agreed to. Clause 43, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 44 -

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, In page 36, line 5, to leave out "Part I" and insert "this Part". This also is a drafting improvement. Amendment agreed to. Clause 44, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clauses 45 to 49 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 50 - Amendment made: In page 42, line 41, after "be", to insert "guilty of an offence under this Ordinance and shall be".-[Mr Byrne]. Clause 50, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clauses 51 to 58 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 59 -

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, In page 45, line 38, after "A", to insert "vocational". The licence referred to is a vocational licence. Amendment agreed to. Clause 59, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clauses 60 to 65 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 66 -

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, In page 51, line 34, to leave out "signal" and insert "single". This is to correct a mistake. Amendment agreed to. Amendment made: In page 52, line 11, after "be" to insert "guilty of an offence under this Ordinance and shall be".-[Mr Byrne]. Clause 66, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 67 -

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, In page 52, line 39, to leave out "special Ordinance" and insert "written law". The words "special Ordinance" are not defined. It is preferable to refer to "written law". Amendment agreed to. Clause 67, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 68 -

There is a note: In page 53, line 40 to line 4 in page 54, to reset certain lines.* This will be done. *"(b) fails to conform to the indication given by the sign, and any pedestrian who fails to comply with any direction given by the police officer in the execution of his duty,either to pedestrian or to pedestrians and other traffic, shall be guilty of an offence under this Ordinance." Clause 68 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 69 -

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, In page 54, line 28, to leave out "and" where it secondly occurs and insert "or". This is a drafting improvement. Amendment agreed to. Amendment made: In page 54, line 29, to leave Out "and" where it first and secondly occurs and insert "or" in each case.-[Mr Byrne]. Clause 69, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clauses 70 to 74 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 75 -

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, In page 57, line 33, to leave out "subsections (3), (5) and (7)" and insert "subsection (3), (5) or (7)". The word "or" has been substituted for "and", as a police officer may be exercising one of the powers. Amendment agreed to. Clause 75, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 76 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 77 - Amendments made: In page 58, line 40, after "be", to insert "guilty of an offence under this Ordinance and shall be". -[Mr Byrne]. In page 59, line 34, after "be", to insert "guilty of an offence under this Ordinance and shall be". -[Mr Byrne]. Clause 77, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 78 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 79 - Question proposed, "That clause 79 stand part of the Bill."

Mr Speaker, Sir, the reason why we have taken away the powers of compounding offences from the Traffic Police and placed them in the District Judges is that under the new integration arrangements it is proposed that all the duties with regard to enforcement should be vested in the Traffic Police, and it is felt that it is only right and just that in that situation the power of compounding offences should be removed from the Traffic Police and placed in the hands of the District Judges and Magistrates. To prevent the Police from being cluttered up with a lot of this work, it is provided that the Minister should make Rules setting out the circumstances under which an offence can be compounded and also the limits of the fines in respect of the offences which can be compounded. Mr Speaker, Sir, it has been found that the Traffic Police tend to deal with these cases of compounding in a very perfunctory manner. It has been brought to my attention that sometimes first offenders are fined the maximum that is provided for the offence under the present system of compounding. It is provided that the Minister can make Rules for the compounding of these offences. The limits of the fines can be set out under these Rules and a graduated scale of fines worked out. Under this system, it will be quite easy for the District Judge or the Magistrate to assess the penalty if compounding is allowed. Say there is a first offence of driving without lights. In that case, the fine for that particular type of offence can be laid down in the graduated scale of fines. If it occurs for the first time, then all that the District Judge or the Magistrate will be required to do is to say that he imposes a penalty of $5. If it happens a second time, he can increase the fine according to the graduated scale. In these Rules, it can also be provided that if a motorist has taken due heed of his previous breaches of the traffic regulations - say after a period of one or more years he has a clean slate - but he is brought up again, then he cannot be fined the maximum for the offence but he can be treated as a first offender. That is the purpose of this scale of fines. 3.30 p.m. I do not think, Mr Speaker, Sir, that it will lead to the Police Courts and the Magistrates' Courts being concerned with a greater amount of work. I think, Mr Speaker, Sir, that that will meet the objections of the Member for Farrer Park.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I take it that as the enforcing authority under this Bill will still continue to be the Traffic Police, therefore, the offence in respect of which the powers to compound will arise will necessarily come to the notice of the police in the first instance. The present position is this. The offence having come to the notice of the Traffic Police, they might issue a notice to compound from the Office itself. But under the altered system envisaged by clause 79, the police, having come to know of such a compoundable offence, will have to take that offence away from its own Department and carry it (possibly some departmental instruction will go with it) to the Traffic Court may be, either the Traffic District Judge or any Magistrate there. And I take it that every Monday morning, or Wednesday morning, or Friday morning, as the case may be, there will be this traffic officer with all these compoundable offences, and he will have to interview either the District Judge or the Magistrate, and give him a list of all these offences. Whereupon the District Judge or the Magistrate will then have to instruct his usher or somebody in his section to prepare these notices to the various offenders, offering them a composition. The traffic offender can refuse the composition, and if he does, then, of course, the Traffic Police will have to determine whether they wish to lodge a prosecution against him. So, therefore, you get these two extra administrative steps which become necessary if clause 79 becomes law. It tends to increase the administrative work, although I appreciate the principle enunciated by the Minister for Labour and Law that where the Traffic Police themselves are, shall I say, catching the offenders, it is not desirable to leave them to adjudicate upon the composition; but that principle has been accepted by the Government and it is still being carried out by them under the Customs Ordinance. There are customs officers going for customs offences, and yet the senior customs officer is given authority to compound. So, therefore, that principle in itself cannot be raised in this matter, because that has been conceded by the Government so far as the Customs Department is concerned. However, Sir, I do not wish to press the point. But I only raise it because I thought it might affect the easy manner in which these cases have been dealt with. I remember when this question was first mooted in the Legislative Council, I think it was some seven or eight years ago, the reason why the police were given this power was for them to get all these minor traffic offences out of the District Courts or the Police Courts.

Mr Speaker, Sir, all these are administrative duties that we are taking away from the Traffic Police; they are concerned only with enforcement. I agree there will be some extra work for the District Judges and Magistrates, but they will have the staff to cope with it.

Question put, and agreed to. Clause 79 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 80 - Amendment made: In page 61, line 34, after "be", to insert "guilty of an offence under this Ordinance and shall be". -[Mr Byrne]. Clause 80, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clauses 81 to 83 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 84 -

Mr Speaker. Sir, I beg to move, In page 65, line 16, to leave out "(3)" and insert "85.". Mr Speaker, Sir, this has been made a new clause as it applies to all Rules made under the Ordinance. Amendment agreed to.

It means, of course, that there will be a new clause 85.

Yes, Sir. Clause 84, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

There will be consequential amendments* as indicated in the Supplementary Order Paper. *Amendments to be made to the numbering of clauses consequent on the numbering of sub-clause (3) of clause 84 as clause 85. Clauses 85 to 88 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 89 -

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, In page 67, line 17, after "Government", to insert "or in any public officer". Some of the functions under the Bill are vested in public officers, for example, the Registrar of Vehicles. Hence the amendment, Sir. Amendment agreed to. Clause 89, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 90 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

There is a note* in the Supplementary Order Paper to insert figures. That will be done. Bill reported with amendments; 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." This is a short Bill which seeks to provide that a person who has passed the final examination for the degree of Bachelor of Laws in the University of Malaya shall be regarded as a qualified person for the purposes of the Advocates and Solicitors Ordinance. The effect is that such a person will be able to read in Chambers (and if no other amendment is made to the Advocates and Solicitors Ordinance), to apply for admission as an advocate and solicitor after having attended and received instruction in law in the office of an advocate and solicitor of not less than seven years' standing for a period of not less than twelve months. This is, however, intended to be an interim measure and it is hoped that a more comprehensive amending Ordinance will be introduced later in the year. The question of how a graduate in law of the University of Malaya will be allowed to qualify for admission as an advocate and solicitor of the Supreme Court in Singapore and in the Federation of Malaya has been discussed over the past few years. There has been general agreement on the main principle that the degree of LL.B. of the University of Malaya should be recognised as a qualification for admission to the local Bars and that there should be a short period of articles or reading in Chambers before the graduate is admitted as an advocate and solicitor. It has unfortunately not, however, been possible to get agreement on all the details of the amendments that are needed. The Committee set up by the Government of the Federation on which there are representatives of the Singapore Government and the University, have only recently completed its deliberations and the recommendations of Ihe Committee will have to be accepted by the two Governments and the Bar Committee of Singapore and the Bar Council of the Federation of Malaya. It has, therefore, not been possible for us to introduce the comprehensive Bill to amend the Advocates and Solicitors Ordinance. As, however, the Faculty of Law of the University of Malaya has already produced its first graduates and as these graduates have already joined the Government service or begun to read in Chambers, it is felt that some interim legislation should be enacted to define their position. The Bill refers to the passing of the examination and not to the possession of the degree, as the degrees are not now conferred till six months after the final examinations. 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; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed.

Order for Second Reading read. 3.44 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I signify that I have received the Yang di-Pertuan Negara's recommendation that the Bill be proceeded with.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." Sir, the object of the Bill is to bring the Stamp Ordinance up-to-date in the light of past experience in order to overcome certain administrative difficulties encountered in the past, and to improve efficiency in administering the Stamp Ordinance. In order to eliminate unnecessary delay and administrative inconvenience, it is now proposed to empower the Commissioner of Stamps to delegate the powers, functions and duties vested in him by the Ordinance to any person having official duty or employed in the admimstration of the Stamp Ordinance. For the same reason, it is proposed to transfer the powers to authorise the officer in charge of any Stamp Office to issue imprest stamps, to issue a licence giving permission to use a franking machine to pay stamp duty and to authorise any bank doing business in Singapore to compound for the payment of duty on any unstamped cheques, from the Minister to the Commissioner. The Bill also aims at tightening up the provisions to deal with evasion more effectively. It provides that only stamps of the State of Singapore shall be used for payment of stamp duty. At present the Ordinance does not specify the period within which an instrument should be stamped after adjudication by the Commissioner so that the Commissioner has no power to compel the taxpayer to have such instrument stamped within any specified period. Clause 6 of the Bill provides that such instrument shall be stamped within 14 days after notice of the assessment made by the Commissioner, or within 14 days after the issue of the Order of the High Court or within such further period specified by the Commissioner or High Court as the case may be. This will assist the Commissioner in the collection of duty payable by the taxpayer. At present, under section 45 of the Ordinance, transfers, of shares cannot be stamped until the number of shares are entered. In view of the fact that certain types of shares now no longer carry distinguishing numbers, provision is now made by clause 7 of the Bill to empower the Commissioner in suitable cases to permit a transfer of shares to be stamped even though the number of shares is not entered in the transfer. Clause 9 of the Bill provides that where an instrument is to be stamped vvithin a certain period after execution, such period shall commence on the day after the execution of the instrument. Clause 11 provides for the right of Government to claim duty which has been under-assessed and to recover penalty in respect of offences committed under the Ordinance, and clause 12 is designed to tighten up the provisions relating to such penalty. Clauses 8, 10 and 13 of the Bill provide respectively for consequential amendments to sections 46, 53 and 63 of the Ordinance following the revision of the rates of duty under Schedule A by the Stamp (Amendment) Ordinance, 1952. The Bill also gives effect to the proposal to raise the practising fee of Advocates and Solicitors, which was announced by the Minister for Finance in his Budget Statement on the 29th November, 1960. 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 Low Por Tuck]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed.

Order for Second Reading read. 3.52 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." Sir, as hon. Members can see from the Explanatory Statement, this Winding Up Bill seeks to wind up the Certificates Fund constituted under the Victory Savings Certificates Ordinance, 1946. The principal Ordinance was passed on 10th October, 1946, and under its provisions the Certificates Fund was set up to borrow money to provide for the reconstruction of capital works after World War II. Certificates were sold at a discounted value of $15 each, and when they reached maturity in 10 years from the date of issue, holders were entitled to $20 per certificate. Redemptions were allowed any time before the expiry of 10 years and the surrender values of a unit certificate were graduated from $15 when less than one year to $20 on completion of 10 years. Certificates were sold from 1946 to 1950, when sales were terminated. The total sale of the certificates was only $809,542.

50. Some of the buyers of the certificates started handing in their certificates for redemption within a year after the certificates were introduced, and after 1948 the amount of certificates presented for redemption was more than the amount sold. As stated, the date of maturity of certificates is 10 years from date of issue. Since the last certificates were sold in 1950, all the certificates sold have matured and no certificates will earn interest after 1960. Therefore, it is now proposed to wind up the Fund. The Bill contains provisions which are largely procedural. Clause 5 provides that not later than six months after the coming into operation of the Ordinance, the assets of the Fund shall be converted into cash and used to settle all outstanding principal and interest payments on unredeemed certificates. Notice is to be given to holders of unredeemed certificates so that they will have ample warning that the Fund is going to be wound up. If there is any dispute regarding any payment or repayment, the Minister may pay the amount into court or may make other appropriate provision for them. After all claims have been paid or provided for, the balance, if any, is to be paid into the Consolidated Fund. 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 Low Por Tuck]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed.

Resolved, "That this Assembly do now adjourn sine die." -[Dr Toh Chin Chye]. Adjourned accordingly at two minutes to Four o'clock p.m.