Hansard, 1961-11-28

2.31 p.m.

(by Private Notice under Standing Order No. 18 (1) asked the Minister for Education (i) whether he is aware that there are agitators in buses stopping students from going to the examination; and (ii) what steps the Government proposes to take or is taking to prevent this.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I wish to state that the Government is fully aware of political agitators stopping students from going to the examinations. These agitators were working in buses and at bus stops. Political agitators covering Yock Eng High School were posted at the bus stop in front of Happy World, and political agitators covering Chung Cheng High School were posted at the Keppel Bus terminus, near the Tanjong Pagar police station. As regards the steps which Government should take, as I already stated yesterday, parents should accompany their children to and from examination centres. Parents of those misinformed children who joined the picket lines would do well to assert their authority as parents by going to the picket lines and taking them home. It is not the Government's intention to give the Communists the excuse to say that the police are manhandling students, unless it is to come to the aid of students against violence, because such students refuse to be so intimidated. I wish to add that, despite intensive picketing today with human chains, blocking up all gates of examination centres with coconut trunks, and bicycles being used to barricade entrances, about 1,500 students are carrying on with the Government Secondary IV Examination for the second successive day. Mrs Seow Peck Leng (Mountbatten) rose -

Mrs Seow, a supplementary question?

Supplementary, Sir. Mr Speaker, Sir, I wonder whether the Minister would consider taking this suggestion as a first immediate step, because I notice the Minister said that about 1,500 are taking the examination, which means that over 1,000 are not taking the examination. I have been told by members of the public that -

Order. Will the hon. Member come to her supplementary question?

Would the Minister take the first immediate step to inform students through the radio, Rediffusion and other means available to Government, that it is permissible and advisable for them to go to the examination without their uniforms, as this is the way in which all the students are recognised by agitators?

Democratic methods!

Mr Speaker, Sir, I think it is a little difficult to insist upon the wearing of uniform as a requirement for an examination.

On a point of information.

If the Minister gives way.

I thought the Member for Mountbatten was suggesting that students should be informed that they could go to examination centres with or without uniforms -

Without uniforms, because they are recognised by their uniforms.

As I have said, we should not make it so that to take an examination, you should be wearing a school uniform. I think it should be left to them whether they wear or do not wear uniforms. I think, Sir, if we are to survive as a democratic State, we should be prepared to stand on our two hind legs and say, "Boo!" to intimidation - Some hon. Members: Hear, hear!

- as we do to secret society gangsters. Unless we are prepared to fight for our rights, there is very little that a democratic government can do.

Mr Speaker, Sir, may I ask the Minister whether there have been any incidents of violence or force used by agitators to date?

I am pleased to say, Sir, that up to this moment, there has been no report of any violence whatsoever nor mishap. In fact, many picketers were having handkerchiefs across the bottom half of their faces and they were shivering in fright.

Sir, can the Minister say whether the agitation that is now taking place is following the same pattern as the agitation that took place during the time of the previous Government?

That is a completely different question.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I wonder whether the Minister would do for those who were not able to take their examination today, what he did for those who were not able to take their examination yesterday, that means, give them a substitute examination paper to take?

If it is true that they were prevented through sheer intimidation from taking the paper today, the Ministry will be pleased to prepare a substitute paper for those students who did not turn up for the examination today, as it did yesterday.

Thank you.

The Member for Anson has obtained leave to make a personal explanation. I have acquainted the Minister of what the personal explanation is about. I take it the Minister has received my letter? Mr Yong Nyuk Lin indicated dissent.

No? Has the Minister for Education received a letter which I addressed to him personally?

I am afraid not.

I will give him a copy. The Clerk handed a copy of Mr Speaker's letter to Mr Yong Nyuk Lin.

If it please you, Mr Speaker, I have been in telephonic communication with Mr Tommy Koh Thong Bee, who is working in my office and is now at the Eastern Hotel, Tanah Ratah, with reference to the statement made yesterday by the Minister for Education in the context of the alleged plot of Communists to subvert Chinese students in order to bring about violence and disruption of the merger talks, that yesterday, Monday, 27th of November, at 9 a.m., Tommy Koh Thong Bee of the University of Malaya Socialist Club, which supports the Barisan Sosialis, visited the examination centre at Whampoa Chinese School in St. George's Road. He was accompanied by three friends. Mr Tommy Koh asks that, in fairness, I should inform the House that he left Singapore on Sunday morning, slept in Kuala Lumpur on Sunday night, and at 9 a.m. on Monday morning, he was travelling between Kuala Lumpur and Tapah with two other persons, more than 300 miles away from the Whampoa Chinese school where the Minister for Education said he was. He has not been near Whampoa Chinese School for months. Mr Tommy Koh is prepared to substantiate these facts on oath before a Commission of Inquiry. Some hon. Members: Apologise! [Interruption]

Order. Any Minister who wishes to make a statement, and only a statement, on that may do so. There is no debate.

Mr Speaker, Sir, before I reply to the Member for Anson, since it was indicated that I had received your note, which I have not, perhaps an inquiry can be made -

Inquiry?

- probably it is on its way, so that the matter can be put right. As I was coming into the Assembly, I was told that there was a telegram waiting for me, and I tore it open but I did not look at its contents until I referred to this letter, which mentioned that there was some telegram. So I am reading the telegram for the first time.

Liar!

Order. The Member for Thomson will now apologise to the House. Only an apology will be accepted and nothing less.

I apologise, Sir.

With reference, Mr Speaker. Sir, to the Member for Anson's statement. I can only say that I shall refer his statement to the source of intelligence that I have received, and after the matter has been clarified, I shall make a suitable statement.

On a point of information. Mr Speaker, Sir, can I ask you whether you have received any other telegrams?

No.

None from Mr Fong Swee Suan, Sir?

Order. That is completely out of the ambit of the personal explanation.

Mr Speaker, the telegram that seems to be referred to, is it material to the statement?

The telegram is a telegram which I, as Speaker, received from Tommy Koh, and which I thought the Minister ought to see. I am not permitted to disclose the contents of any such document that comes to my hand except, of course, through an Assemblyman. 2.46 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the Assembly approves the financial policy of the Government for the year 1962. [Interruption].

Order.

When moving this motion last year, I said in my introductory remarks "the background against which this Budget is being presented is markedly different from that a year ago". This year, this holds only too true and with greater force. For we now stand on the threshold of a new independence, reunited with the Federation of Malaya. It is hardly necessary for me to labour this point, as the House is in the midst of a debate on the merger proposals. Merger is the dominant issue before the whole country today. When such momentous issues are being debated both in the Assembly and outside, it is almost with diffidence that I, as Finance Minister, enter the arena to draw attention to such mundane affairs as the Budget. Nevertheless, Sir, life must go on. Provision must be made for the running of the public service next year. Perhaps it is a gracious Providence that has ordained that the Budget should be introduced in the midst of the debate on merger. For there are already signs that some Members of the Assembly in the Opposition Benches have allowed their imaginations to soar into space, right into the realms of wild fantasy. Before their minds circle permanently in orbit in outer space, it is good that they be brought back to earth to face the realities of life. Far be it from me to deliver a sermon to the Barisan Sosialis on the hard economic facts of life, nevertheless, I think that a few timely reminders will not be out of place, if only to bring home the point that while political excitement and euphoria may be a pleasant pastime for amateur politicians, there is, for more practical people, the task of seeing that our economy continues to function and that the livelihood of people be thereby ensured. We in Singapore live in a tight economic situation. We are a small island State which is prosperous because of our central geographical position. This allows us to render services of value to our neighbours. Through the port of Singapore passes much of the produce of the Federation of Malaya, Indonesia and Borneo. In addition, we serve as a supply base for the consumer goods which these territories need. This is the main source of our livelihood. We will continue to earn this livelihood so long as we provide these services efficiently and so long as we are on good terms with our neighbours. But when neither of these things obtains, then this principal source of our livelihood may shrivel. And this will bring in its train poverty and destitution for us. Whatever our differences in political outlook may be we must refrain from such action that would lead to the ruin of our country through hostility of our neighbours or the running down of our business organisations. Political slogans and political ideology cannot feed empty stomachs. In the background of the current political situation, the only possible Budget that a Finance Minister can present to the House is one that sees few innovations, while maintaining the public services much in their present form with some scope for modest expansion. This, in fact, is the Budget which I am privileged to present to the House today. For, with merger around the corner, there will be innumerable matters which will need the attention of the Government and the Central Government of the new Federation. There will be many anomalies and budgetary adjustments to be made between State and Central Governments, and at this stage it is unwise to enter into new lines of action. This does not mean, however, that the plan for our economic expansion should be halted or even retarded. The policy iii this respect is stated clearly in the speech of the Yang di-Pertuan Negara. And I quote: 'For the immediate future, the task of the Government is to proceed with the work already initiated.' Before I discuss the Estimates now before the House, I shall, in line with past practice, turn to a review of the current year. Review, of 1961 The year 1961 was an eventful one. Several new financial and economic measures were successfully introduced. Others initiated by the P.A.P. Government in previous years came to fruition during this period. I wish to deal briefly with some of the more important of these financial and economic measures. Quite the most important event of the year was the publication of the Four-Year Development Plan. The Development Plan sets out the targets in economic and social development which the State should achieve in the period 1961-1964. The principal objective of the Plan is to increase the rate of capital formation from its present level of about 11 per cent of the national income to something nearer 20 per cent. This is to ensure an expansion of the economy sufficient to keep pace with population growth and to leave aside something for the improvement of standards of living. The Plan also calculates the available resources, both internal and abroad, to carry out the Programme. The Plan provides for capital investment in the public sector, that is to say, capital investment by Government and statutory authorities. By the nature of things, it cannot and does not set out targets to be achieved by private investment, though one of the main objectives of the Plan is to induce an increase in the rate of private capital investment. The Development Plan was conceived against the background of a severe unemployment problem which threatened to increase to unmanageable proportions if no positive effort was taken. I will at a later stage give details of the performance of the Plan in the current year. Another measure of great importance, which was taken by the Government, was to set up the Economic Develop. ment Board on 1st August, 1961. An Ordinance setting out the powers and functions of the Board was approved by the Assembly on 24th May, 1961. It has taken the P.A.P. Government some two years to launch the Economic Development Board. In this period, we had access to expert opinion at the highest level, including the World Bank and the United Nations Special Missions. The Board has started its work, recruited personnel, and got down to business, I shall deal with the work of the Board later in my statement. I have mentioned in previous Budget statements that we would be approaching the World Bank for Development loans. Members will be glad to learn that the World Bank has agreed in principle to negotiate loans for projects in the Four-Year Development Plan. At present, two projects are under consideration, namely, the expansion of water and power supplies. It is a source of satisfaction to the Government that the World Bank has agreed to finance our development projects, for a World Bank loan indicates the confidence of the Bank in the financial standing of the Government. The year 1961 also saw the conclusion of the work undertaken by two United Nations Special Missions despatched to Singapore. One Mission, headed by Dr A. Winsemius, studied the general problem of industrialisation of Singapore. In addition, the Mission made recommendations in respect of the establishment of specific new industries. The responsibility for implementing the findings of this report rests with the Economic Development Board. The other United Nations Mission, headed by Mr P. L. Schereschewsky, examined the feasibility of a steel industry in Singapore. The Government is acting on its recommendation that a small rolling mill should be set up as a first step. We have been successful in persuading a group of local businessmen to pool their resources to establish this steel plant which will be sited in Jurong. They have held negotiations with one of the major Japanese Steel companies over their participation in this project. No agreement was reached, however, though the door was left open for future participation in a more substantial project, should this prove feasible. Another event of significance was the conclusion of the agreement on basic arrangements in regard to trade between the Governments of Singapore and the Republic of Indonesia. In consequences of this agreement, the Office of the Singapore Trade and Cultural Representative was established in Djakarta this year. Another agreement entered into with a foreign Government was the Agreement on the Avoidance of Double Taxation which was ratified by the Governments of Singapore and Japan in September this year. In February this year, the Government decided to offer Treasury Bills to the public on tender. These bills were issued under the authority of the Local Treasury Bill Ordinance. The value of Treasury Bills now outstanding is $12 million issued on tender, and $5.3 million issues on tap, making a total of just over $17 million. Treasury Bills provide a safe and liquid form of short-term investment. They are useful to banks and other concerns which may have surplus cash balances seeking investment of a fairly liquid form. There is considerable scope for expansion of the short-term money market. A loan of $50 million bearing an interest of 5¾ per cent redeemable in 20 years was floated on 27th September, 1961, all of which was taken up. This loan will be a useful addition to the resources of our Development Fund. Now to turn to the general economic picture of the State. The value of Singapore's trade in 1961 has not been as large as that of the previous year. For the first three-quarters of 1961, the value of our total trade amounted to $5,473 million as compared with $5,700 million last year. Our imports fell by $72 million and, more seriously, our exports by $155 million. Our two major trade partners are the Federation of Malaya and Indonesia, and in respect of both, there has been a slight decrease in value. Our exports to Indonesia, however, have shown a small but welcome increase from an average of $10 million per month in 1960 to nearly $13 million per month in 1961. This improvement reflects better relations between the two countries. The principal reason for the decline in trade values is the fall in the price of rubber. Our trade in rubber accounts for a third of our total imports and nearly half of our exports. Therefore, small variations in the price of rubber will have a significant effect on our trade values. Last year, 1960, was a good year for rubber, the average price for R.S.S. 1 being $1.08 cts. Since October 1960, however, the price of rubber began to drop. During 1961 this drop continued slowly but steadily with average prices being between 90 and 82 cents. Recently the price is around 75 cents above. The effect on Singapore so far has not been very substantial. As far as the activities of our port transport communications and business houses are concerned, it is the volume of trade rather than the value which determines how well off we are. In this respect, the position is happier. Total tonnage of cargo handled showed a slight improvement in 1961 as compared with last year. In the period January to August 1960, just over 6 million tons of cargo was discharged and 3.4 million tons loaded. This year the corresponding figures have risen to 7.5 million tons discharged and 4.2 million tons loaded. The volume of cargo handled by the Singapore Harbour Board alone has shown an increase from a monthly turnover of 396,000 tons to 533,000 tons. Again during the same period, the number of ships which were cleared by our Port rose from 12,933 to 13,751. In terms of total registered tons, there was an increase from 43 million tons to 47.5 million tons. On the whole, the volume of trade was high this year and the capacity for handling this volume was fully employed. Nevertheless, the decline in the price of rubber is bound adversely to affect the earning power of our neighbours. They in turn will buy less goods and this may reduce the volume of trade passing through Singapore unless there is a revival in the price of rubber. The general trend of economic activity in the State for the past year is also reflected in the volume of financial transactions and changes in levels of industrial production and constructional activity. Loans and advances made by banks increased from $569.5 million last September to $666.4 million September this year. The upward trend of manufacturing activity which I brought to your notice in my last Budget speech may be seen to continue into this year. This is reflected in the increase of production of main industries. The cigarette industry has shown an increase of nearly 25 per cent for the first eight months of this year as compared with the corresponding period of last year. Output rose from 2,455,000 pounds to 3,062,000 pounds. Other industries which showed a significant increase in production are coconut oil (17 per cent), sago flour (14 per cent), soft drinks (17 per cent) and remilling of rubber (40 per cent). How, ever, the production of biscuits, soap and soya bean sauce declined slightly. The construction industry saw heightened activity generated by the massive building programme of the Housing and Development Board and the revival of private building activity with the favourable change of policy towards development charges for main City Council services. This is reflected in the increases in our retained imports of building materials. Imports of cement increased by 40 per cent in the first nine months of this year. Imports of steel and other constructional materials have also shown an equally substantial increase. With economic expansion, consumption of textiles and durable goods have shown a corresponding rise for the period under review. Retained imports of radio and refrigerators increased by about 30 per cent while new registration of private cars, motor-cycles, and scooters increased by 35 per cent. Textiles retained for the first six months showed a substantial increase over the corresponding period last year. So far as statistical evidence is available, more goods were generally consumed this year compared with the last. The prospects for the coming year are not unhopeful. The American economy has recovered from the recession of last year and it appears set for further advance. Similarly, the economic expansion of industrial nations, which slowed down in a number of countries last year, is likely to register a general advance. Revenue and Expenditure 1961 I now turn to a review of expenditure and revenue in 1961. Expenditure was estimated at $348.3 million. For the first ten months of the year, actual expenditure amounted to $246.7 million. It is not easy to forecast what the final figure would be, because most of the bills for the purchase of equipment under O.C.S.E. Heads and works started in the year will be paid in the last quarter of the year. It is likely, however, that Expenditure will fall short of the Estimates by some $30 million. I dealt last year with the reasons why expenditure of that year was not expected to reach the levels estimated. The familiar reasons were that of difficulty in recruitment of staff and delays in the fulfilment of orders by suppliers. This year, however, a new factor arose, and this is that some of the previous City Council Departments now integrated into the Government Departments have overestimated their requirements. This will be made clear when I discuss Heads of Expenditure. As regards Heads of Expenditure where there has been substantial under-expenditure, Public Works Recurrent shows that some $4 million will not be spent principally because of the lack of engineers and architects to supervise maintenance and construction work. We are making every effort to bring the establishment of the Public Works Department to full strength, but there are still deficiencies in the senior and medium grades. Further, there has been an over-provision in respect of the Transport Centre taken over from to City Council. As regards the Ministry of Health, under-expenditure has been less than that of previous years. The Ministry of Health is likely to spend some $3.7 million less than the Estimates, and this is principally due to unfilled posts in the senior and ancillary grades. The Government has made certain improvements in the conditions of service of nursing and other ancillary staff. I hope that with these improvements we shall be able to fill most of the vacant posts. The Ministry of Finance is expected to spend some $3 million less than the Estimates. This is principally due to the fact that an Advance Account of $2 million provided for in the Estimates to pay for forward purchases of materials and stores by the City Engineer's Department was not drawn upon. There have also been stricter controls over payments of passages and miscellaneous travelling expenses. Some $2.4 million will not be spent under Charge on Account of the Public Debt, because the total amount of borrowing by the Government did not reach the level estimated. The Ministry of Labour will probably spend $900,000 short of the estimated expenditure. This is principally due to under-expenditure on Work Brigade projects. The Police will spend some $900,000 less than estimated. There is difficulty in recruiting constables with the qualifications and standards set down. Some reorganisation has taken place, as a result of which certain static or non-operational duties have been regarded as Guard Constables for which lower standards may be accepted. Recruitment to this group is proceeding satisfactorily. The Ministry of Education will under-spend by roughly $4.6 million. This is due to more careful administration of Grants-in-Aid. There is also the perennial problem of getting sufficient numbers of suitably qualified personnel. The 1961 revenue position is satisfactory. The yield from most of the main items of revenue exceeded expectations. 1960 by all accounts must have been a good business year, for the yield from Income Tax surpassed the estimated amount of $75 million by $5 million. The estimate for Property Tax of $31.6 million is likely to be exceeded by $12.5 million. This is mainly due to improvements in collection procedures. Totalisator and Sweepstakes duties did not fulfil the optimistic expectations of $8 million. The yield will be about $2.8 million less than the Estimates. Customs and Excise revenue was buoyant. The total revenue collected from the Customs Department during the first ten months of the year was $95.4 million or $3 million more than the revenue collected last year for the same period. The total Customs revenue is expected to reach $116 million. Liquor duties will probably exceed the estimated $23.1 million by $3 million. Consumption of liquor of all grades had been maintained throughout the year at a high level. The Tobacco revenue, which in recent years had given rise to anxiety, will for once exceed the estimate. The figure of $38.5 million may be passed by some $3 million. On the other hand, Petroleum has proved a disappointment. Once again, there is a short-fall, this time probably in the region of $1.3 million. There has been a switch from petroleum engines to diesel engines to power vehicles. However, the yield of the special tax on heavy oil engine vehicles has more than offset the short-fall in Petroleum revenue. Entertainment Duty may just fail to reach the estimated $7.7 million. The second instalment of $10 million of the $30 million loan repayment by the Federation of Malaya was made this year. The United Kingdom Government made a contribution of $4.28 million towards the maintenance of the Local Defence Forces. City Council integration Sir, before I comment on the Estimates now before the House, I wish to dwell at some length on the progress made on the integration of the City Council departments into the Government. This is a major administrative reform undertaken by the P.A.P. Government. I wish to say also something about the next stage in this process of integration, which would be the setting up of the Public Utilities Board to take over the Trading departments of the City Council. This year's estimates is the first exercise at integrating the Budgets of the Government and certain City Council departments. I have dwelt at some length last year on the intricate nature of this exercise. The work of integration was carried on more smoothly than was thought possible last year. In spite of the different systems of accounting procedure, the management of this integrated Budget carried on smoothly and without any major upset. The volume of work handled at the Accountant-General's Office has increased by about a third. The staff of the office had to be supplemented with one Accountant and sixteen subordinate staff. The next stage of integration would be to set up the Public Utilities Board and I shall deal with some of the problems that this will raise, as these are matters of widespread public interest. The City Council has hitherto been divided into two main parts, the Rate Fund Departments and the Trading Departments. The Rate Fund Departments, which include sewerage, cleansing and many other departments, were financed from rates paid by ratepayers under the Local Government Ordinance, 1957. The Trading departments are the water, gas and electricity departments, and they derive their revenues from the consumers of water, gas and electricity. The intention is to constitute the Trading departments, with the necessary administrative staff, as a Public Utilities Board. The Rate Fund Departments are to be integrated or merged with the existing Ministries of the Government. The personnel and equipment of the Rate Fund Departments have already been transferred physically to Government Ministries and are now operating under the control of those Ministries. This, the so-called physical integration, began on the 1st January this year, and is, for all practical purposes, completed. In addition, the revenues formerly received by those Rate Fund Departments have been paid to the Government since 1st January, 1961, and their expenditure has been paid by the Government from the same date in accordance with the Local Government (Financial Integration) Ordinance, 1960. The personnel and equipment of the Trading departments, and the associated administrative staff, will remain with the City Council, and their revenues and expenditure are still accounted for by the City Council. Standing outside and apart from the Rate Fund and the Trading Departments are the Municipal Provident Fund and the public loans raised by the City Council. These two accounts serve both the Rate Fund Departments and the Trading departments and are still being maintained by the City Council as a common service to all departments, including those that have been integrated with the Government. The taking-over of the revenues of the Rate Fund Departments by the Government requires only one minor adjustment. It relates to the collection of fees for sewerage and other sanitary services. These services are at present billed in different ways in the city and in the rural areas, but as from 1st January next a uniform system of billing is to be introduced. From that date, the occupiers of all houses throughout the island will find that the familiar consolidated accounts rendered every month by the City Council will be slightly changed and some people in the city area will find that they are billed for certain sanitary services by the Ministry of Health and no longer by the City Council. It has been decided that the administration of the Municipal Provident Fund shall be taken over by the Government and administered in the common interests of the Government, the Housing and Development Board, and the new Public Utilities Board. It has also been decided that the public loans and sinking funds of the City Council shall be taken over by the new Public Utilities Board and that the relatively small liability of the Government for these loans shall be discharged by, regular contributions from the Government to the new Board. It remains to deal with the assets in cash and property of the City Council. These assets have a book value of over $600,000,000. They are to be apportioned between the Government and the new Public Utilities Board; the power stations, water works and other assets of the Trading Departments going to the Board and the roads, sewers, fire engines and other assets of the Rate Fund Departments going to the Government. For various technical reasons, it has been decided that the most convenient date on which the apportionment is to take place is 1st January, 1961, and the Government will assume the ownership of its portion with effect from that date. The portion which goes to the new Board will be handed over to it when it is set up. The liabilities of the Rate Fund Departments will likewise be assumed by the Government and those of the Trading Departments by the new Board. A few minor adjustments are to be made for the convenience of administration. The public street lamps and stand-pipes of Singapore which are owned by the Trading departments will be handed over to the Government with, of course, the associated liability to maintain them. Certain houses and buildings which are the property of the Rate Fund Departments will be handed over to the new Board in order that it may be properly equipped to carry on its functions economically in the interests of consumers of water, gas and electricity. It will be seen that although it is relatively easy to give general directions for carrying out these intentions, an immense amount of work will have to be done in sorting out the assets and liabilities of the City Council acquired over the last 100 years. Turning now to the problems of the personnel of the City Council, I should first explain that there are about 2,600 monthly-rated employees in the Rate Fund Departments and, on integration with Government Ministries, they join up with about 29,000 monthly-rated Government employees. It has been decided that every permanently engaged monthly-rated City Council employee shall retain his present salary and salary scale on his transfer to the Government service. In addition, all of them who are members of the Municipal Provident Fund will be allowed to remain members of that Fund and will, on their retirement, be entitled to receive the full benefits of that Fund calculated on .the basic salary drawn in the Government service. There are many problems connected with their transfer the details of which are being worked out grade by grade and, in some cases, individual by individual. The general intention is that the entry of these monthly-rated employees of the City Council into the Government service should not result in displacement or impaired prospects either for themselves or for the Government employees they join. As I have explained, the physical integration of the Rate Fund departments with Government is complete. Those departments have now become merged with the Government. What remains of the City Council is that part of its former self which is to become the Public Utilities Board. Legislative sanction to carry out the final acts of formally transferring assets, liabilities and employees will be sought in two Bills. The one is the Local Government Integration Bill which will deal with the transfers to the Government as well as with the manifold powers and duties carried out by the Rate Fund departments. The other Bill is the Public Utilities Bill which will establish the new Public Utilities Board. Certain other minor Bills will also be introduced to bring about consequential amendments to the pensions laws and the constitution of the Housing and Development Board. Expenditure Estimates, 1962 I now discuss the 1962 Estimates. As I said in my introductory remarks, the Budget for 1962 is designed to maintain existing provisions, making allowances for normal expansion. The only new service that will be introduced next year is the Television service which I shall discuss later. Other than this, all increases of expenditure are due to normal expansion. The expansion of the social services to keep pace with demand is a substantial one. Education and health between them account for $25 million additional expenditure. The growth of expenditure on education has been striking in the past ten years. In 1951 the annual vote on education was only $12.4 million. Next year the amount will be $89.1 million, a sevenfold increase in 11 years. We in Singapore have reached the stage where it is possible to provide free education for every child up to primary stage. I have, in my first Budget statement, drawn attention to the mounting cost of education. Every loyal citizen wants the State to maintain the highest possible standards of education as well as to ensure its widest possible extension. So far, we have been fortunate that we have sufficient resources to satisfy this wish. As for the future, whether Singapore will be able to do so depends on whether or not we succeed in expanding our national income fast enough. If everyone makes his full contribution to this end, I think we can make the grade. As regards particular Heads of Expenditure, the principal increases in expenditure occur under the Ministry of National Development ($6.5 million), Ministry of Health and Law ($6.1 million), Charge on Account of Public Debt ($5.9 million), Ministry of Culture ($2.15 million), Defence Services ($1.5 million), and Ministry of Education ($20.98 million). The large increase in the provision of the Ministry of National Development is due to a change in the Budget. The votes for the Work Brigade have been transferred from the Ministry of Labour to the Ministry of National Development. This has been done for organisational reasons since the Ministry of National Development is concerned with most of the Work Brigade projects. The increase under Charge on Account of Public Debt is to meet loan charges in respect of the 1961 Loan and that part of Government's liability in relation to City Council loans consequent on integration of certain City Council departments into the Government. To facilitate administration, the Head "Ministry of Health" has now been reorganised under three Heads: Ministry of Health and Law, Hospitals Division, and Public Health Division. City Health has been incorporated into the Public Health Division. The expansion of medical and health services has necessitated an increase of staff at all levels. Maintenance costs have necessarily risen. The increase is also due to the absorption of provisions for water supplies from stand-pipes in rural areas and rural cleansing and scavenging services previously shown under Rural Administration. The increase in the provision for the Ministry of Culture is due to the incorporation under this Head of Victoria Theatre and Memorial Hall (previously shown separately). There has been also expansion in the activities of that Ministry. Members will recall voting supplementary provision this year from Suara Singapura and the Dewan Bahasa dan Kebudayaan Kebangsaan. These have now gone into full swing. Provision has also been entered for engineering and technical staff for a television service. Plans for this service have reached an advanced stage, and I expect that the new service will be inaugurated by the end of 1962. The provision for Defence Services for 1961 was based on a standstill budget pending the outcome of financial talks with the British Government. Now that the extent of the contribution which the British Government is prepared to make has been ascertained, it is possible to have a realistic budget for Defence Services. Recruitment, repairs, replacements of equipment, and so on which were previously deferred, could now proceed. There is the large increase under the Ministry of Education. With the increase in educational facilities, additional staff and non-teaching staff (to maintain school compounds, buildings and so on) will be required. There will be the consequential increase in equipment and consumption of water and light. Also a large element of the increase is occasioned by the contribution to the University of Singapore. The sum is $8.5 million, of which $4.0 million is recoverable from the Federation Government in respect of Federation students. There is also an increase in the number of bursaries to students. Further, earlier this year, the Lembaga Gerakan Pelajaran Dewasa extended its activities substantially by introducing further education classes which have proved to be well supported. To meet this additional commitment as well as its regular expansion, the contribution to the Lembaga is now increased from $500,000 to $1,019,400. Finally the total under the Ministry of Education has been increased by a sum of $1,997,400 in respect of "Contribution to the Polytechnic". In this year's Estimates the contribution to the Polytechnic is shown under the Head, Contributions and Charitable Allowances, a practice not in keeping with the dignity of that institution. With regard to housing, the terms of a subsidy to the Housing Board are being discussed, and I expect that these will be settled next year. Provision for this will be applied for in a supplementary estimate in the course of 1962. In the meantime, substantial sums have been provided both in this year's and next year's Development Estimates to finance the Board by way of loans. Thus, 1962 will be another year in which the expansion of social services is kept up. Revenue Estimates, 1962 The favourable trend in revenue collections is expected to continue into 1962. The 1962 estimate ($391.1 million) is $46.3 million more than the 1961 estimate ($344.8 million). The yield from Income Tax is expected to exceed the 1961 estimate of $75 million by $5 million. Property Tax will yield $14.4 million more than the 1961 estimate of $31.6 million. Receipts from Tobacco Duties are also expected to exceed the 1961 estimates by $3 million, based on the trend of consumption at present. Liquor Duties are expected to increase from $23.1 million estimated for 1961 to $26.0 million. Stamp and Estate Duties are estimated to yield $0.3 million and $1.3 million respectively more than the 1961 estimates of $3.6 million and $3.2 million. Further, increases are expected in respect of Postal Receipts and Telecommunications Receipts, Motor Vehicles Taxes, Rents and Interests and Singapore's share of the Currency Profits. There are also increases in the small items which are too numerous to detail. But two large new items appear in next year's Estimates. The first is Reimbursement by the Federation Government of part of the Singapore Government's contribution to the University of Singapore, being its contribution to cover Federation students studying at the University. This amounts to $4 million, and is a per-contra item against the expenditure vote of $8.5 million shown under the Expenditure Estimates of the Ministry of Education. The other is the Contribution by the U.K. Government towards the cost of Local Defence Services. This amounts to $4.7 million. Now for the decreases. The falling trend in the collection of Petroleum Duties is reflected in the decrease of $2 million shown in the 1962 estimate against the 1961 estimate of $38.5 million. There is also $½ million decrease in Entertainment Duty. The estimate for Sweepstake revenue has been readjusted, and in 1962 will show a reduction of $1.5 million as compared with the 1961 estimate of $8.0 million. As regards, Commercial Broadcasting, I have taken into account the current year's collection as well as the proposed introduction of commercial broadcasting in the Federation of Malaya. On these bases, the yield is expected to be $700,000 less than the 1961 estimate of $2.5 million. Revenue forecasts are necessarily affected by the vagaries of our entrepot trade which is so sensitive to the effects of trade fluctuations in neighbouring territories. The forecasts made of revenue yields assume that there will be no calamitous decline in the prices of primary products nor any boom conditions. Neither of these extreme conditions is likely and, with reasonably good fortune, we may see our estimates realised. Summary of Expenditure and Revenue in 1962 With expenditure estimated at $394.0 million and Revenue at $391 million, the Budget for 1962 will be an almost balanced one. It is a budget intended to keep the public services going in the direction laid down in the Yang di-Pertuan Negara's speech while the people and the State get down to working out the detailed arrangements of merger and map out the future as the twelfth State of the Federation. DEVELOPMENT ESTIMATES I now turn to the Development Estimates. Development projects differ from other activities of the Government in that it is not easy to consider them in a framework of annual estimates. The reason is obvious. Many projects take more than one year to complete. Even for short-term projects, work may be started in one year and completed in the next. Hence there is need to look forward over a longer period than one year and this is one of the reasons why a Development Plan is necessary. I therefore propose to consider the Development Estimates against the framework of the State's Four-Year Development Plan. First, I shall give a general financial outline of development expenditure in 1961. Then I shall proceed to an examination of the progress achieved in some of the more important development projects in the Four-Year Plan. DEVELOPMENT EXPENDITURE 1961 In 1961, the amount voted for development expenditure was $166.2 million. It is difficult to say at this stage just how much of this sum would have been spent by the end of the year for reasons which I have already mentioned before. Preliminary estimates show that Development Expenditure would amount to about $100 to $110 million. This is an all-time record for Singapore. A further sum of $54 million has been entered as revotes for next year. Much of this sum represents expenditure already committed, but the bills will not be presented for actual payment this year. In assessing the performance in the first year of the Plan, it is important to bear in mind certain difficulties in getting the Plan into stride. First, a fair amount of time has to be spent in preparation, design and planning of public works and building construction. I have already referred to the shortage of architects, quantity surveyors, engineers in the Public Works Department. This is a source of constant anxiety to the Government. Further, in many cases, sites for buildings and routes for roads require preliminary steps, such as the acquisition of land and resettlement of squatters, before work can actually proceed. To tide over the present shortage of technical personnel, we have tried to recruit men from overseas on short-term contracts pending the training and recruitment of local personnel. I have already previously mentioned that we tried to recruit from Australia, New Zealand, the U.K., Japan, and Israel and we are in communication with these Governments. To this list must be added Western Germany. Overseas recruitment is by no means an easy task as the shortage of experienced technical personnel is worldwide. Further, recruitment procedures have to be agreed with the government of the countries concerned and this is a time-consuming process. Some small success has been achieved, though I hope that next year we shall be able to get more staff. We have so far been able to recruit from Israel two engineers and one architect, men of substantial experience. They have been offered three year contracts and should be coming to Singapore soon on completion of certain formalities. In the meantime, we have accelerated the training of local staff to acquire the qualifications needed. A total number of 93 scholarships was awarded in the last two years of which no less than 76 relate to training in technical and specialist occupations. In the next few years, the number of scholarships for training in professions experiencing short supply will be stepped up. But the acquisition of such professional skills will take a long time and we shall reap the rewards only after five or six years, or more. I now turn to review the progress of the more important projects entered in the Four-Year Plan. I will discuss the Plan under the main heads in which it was divided, namely, Economic and Social Development. ECONOMIC SECTOR Economic Development Board The establishment of the Economic Development Board on the 1st August will prove to be a landmark in Singapore's economic history. The Board will be the instrument through which the State will mount its major effort to industrialise the economy. The Government has appointed a senior civil servant to the chairmanship of the Board. Other members representing banking, trade, professional and trade union interests have been appointed. The Board has recruited a Director, who was sent to Singapore under the United Nations' Opex Programme, and he assumed duty a month ago. Further key personnel are required and the United Nations are being approached for urgent assistance. The staff needed are a senior industrial economist, an officer to head the Technical Consultant Service and three other officers to staff the service. These three officers are, one, an industrial designer, two, an industrial engineer, and three, an industrial accountant. There is also need for a chemical engineer and a mechanical engineer. Local recruitment for the staff of the Board has taken place by secondment to the Board of two administrative officers both with honours. degree in economics, and a mechanical engineer with very high qualifications. Direct recruitment for additional staff is in progress. In addition, four students with excellent results in last year's Higher School Certificate examinations in Science subjects were awarded scholarships to pursue courses in Mechanical, Electrical and Chemical Engineering in Britain. The Board has only recently commenced work. Much of this work will be to complete the preparations already set on foot before its establishment. Some solid progress, however, has already been registered. A loan of $0.5 million on favourable terms has been made to a local shipbreaking firm in line with Government's policy to encourage shipbreaking. There are six applications now for loans being considered by the Board amounting to $4.5 million. Applications for pioneer status in industry are processed in the first instance by the Board. At present 12 industries have been granted pioneer status. They have an authorised capital of $104.5 million and a subscribed capital of $86.2 million. More than 1,300 additional permanent jobs would have been created when all these industries are in production. At present, five have commenced production and another two more will do so before the end of the year. There are 27 new applications for pioneer status currently under consideration. These are expected to provide permanent jobs for 1,900 persons and have a total authorised capital of $105.5 million. Industrial Research Unit With the assistance of the New Zealand Government, our plan to establish the Industrial Research Unit is now nearly complete and it is expected that the Unit would commence functioning early next year. The Unit will assist local manufacturers to solve their production problems. Local staff has been recruited and two members are now in New Zealand undergoing training. Jurong Project Work has commenced on the development of the Jurong industrial site and progress is satisfactory. To ensure rapid implementation of this important project, the Government has formed a new organisation known as the Jurong Industrial Development Unit, headed by an engineer seconded from the P.W.D. and a surveyor and planner. The Unit works under the general direction of the Economic Development Board. Some $600,000 would have been spent by the end of the year and works to the value of another $250,000 have already been committed. Further, a sum of $4.3 million has been spent on land acquisition. So far, the main works in progress are: (1) the construction of the South Access road, (2) the construction of a culvert at the Jurong River, (3) the levelling of Hill No. 12 and associated reclamation works.

Surveying of other hills to be levelled is proceeding. In addition, test borings of the proposed wharf line are nearing completion. These works now in progress are giving jobs to more than 220 men, of whom 70 are residents of Jurong. Next year, development work in Jurong will be considerably stepped up and it is expected that $15 million will be needed to pay for earth works, roads, development of the wharf area, reservoir to supply industrial water, sewerage, drainage, etc. The target for 1962 has been fixed as follows. By March next year, it is hoped that the site for the Steel Mill (Phase I) would have been completed. By late 1962, electricity, water supply and telephone services would have been brought to the area. By the end of 1962, the first phase of the lighter wharf should have been completed with one berth westward of Tanjong Kling ready by June, and, if justified by need, a second berth soon after that. Work on the light industries area north of the Access Road should be completed by August 1962, while part of the heavy industry area should be available for occupation by the end of 1962. Other Industrial Estates In addition to the main Industrial Centre at Jurong, four small industrial estates are in an advanced stage of completion. They will provide sites for :140 factories. These industrial estates are sited at Redhill, Tanglin Halt, Bendemeer and Kampong Ampat. On some of these sites, standard factory units will he built. Thirty-four standard factories are planned for Redhill itself; of these, eight have been completed. The Housing and Development Board, which is in charge of general supervision of these estates, has reported that applications for factories and sites are satisfactory. Kallang Project This is to reclaim land in the swamps in the area known as the Kallang Pudding. While the general outline has been worked out, the detailed design has not been proceeded with. Owing to the shortage of technical personnel, it has been necessary for the Singapore Government to make a request to the Government of West Germany for technical assistance in the planning and design of the scheme. Public Utilities Power and water expansion projects will be financed by a World Bank loan, consultants to produce the details and specifications of the new Power Station have been appointed and the work of designing is in progress. The choice of consultants for the water expansion scheme is under consideration. East Wharf Project The first of the four new berths laid down in the Four-Year Plan was completed in May this year. The other three berths will be completed next year. Civil Aviation Good progress is being made on extending the runway from 8,000 to 9,000 feet. In fact, the work is nearing completion. The design of a new passenger terminal is about to be completed and tenders are expected to be called for early next year. In addition, agreement on types of telecommunications equipment to be used by our Airport has been reached between the Governments of Singapore and the United Kingdom. This is to fulfil the conditions for the grant by the British Government towards telecommunications and navigational aids development. For airport development projects, it is expected that $4 million of the grant of $6.5 million would be claimed next year. Roads The somewhat ambitious Four-Year Programme for road works is being reexamined. The Public Works Department has worked out a revised programme and I propose to set up a Roads Review Committee to study this revised Plan, taking into account all development requirements such as industrial, commercial, residential, traffic, etc. The Roads Review Committee will consist of representatives from the Economic Development Board, the Urban and Rural Services Consultative Committee, the Housing and Development Board, the Planning Department, the Public Works Department, the Registrar of Vehicles, the Traffic Police and the Economic Development Division of my Ministry. The Committee will evaluate the revised programme and arrange priorities, bearing in mind the capacity of the Roads Section of the Public Works Department. SOCIAL SECTOR Schools Satisfactory progress has been made on the School Building Programme. Ten schools have been completed this year, six primary and four secondary. Another ten are in an advanced stage of construction. Work has commenced on another nine schools, four primary, two secondary and three secondary technical. It is the policy of the Government to build larger and taller schools. As a result of the number of schools completed this year, there are available places for an additional 10,560 children. With schools soon to be completed, there will be places for a further 10,560 children. This is a satisfactory achievement. Housing When the Four-Year Development Plan published details of the Housing Programme of the P.A.P. Government, it was received with mixed and deep feelings, with hope by those in need of housing, with sour scepticism in politically hostile quarters. The target of 10,000 buildings a year represents nearly three times the best that had been achieved in any one year in the past, and four to five times the average performance of previous governments. For the first year of the Plan, a target of 7,096 homes was set. This target is likely to be over-fulfilled. The last report I have is that 4,410 homes have already been completed at Bukit Ho Swee, Tiong Bahru, MacPherson and Queens-town. Another 11,257 are under construction, of which 3,044 will be completed by the end of this year. The number of homes expected to be completed this year is therefore 7,454. The Board expects to meet its future target of 10,000 homes a year well in advance of its time-table. The end of next year will see the end of the long and frustrating years of waiting for decent homes by more than 10,000 families on the register of applicants. Some have waited for six or even eight years. By next year there will be a home for each one of these families, and at rents they can afford. This is a record achievement in the provision of public housing and can be claimed as a major success of the P.A.P. Government. The achievement is all the more remarkable if we bear in mind that the Housing and Development Board had to start with what was left of the wreckage of the former S.I.T. For this outstanding performance we are greatly indebted to the honorary members of the Board and the permanent officers who implement the policy. In particular, I must mention the drive, resourcefulness and skill they have displayed under the able guidance of the Chairman of the Board. Television Planning has reached an advanced stage and tenders for equipment had been under detailed scrutiny for months. Negotiations are in the final stages. Delivery of equipment is expected to be made by the middle of next year. The Government intends to commence television broadcasting once the Transmitting Station is ready. A permanent television studio may take some time to build, but, in the meantime, a temporary building could provide a two-channel service of three to four hours a day, which could be operational sometime late next year. National Theatre The site at King George V Park has already been levelled and piling work for the foundation of the Theatre will begin shortly. The Theatre is expected to be completed by the rend of next year. 1962 DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS Our development proposals for 1962 follow, in the main, the proposals for expenditure already set out in the State Development Plan. With the exception of a few new projects, the others are continuing ones which have been initiated this year, or for which it has been possible to go into more detailed planning this year. The new projects included in the Development Budget have been clearly marked as such, and I propose to discuss only the major ones. There are two of them, namely:-

Multi-storey car park The question of a multi-storey car park is one which has been given long and careful study by both motorist organisations and public authorities in the past. A provision of $2 million has been entered under Head D. 19 in the Draft Development Estimates for 1962 for a multi-storey car park to be built in the centre of the City. The need for a multi-storey car park is now more pressing than ever. In common with most growing cities the traffic problem in Singapore is becoming very acute, because of the increasing number of vehicles coming on to the road every month. An average of 550 new cars are being registered every month, and the rate of increase of motor cycles and scooters has lately become quite phenomenal. Between September 1960 and September 1961 the number of motor cycles and scooters on the register increased from 17,244 to 26,008, an average increase of 730 per month. While all this testifies to a measure of affluence in our society, it also increases our traffic problems. The proposed site for the multi-storey car park is a piece of vacant Crown land bounded by Cecil Street, Cross Street and Market Street. Detailed plans have not yet been drawn up but it is envisaged that a ramp type garage of 9 or 10 storeys high will be constructed capable of accommodating 800 to 900 cars and a fair number of motor cycles and scooters. The garage, when completed, will be operated by the Government. Preliminary estimates of revenue and expenditure show that the garage should be self-supporting. Singapore Conference Hall and Trade Union House The Trade Union House project is a fulfilment of the P.A.P. Government's pledge to the workers of Singapore. The building which is to be erected will incorporate the Singapore Conference Hall, and will be sited on approximately three acres of land at Shenton Way. Soil tests have been completed and a competition among Singapore architects for the design of the building is in progress. Premiums amounting to $6,000 would be awarded to the first, second and third prizes. The total cost for this new project has been estimated at $4.15 million, of which $3 million will be required for the building itself. The building is expected to hold between five and eight storeys, and the facilities will be varied and substantial. There is a clear need for a Conference Hall of adequate size and with adequate facilities in Singapore. With the achievement of independence of Asian countries and their subsequent membership of the United Nations and its agencies, each year sees innumerable conferences of delegates of independent Asian nations. Singapore, standing on the verge of independence, should be prepared to make its contribution to the great international effort in Asia to bring Asian countries closer together to discuss their common problems. As it stands in the centre of international sea and air communication routes, Singapore is well placed to serve as a venue for many of these conferences. But we do not possess the facilities needed. Accordingly, a Conference Hall with the Trade Union House in the same building should be constructed as soon as possible. It is not only a matter of national prestige; if we were to act as host to other nations, we should see to it that the facilities we provide are of adequate standard. The Government has therefore decided that the Conference Hall should be a substantial one. The design, construction and equipment of the Hall should seek to attain acceptable standards of dignity, elegance and taste. There will be an air-conditioned auditorium which will seat 1,000 people. There will be provision in the auditorium for simultaneous translation equipment which is used in all international conferences. In addition to the main auditorium, there will be another three conference rooms each of about 1,000 square feet, a large reception hall and lounge with a buffet service, library and reading rooms, a theatrette, a canteen, a kitchen, as well as residential accommodation for visiting trade unionists and conference delegates. The offices and conference rooms of the Trade Union House will be sited in the same building. New Revenue Proposals Mr Speaker, Sir, I now come to revenue proposals for 1962. It is obvious that this is not the time for new taxes and I do not intend to introduce any new taxes next year, nor to raise existing ones. Only import duties may be introduced or varied if it is necessary, to protect local industries. I would take this opportunity to announce that the Government has decided not to proceed with two of the major tax measures announced in the last Budget. The taxes concerned are the Business Registration Tax and Fees to be levied on certain professional persons in private practice. Legislation to authorise these new taxes had been completed after discussion with several professional associations. By the time these discussions were completed and legislation drafted, the prospects of merger and a reunification of the professional bodies and associations became a pressing point against our creating anomalies which would add to the difficulties after merger. Moreover, there was less justification to proceed with the introduction of these measures, when the first draft of next year's Budget showed that expenditure and revenue could be held in balance without these measures. The Government, however, intends to proceed with introducing legislation to regulate the registration of certain professions, such as accountants and engineers, which at present are not covered by any Ordinance. Members of the professions concerned have stated that they would welcome such a move in the interest of maintenance of standards of their profession. I intend to make a review next year of the incidence of the Property Tax on attap houses. There has been a great deal of misunderstanding on the liability to tax on attap houses. Many of these houses are occupied by poor people who cannot afford better homes. On the other hand, illegal builders are in the practice of setting up attap houses on unauthorised land and selling or renting them out to unsuspecting members of the public. When the rates of property tax in rural areas were raised last year, special concession was given to attap houses. These properties were not affected by the increases in the rates of tax. Further, all houses, whether built of attap and plank or otherwise, retain the old rates of tax if their annual value is $240 or less. But, of course, yearly revaluations of annual values do take place as a matter of course. And properties which were under-valued have had their annual values raised. Accordingly, some owners of attap houses thought that this was contrary to the policy outlined in the last Budget. It has been represented to me by Government Assemblymen that in the case of attap houses in areas bearing the maximum rate, that is 36 per cent, there is a case for making some concessions to owner-occupiers of attap houses, on the grounds that these houses do not enjoy all the facilities which permanent buildings do. For instance, roads in districts where most of these attap houses are found are usually unmetalled and in poor condition. Few of these houses are supplied with water, light, modern sanitation, or other amenities. I propose to have these problems re-examined to see whether or not concessions in the way of tax reduction are justified. Mr Speaker, Sir, this may be the last Budget of the State of Singapore under its present Constitution as a self-governing State. If not the last, it will certainly be the penultimate, for by next year, or by 1963 at the latest, we would have merged into Greater Malaysia. No one could have foreseen the pace of events at which we have advanced in the last few months towards our destiny of independence through merger. This is the goal towards which the P.A.P. wants to lead the country, and we are now in sight of fulfilment. In the last ten years, the citizens of Singapore have had more than a fair share of turmoil and tribulation. Perhaps more is yet to come. But it is remarkable that even under these troubled conditions, we were able to press ahead as vigorously as we did. But once we have passed through these troubled waters and move into calmer seas, the talent and energy of our people will find immeasurably greater outlets of expression. For in Greater Malaysia, not only will we have a strong stable central government which will give certainty and purpose of direction in political affairs, but we shall also have an immensely wider field for the exercise of our industry and enterprise. Sir, I beg to move. 4.15 p.m.

The question is, "That the Assembly approves the financial policy of the Government for the year 1962." In accordance with paragraph (1) of Standing Order No. 83, the debate now stands adjourned. Debate to be resumed, what day?

7th of December. 4.16 p.m.

Order read for resuming adjourned debate on Amendment [21st November, 1961] to Question [20th November, 1961], "That, whereas it, has always been the avowed objective of all nationalists of Malaya to achieve the reunification of Singapore with the Federation of Malaya and to remove the artificial division created by the British by their policy of "divide and rule", this House affirms and declares that the first objective of all true patriots of Malaya is to achieve the reunification of these two territories in a merger of Singapore with the Federation of Malaya.".-(The Minister for Labour-Inche Ahmad Bin Ibrahim). Which Amendment was, 'To leave out from "a" in the second last line to the end and insert: "genuine merger of Singapore with the Federation of Malaya, with Singapore entering the Federation as the twelfth state and with all its Citizens automatically becoming Federal Citizens on Merger Day".'-(Dr Lee Siew Choh). Question again proposed, "That the words proposed to be left out, be left out." 4.17 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, may I borrow a phrase used by the Prime Minister? He said last night - he was talking of another Member - "He was eloquent, but what has he said?" For six full days, Sir, we have been sitting here. I believe today is the seventh. Both the P.A.P. and the Barisan Sosialis have been very eloquent. But what have they said? Out of every hour of speech. Sir, about two-thirds of the hour are taken up with political attacks, probably one-sixth washing dirty linen, and one-sixth - this is quite a generous proportion, Sir - probably on merger. Both the P.A.P. and the Barisan Sosialis have shown that they are more interested in the welfare of the Party than the State or the people. Both have found fit to use a merger - such an important issue as merger, which is actually the pivoting point of the welfare of Singapore and the people - to vie for power! Both are equally guilty, Sir. The motion is quite straightforward. But the Minister, in introducing the motion, tried to make the word "merger" mean the P.A.P. merger. Then the natural reaction of the Barisan Sosialis is that they wanted to make it a Barisan Sosialis merger. Then what caps the confusion was when the Member for Hong Lim, leader of the United People's Party, said that he supported both the phoney and the genuine merger. Sir, this is not surprising because they all came from the same camp. They had the same training and, therefore, they are employing the same methods. All these methods aim at confusing the public. Another common feature, Sir, with the P.A.P. and the Barisan Sosialis is their arrogance. Had the Minister not introduced his motion with such arrogance and abuse and suspicion flung across at the Barisan Sosialis, the motion might have been well received and more appropriately treated, and we, Sir, might have been spared six days' debate on the amendment - or seven days, including today. Sir, every time there is a quarrel within the P.A.P., we have to sit here day after day. Once we even sat up to 4.00 o'clock in the morning - just to witness this quarrel and dissension within the Party. In such instances, as in this one, important matters of State have had to be put aside and delayed just to listen to this quarrel first. Sir, this is a disgraceful abuse of parliamentary democracy. The P.A.P. has spent more time here quarrelling and fighting for power among themselves than working for the State. The performance of the six days, Sir, during this debate on the amendment, fits beautifully into the P.A.P. pattern of behaviour. You will remember, Sir, in 1959, during their first year of office, the Prime Minister spent his leisure in this Chamber shooting at dead ducks and gunny sacks and in humiliating the English-educated who, according to him, were emasculated, devitalised, deculturalised people, who should go down on their bended knees and thank their gods that their souls have been spared. In the second year, he was indulging in challenging the Member for Hong Lim to fight him outside the Chamber. Sir, when the Opposition consisted of the S.P.A. and U.M.N.O., Singapore had been warned against Right-wing suppression. When the Opposition was enlarged by the Member for Hong Lim and his colleagues, Singapore was warn ed against Left-wing opportunism. Now when it is further enlarged by the Barisan Sosialis, we are warned against Communism. Sir, if there are Communists or pro-Communists in this Chamber, and if the dignity of this Chamber has been defiled by the presence of Communists, who are the culprits responsible for it? Who brought them in here? The P.A.P. Sir. The Prime Minister last night said, "We trained them." Two days ago, I think the Minister for Education said, "We nurtured them." But we, Sir, the Alliance say that they shielded them from the law, if they were Communists. During the six days' debate on the amendment, Sir, the Barisan Sosialis have been behaving in exactly the way they used to behave when they were sitting there on the Government benches. And the Government applauded their behaviour. Today when they are sitting on this side of the House, their behaviour has been condemned. But anyone could have told them that their behaviour was the same as that when they were on that side. Sir, this amendment superficially seems to be one that everyone should support. As the Member for Anson pointed out, do we not want genuine merger? Do we not want Singapore to be the twelfth State? Do we not want the 624,000 Singapore citizens to have automatic Federal citizenship? Of course, we do. But the fact that the Member for Queenstown has found fit, Sir, when introducing his amendment, to issue a threat to the Federation - not only to issue a threat, but also to emphasise the fact that the Barisan Sosialis' intention to join up with the Sosialist Party in the Federation after merger in order to overthrow the present Government - An hon. Member: Socialist forces.

Oh, Socialist forces - I beg your pardon - suggest that there may be a dangerous hook inside this innocent and attractive looking bait. For those who are about to swallow this bait, Sir, my message to them is, beware of the hook. I make this as an appeal, Sir. Let every Member in this House reassess both the main motion and the amendment in a detached and unbiased atmosphere. Let us put the interests of the State and the people of Singapore before personal or even party interests and ask ourselves - does this motion really need an amendment? - and give ourselves an honest answer to that. 4.27 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, there has been so much talk about what is, in fact, a very simple issue at this stage, and the talk has served to obscure the real question. Do we or do we not agree in principle with the concept of Merger? Months ago, years ago everyone, including the Barisan Sosialis, were ready to say they wanted merger - an unqualified yes. But then it was only a dream. Now it is a reality tabled in this House. Now what have they to say. You would expect everyone to greet it as the achievement it really is. But no; we find opposition. It is easy to pay lip service to a far-off dream, that may never come off, but when it becomes a reality, then is the time to test for sincerity. All Parties have said they want merger. All we are asked for is our agreement in principle. We are going no further than the first objective. The Member for Queenstown has talked of marriage and of the difference between a wife and a mistress. Well, the period of courtship does seem to have successfully come to an end, and we are at the proposal stage. And any woman will tell you that now is the moment for a straight "yes" or "no". It is not the time to haggle and impose impossible conditions, unless you want to lose the offer. Later, once the union has taken place, then the process of adjustment occurs - in stages - and a full relationship is worked out - a working relationship to try to make that union for better, not for worse. In accepting the proposal, Sir, we are declaring our faith that such a union will succeed, and bring benefits to both parties, as we believe this merger will do. The proposal, moreover, is a sincere one. Singapore is being offered an honest union; she is not being propositioned as a mistress. I would remind the Member for Queenstown that the real difference between a wife and a mistress is a legal one. The mistress may, in fact, enjoy more benefits but they are temporary ones and she has no security in law. This merger is legal and constitutional and permanent. Can you call it anything but a genuine merger? 4.31 p.m.

What is fundamentally at stake? Do you want independence from the colonial power? Do you want to be reunited with Malaya? These are national issues. The Member for Queenstown and his comrades are trying to reduce them to selfish party issues, even personal ones. This is a cause of the people, not an excuse for abuse and personal smears. Why go to such lengths about the stability of the Government? We are not legislating for the future of this Government alone, or to win the next election. We are deciding the future destiny of all Parties and of the State as a whole. Of course, the opportunists look at merger for what they themselves can get out of it, which is perhaps why the Barisan Sosialis are calculating how many extra seats will be there for them to contest in the Federation. The P.A.P. prefers to act as the agent of the people. They are the go betweens in this marriage proposal - the properly authorised go-betweens on an election mandate. The Barisan Sosialis, having deserted their election mandate, have only themselves to act for. And as to the P.A.P. being too weak for their task, they have managed to negotiate terms with the Federation that two years ago seemed impossible. At that time the Federation appeared to be the stumbling-block. The block has been removed only to be replaced by one within our own ranks. Having come this far towards our goal, it would seem that the Member for Queenstown is doing his best to frustrate the entire plan. His demands are extreme. They could be aimed at frightening off the Federation. We all know that if you are set against making a business deal, you set an impossibly high price on yourself. You demand in this case automatic citizenship of the Federation, and you do not hesitate to insult the Tunku, because he is a client you wish to drive away. I submit that the Barisan Sosialis are being deliberately obstructionist. Their objections are red herrings, to draw us away from the real issue. They disbelieve the sincerity of the Federation because the same people who once opposed merger are still at the helm. Yet I seem to remember that they themselves crossed the Floor here, because they changed their minds. They say we shall become second-class citizens with only a token representation in the Federal Parliament. 15 seats are a pretty big token - second only to Perak and more representatives than the Barisans can claim in this Assembly. It is not very flattering to Singapore politicians and the people's choice to suggest that our 15 will not be able to exert any influence. We can only gain from becoming part of the Federation territory, and for this, we give up nothing. We remain first-class citizens of Singapore enjoying all our previous rights plus independence. In fact, where the P.A.P. have negotiated for separate conditions for us, they have all been in our favour. Far from castrating or crippling us, they give us special privileges over the other States in education, labour, Finance and trade. Where is the sell-out? Where are the losses? Would the Member for Queenstown exchange our education and control of labour for this automatic citizenship? We in fact get two brands of independence - the new political release from colonialism and full nationality, and the old independence or autonomy in what matters most to us. We enter the married state and are allowed to take our jewels with us. Perhaps the only ones who stand to lose are those who are afraid of the Internal Security Council, but these are not the honest loyal citizens of Singapore whom the Council cannot touch. There is no longer a principle at stake. The Council will not be like the P.P.S.O., an instrument of the colonial power. It cannot be seen as interfering in our affairs because it will consist of our own local people. We objected to the British lion, but we do not object to the Malayan tiger. There has been talk of sacrifice on behalf of the people. This seems a very noble thought from those who were last heard of looting furniture and sewing machines from their former Party Branches. But sacrifice is rather vain, is it not? Would they not better serve the cause of socialism by joining their brothers in the Federation whom they claim the Tunku and our Prime Minister have a common interest in suppressing? This is surely an opportunity to organise themselves through constitutional means on a pan-Malayan basis. But perhaps they do not like constitutional means. I come back to my first point. We are being offered a fair, realistic deal for our people - more than we ever expected at this time last year. Let us not miss the bus through arguing about the kind of seats on it. Do we or do we not want merger? 4.40 p.m.

(In Mandarin): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, today the question before the House is not as what the Deputy Prime Minister has said. It is not a question of whether we want a merger or not. It is a question of what type of a merger do we want. Do you want the merger proposed by the P.A.P., i.e., a sell-out merger, or do you want our Barisan Sosialis' genuine merger? Now, let me talk about the amendment moved by our Barisan Sosialis, i.e., for a genuine merger? Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, let me state why the Barisan Sosialis want a genuine merger. Is the Barisan Sosialis afraid of a real merger? Is the Barisan Sosialis sincere in putting forward this genuine merger? What are the basic conditions of the Barisan Sosialis towards the merger question? Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, geographically, ethnically, linguistically, historically, economically and in customs and habits, Singapore and the Federation were one originally. However, ever since 1944, Singapore and the Federation of Malaya were forcibly divided by the colonialist British Government. It became part of the British colonialist policy to divide and rule. The arrogant and unreasonable conduct adopted by the British Government in those days aroused protests from the people of Malaya. In spite of protests by the people in those two territories against their policy, the British colonialists still persisted in carrying out their divide and rule policy. In August 1957, the British colonialists gave up the Federation of Malaya and allowed it to be independent. On 1st June, 1959, Singapore became a self-governing State. Ever since that time, the separation between the two territories has become more and more marked. Do the peoples of Singapore and the Federation of Malaya want to be separated? Do the Left-wing forces in the two territories want to be separated? No, not at all. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, we the Left-wing forces have never supported the artificial division of the two territories. The peoples in these two territories are not happy about this division of the two territories. Therefore, it has been one of our objectives to fight for a real and genuine reunification of the two territories and to be free from colonialism. This is also the main objective of the Left-wing forces. We believe in the integration of the two territories with independence in economy and politics, equal rights for the people, and democratic freedom. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, these are our basic aims. A genuine merger between Singapore and the Federation is one objective for which we will never give up fighting. The Right-wing forces should not smear us and give warning to us here. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, it is my duty to state the objectives of the Barisan Sosialis as contained in our Party Constitution. Let me now read some of the articles in our Party Constitution. Article 1 - to eliminate colonialism and to establish an independent unified nation comprising the Federation and Singapore. Article 2 - to set up a democratic government based on the right of franchise of the citizens in the two territories. Article 3 - to bring about a prosperous, stable and just economic system. Article 4 - to get together the people of all races to establish a Malayan nation. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, the Barisan Sosialis demand a genuine merger of Singapore and the Federation. This is in accordance with our Party platform and is also in conformity with the interest of the people. Our stand is firm and resolute. We are not weak. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, the socialist ideology was born in an unjust society. The socialist movement has had its setbacks and socialists have been prosecuted. This is to be expected and it is not surprising. Those who make use of the socialist banner to deceive the people become turn-coats half-way. This is something which very often occurs in the course of development of the socialist movement. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, today we are discussing the serious problem of merger between the two territories. We the Barisan Sosialis request a genuine merger between Singapore and the Federation of Malaya. The leadership of the P.A.P. has said that we are afraid of merger because we are afraid of a strong Right-wing Central Government. They have also said that the Barisan Sosialis want to make use of Singapore as a base in order to emancipate the people of the Federation of Malaya. All these accusations are nonsense. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I want to ask the leadership of the P.A.P. whether they are sincere in seeking a true merger between the two territories of Singapore and the Federation of Malaya. The answer is, "No, they are not sincere." What the P.A.P. want is a kind of sellout for the people of Singapore. According to the P.A.P. logic, we are afraid of merger because we are afraid of being arrested. They say that we are opportunists. But I can honestly tell the leadership of the P.A.P. that what we are afraid of is that the interests of the people of Singapore will be endangered if there is no genuine merger between the two territories, because the people will not be able to share the same political life as that enjoyed by the people in the Federation. As to the threat that the Left-wingers will be arrested by the Right-wing Government after merger, this is another matter and it is not important. The socialist movement has been known to be curbed. History has proved that the socialist movement has always met with a setback, after which it becomes all the stronger and develops faster. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, we have learnt from history that those who are really afraid of being arrested are those reactionaries and traitors who sell out the interests of the people. These people pursue a line of holding high State posts in order to enrich themselves - like Syngman Rhee, Chiang Kai-shek, Wang Chin-wei, Bao Dai and Chew Swee Kee. For the sake of their own personal interests, positions and prestige, these people resort to any means to curb the activities of patriots and sell out the people. The P.A.P. are now following this line in Singapore. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, the Left-wing forces of Singapore demand a true merger between the two territories of Singapore and the Federation of Malaya. They expect that they may be arrested and thrown into Changi Goal or detained in St. John's Island. But true socialists work only for what is in the interests of the people and the future of the country, so that the people can move forward towards a more prosperous and happy future. Other things are insignificant and of no importance at all to them. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, you do not see genuine anti-colonialists and socialists being afraid of oppression from reactionaries. If they are afraid, they will cringe with fear and will not come forward. You never see that happening.

It is a convenient time to suspend till half-past five. Sitting accordingly suspended at 5.01 p.m. until 5.30 p.m. Sitting resumed at 5.30 p.m.

Debate resumed.

(In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, the Indian Prime Minister, Mr Nehru, is worshipped by our Prime Minister. In his struggle against colonialism, Mr Nehru spent many years in prison. The Indonesian President, Dr Soekarno, in his struggle in the past against the Dutch colonialists, had also been imprisoned. The Congolese Prime Minister, Mr Lumumba, because of his struggle against colonialism and imperialism, was murdered. The President of Partai Rakyat in the Federation of Malaya, Inche Boestamam, has been imprisoned for his struggle in the socialist cause. Singapore's Leftist elements have been imprisoned too. Now they are still under detention. Why are they imprisoned? Why do they suffer? For what? What they are fighting for is only to achieve the integration of the two national territories. And they oppose the colonial rule. They seek to achieve a more just society. They are not afraid of death, and they do not carry on the struggle for the sake of personal interests or prosperity. Therefore, Mr Speaker, Sir, we the Barisan Sosialis, in our stand for true merger, were positive in the past. We are positive at present, and in future we will also bepositive in our stand. Mr Speaker, according to the Prime Minister's speech, we are not sincere in our demand for true merger. He said we are purposely trying to embarrass the Government. He also said that we are afraid of the Right-wing Government in the Federation. Mr Speaker, for a non-Communist, socialist leader of the P.A.P. to make such childish utterances is a very sad thing. Mr Speaker, the Prime Minister has said that the leaders of the Barisan Sosialis are capable young men who lack experience. Yes, we are still young. We do not have experience in deceiving the people. We congratulate our Prime Minister for his experience in this respect, a very rich experience. But I regret that a person with several years - of experience of the so-called non-Communist, socialist struggle cannot understand the true meaning of socialism and the development of the socialist movement. Perhaps the Prime Minister has tried to suppress the growth of the socialist movement. But I can honestly tell the Prime Minister that, according to the facts of history and my personal experience which I have gained from study and learning, the socialist movement is not based on race, creed, religion, colour, or any form of barrier. There is no barrier. As long as there is unreasonableness in society, the germ of socialism will grow into a plant and flower and bring forth fruit. Because if these unreasonable conditions in society, the people become poorer and poorer everyday and they are deprived of their democratic rights. All these harsh facts of practical life clearly tell the people that they must reform the society in which they live.

Order. The hon. Member could possibly touch on socialism just on the surface to make his point. But if he goes into details, then, of course, he is debating socialism. We are not debating socialism at the moment. We are debating merger. As I said, all he need do is to touch on the fringe of socialism and make his point in that way, but he must not go into details.

(In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I shall return to the main subject. The Left-wing movement in the territories of the Federation of Malaya and Singapore existed during the colonial era. Before the establishment of the P.A.P. in 1954, there was already a socialist movement. And there was socialism before I was born. All along the Left-wing movement-had met with oppression and attacks from all reactionary forces. The Left-wing movement could still exist under such conditions and expand. Does it mean that the reactionary forces of oppression could curb the Left-wing movement? No. They cannot do so. The truth of the matter is that the socialist movement moves according to history, which propels the socialist movement forward, and in its natural course it develops. Mr Speaker, Sir, although at present in the Federation there is a strong Right-wing government suppressing the Left-wing movement, our socialist comrades, under the banner of the Socialist Front, are now strengthening and expanding their forces and they have extended their influence to every city, town and rural kampong. The prospects for the future of socialism are very bright. Socialism is on the march. Although the Socialist Front is in opposition in the Federation at present, the oppression of socialist elements there was no better than under colonial rule. All this could not stop the Socialist Front from developing. It cannot stop the cause of socialism. In Singapore the Left-wing strength has been attacked by the oppression of this so-called non-Communist, socialist Government. The democratic rights of the people have been curbed by the Government. Unreasonable laws have been passed. They are more stringent -

Order. I ask the hon. Member to come back to the motion. All this, to my mind, is more than irrelevant. It is opening out a debate-that has nothing at all to do with the merger motion before the House.

(In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, I was explaining to you why we, the Barisan Sosialis, want genuine merger. But the Government says we are afraid of merger because we are afraid of being curbed and oppressed by the Right-wing Government in the Federation. Therefore, I have mentioned all these facts and reasons to prove that in moving our amendment, we are very sincere in asking what we want. What we want is genuine merger and not a phoney merger. Mr Speaker, Sir, the rapid development and progress of the Barisan Sosialis in Singapore has struck fear in the heart of the P.A.P. Government. Therefore, no matter how bad the circumstances are, the socialist movement can still exist and develop. For instance, the Pahang River must flow out into the South China Sea. The Rivet Nile must flow out into the Mediterranean Sea. The River Thames must flow out into the English Channel. That is a course nobody can stop or alter. Therefore, no matter what kind of oppression or curb is imposed upon it., the socialist movement can still endure and progress. All these efforts at suppression will be wasted. People in the end will tell the oppressors what the result will be. Mr Speaker, we the Barisan Sosialis demand a genuine merger. We are ready at any time to suffer the same fate as our comrades in the Federation. We want to struggle for the same aim-and the same objective as long as the people of Singapore and the Federation live the same political life and share and enjoy the same citizenship rights.. The socialist movement will have nothing to fear. Only those who do not like to see the socialist movement progress will be afraid. Only these people will think of ways to deprive the citizens of Singapore of their citizenship rights. By this they have been exposed as phoney socialists. Mr Speaker, Sir, since its formation, the Barisan Sosialis, has never altered its stand in regard to merger of the two territories. We do not want to change our stand now. The stand will also not be changed in the future. In this respect the P.A.P. dare not criticise us. They can only allege hypocritically that we are trying to embarrass the Government and that we are afraid of merger. Mr Speaker, Sir, in the course of history, you can never find any true socialists who are opposed to true unification of the territories into one nation. On the other hand, true socialists will go through fire and water to achieve the unification of the territories and unity of the country. They will fight very hard to achieve this aim. I cannot understand the so-called non-Communist, socialist P.A.P. leadership. They are now looking at everything through coloured glasses. They also look through coloured glasses at this very important issue. Mr Speaker, we the Barisan Sosialis have proposed this amendment in order to demand a genuine merger of Singapore with the Federation of Malaya We do this out of sincerity and honesty We do this in the interests of all the people. If the people of the two territories can truly merge and be united, it does not matter if we socialists have to make sacrifices. It is worth our sacrifices. I hope that hon. Members in this House can understand our sincerity, and not try to slander, to smear and to indulge in mud-slinging for the interests of their own Party. Mr Speaker, Sir, the Barisan Sosialis' basic principles in regard to merger of Singapore with the Federation of Malaya are: (1) A genuine merger of Singapore with the Federation of Malaya; (2) Singapore becoming the twelfth State of the Federation of Malaya; (3) The present Singapore citizens automatically become citizens of the Federation on Merger Day; (4) Singapore citizens can freely take part in elections in any part in the Federation. Of course, any citizen from the Federation can also come to Singapore to take part in elections. In one word, Mr Speaker, we ask that after merger of the two territories, the people of the two territories will be able to enjoy equal political life. This is the basic attitude of the Barisan Sosialis towards merger. Mr Speaker, Sir, the question before us is not whether we want a merger, but whether we want a genuine merger or a phoney merger, that is, a sell-out merger. The Barisan Sosialis want to achieve a genuine merger. But the P.A.P. are opposed to this genuine merger. The Barisan Sosialis demand that all the Singapore citizens should become the citizens of the new Federation after Merger Day. But the P.A.P. want to give up the over 600,000 citizens of Singapore. The Barisan Sosialis demand that after true merger Singapore will become the twelfth State of the new Federation. But the P.A.P. want Singapore to become only a partner in the Federation. The Barisan Sosialis: want the citizens of the new Federation to be able to stand for election in any State in the new Federation. But the P.A.P. only want the citizens of Singapore to be able to stand for election only in Singapore. The Barisan Sosialis demand that there should be proportional representation in the Federal Parliament. But the P.A.P. want to determine the number of representatives after taking into consideration the fact that Singapore will have autonomy in labour and education and how much Singapore will have to contribute to the Federation Government. Mr Speaker, these are the basic differences in our demand for merger. Mr Speaker, on the question of merger of Singapore with the Federation of Malaya, I wish to give an analogy here. Let me take the example of an integrated school introduced by the Government. But it does not mean that the management of integrated schools is being carried out very well. I mean to say, the rights of the students in this school are equal. Therefore, this can help us to understand what will happen after the merger of Singapore with the Federation of Malaya. The rights and obligations of the citizens of the two territories should also be equal. Mr Speaker, you know that the Government has integrated students from the Chinese stream of education with students from the English stream into one school. Students from the two streams of education were in the past separated in different schools. The students had their respective obligations and rights in their respective schools. They had their respective principals in their schools. But now when they are integrated into one school, they go to the same school. This integrated school has one principal. There is only one school song. The students go to different classes to attend their lessons. The students have the right to carry out various activities in the same playground. They use the same auditorium and the same library. They use the same Physics laboratory and they can also use the same microscope. They can use the same music hail. They can have equal access to the Arts room. Not only have they the right to use the same facilities provided by the school and have the same rights, but what is important is that everyone of them has an equal right with the other. They also have the right to elect their representatives to the students body, for instance, the Historical Society, the Geographical Society, the Film Society, the Photographic Study Society, the Sports Society and others.

On a point of order. Have the schools or the students mentioned in these examples any connection with this amendment?

Order. I understood the Member for Choa Chu Kang to say that he was drawing an analogy between an integrated school and the reunification of the two territories. But perhaps the Member for Choa Chu Kang does realise that he is going into too many details. Whatever he has said could have been said in one minute.

(In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I have been trying to help you and our friends opposite to understand what is the true meaning of a genuine merger. Now let me continue. I: does not matter from which school the students come. They have the same rights and obligations to elect their representatives to be responsible for various kinds of offices. Every student can stand for election as an office-bearer of any student body. Mr Speaker, Sir, the students in the school enjoy the same rights and obligations. In this way the school can be said to be a genuine integrated school. We can also call it a genuine merger. If the students do not enjoy the same rights and do not have equal obligations, where then is the equality? If there is no equality, how can we talk about merger? Mr Speaker, a merger of Singapore with the Federation of Malaya is just like the analogy I have mentioned. It is just like an integrated school. The basic question is that of equal rights. In other words, after merger the present citizens of Singapore must become the citizens of the new Federation.

Order. Can I draw the attention of the Member for Choa Chu Kang to the fact that he has been repeating himself about three or four times, and that there is a Standing Order which says that if repetition becomes tedious, the Speaker will draw attention to that fact and then, if the Member still persists in tedious repetition, he will request the Member to cease his speech. We must not have too much repetition.

(In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I was just about to end my speech. If there are no such rights, then it is no use for us to talk about autonomy. What kind of merger will that be then? Mr Speaker, Sir, there is a very good Chinese proverb which goes like this, "If there is no skin, where can the hair grow?" The meaning is that there is no place to grow any hair. If there is only hair, but no skin, what is the use of the hair then? Therefore, in talking about a merger of Singapore with the Federation of Malaya, the same reason obtains if, after merger, Singapore citizens can automatically become citizens of the Federation. It is as important as the skin on the body. Citizenship rights and autonomy in labour and education are just like our hair. They are unimportant. This analogy tells us that if we do not solve the basic problems, but instead, deal with minor, irrelevant and unimportant things and split hairs over minor details, then it will be a waste of time and energy. We cannot get any benefit out of it. On the other hand, we will incur a loss as a result of wasting our energy and time on those minor issues. Mr Speaker, Sir, let me quote from the Nanyang Siang Pau of 22nd November, in which the person who occupies the second seat on the Government Bench, namely, the Minister for Finance, in replying to my colleague, the Member for Queenstown, on the 21st November, said, "Why do the Barisan Sosialis want to quarrel over these small issues?" These "small issues" are citizenship rights. The so-called "small issues" to him are citizenship rights and things like that. Mr Speaker, Sir, one of the basic principles of the Barisan Sosialis in regard to merger is that this should not endanger the present position of Singapore citizens. The type of merger should not degrade the status and the rights of the present Singapore citizens. But the Minister for Finance said that these questions were unimportant. I wish to ask the Minister for Finance whether he does remember that the people of Singapore had fought hard to acquire their citizenship? Madam Chan Choy Siong (Delta) rose -

On a point of order? Madam Chan Choy Siong indicated assent.

(In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, the Member for Choa Chu Kang has said (just now) that the Minister for Finance said that citizenship rights were unimportant. I think he is distorting the facts. Citizenship rights can be acquired by a constitutional arrangement. It does not mean that the question of citizenship rights is unimportant.

That, I must tell the hon. Lady, is not a point of order. It is an argument. I shall look forward to hearing her speak in due course.

(In Mandarin): I mention all this only to help our friends opposite think. Does the Minister for Finance know that the 320,000 citizens of Singapore have grown up on the soil of Malaya? What must we degrade them to the position of second-class citizens? Does it mean that "citizenship" is an academic phrase or word? Mr Speaker, Sir, I use the word "academic" because the Minister for Finance has said that this is a question pertaining to an academic exercise. Perhaps I do not understand what is meant by an "academic exercise". The Minister for Finance is a Doctor of economics. He knows that the word "citizenship" is academic. It is not realistic and practical; therefore, it is not important. I wish to advise the Minister for Finance that if he wants to chop off his own head just because of an academic word, we are not concerned. But he must not chop off the citizenship rights of over 600,000 citizens of Singapore because of this academic word. This is what the Singapore people cannot tolerate and let him do. Mr Speaker, Sir, the highest legislative authority in Singapore is this House. May I ask who elected the Member for Kreta Ayer? The people of Singapore -

Order. The Member for Kreta Ayer is the Minister for Finance, if I am not mistaken. He must be referred to as the Minister for Finance.

(In Mandarin): I will take your advice, Mr Speaker. Let me repeat. May I ask who elected the Minister for Finance? The answer is the citizens of Singapore. Who elected the Prime Minister? The answer is the citizens of Singapore. Who elected the Minister for Culture? The answer is the citizens of Singapore. Who elected all the Assemblymen in this House? The answer is the citizens of Singapore. Who elected the P.A.P. Government? The answer is also the citizens of Singapore. Mr Speaker, Sir, we have to be Singapore citizens to attend primary and secondary schools, the University and technical school. One has to be a Singapore citizen to apply for scholarships or bursaries, and registration for employment as a seaman. One has also got to be a Singapore citizen to get registered for any job, apply for a Government post or be a member of the Work Brigade. Mr Speaker, Sir, I do not want to enumerate any more examples. From this, we can clearly see that the question of citizenship supersedes all other questions. One cannot do anything without a citizenship. It is just like the Monkey King who cannot jump across the five fingers of the Buddha. Mr Speaker, Sir, you can understand more than I do. This House is the highest legislative authority in Singapore: but after merger, the highest legislative authority will be moved across the Causeway to Kuala Lumpur. It will not remain in Empress Place any more. The authority will be removed to Kuala Lumpur, just like Malacca and Penang. Therefore, the present Singapore citizens should be like the citizens of all the States in the Federation and have proportionate representation in the Central Parliament in Kuala Lumpur. The necessary right of the present Singapore citizens - The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Home Affairs (Mr Chan Chee Seng) rose -

On a point of order?

On a point of clarification.

If the Member will give way. Mr Ong Chang Sam resumed his seat.

(In Mandarin): The Member for Choa Chu Kang has just now pointed out so many things about citizenship. It does not mean that half of the citizens here will lose their citizenship rights after merger. That is why we want the Member for Choa Chu Kang to clarify this point.

(In Mandarin): If the Member for Jalan Besar goes back to his constituency and asks the electors there -

Order. The Member for Jalan Besar is now a Parliamentary Secretary and he must be referred to as a Parliamentary Secretary. He has asked the question for clarification, and perhaps the Member would like to clarify. But if he does not wish to clarify, he can say he does not wish to clarify.

(In Mandarin): I have forgotten that he is the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Home Affairs. Mr Speaker, Sir, the Minister for Finance is able to go to Fraser's Hill to take part in the election, and the Prime Minister will be able to go to Cameron Highlands to stand for election -

Order. I do not know how all this is relevant to the merger debate. All these personalities are completely unnecessary and irrelevant.

(In Mandarin): On a point of clarification. Mr Ong Chang Sam resumed his seat.

(In Mandarin): I remember during the time when the Member for Choa Chu Kang was living with us in Fort Canning Hill, he always went up to Cameron Highlands.

Order. Now we find the Parliamentary Secretary is out of order. That is not a point of clarification. Let us come to the motion. Mr Ong.

(In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I want to give a correct reply to the hon. Member. I do not know what the scenery in Cameron Highlands looks like. Let me return to the subject. After a real merger between Singapore and the Federation, any citizen in the Federation will be able to stand for election in Singapore. But the P.A.P. is not prepared to fight for the basic citizenship rights of the people of Singapore. They only fight for the interests of a few people in their Party and they sell out the interests of the people of Singapore. Mr Speaker, Sir, we want a genuine merger but the P.A.P. claim that their type of merger will bring more benefits to the people of Singapore. What are these benefits? We ask the P.A.P. to tell us what these benefits are. As far as I know, there will be another Prime Minister in Singapore. This is the dream of our Prime Minister. There will be another national anthem, another national flag, and other so-called national rights. Mr Speaker, Sir, if we have all these things, does it mean that we have a genuine merger? Does it mean that our problems will be solved if we have national rights? "National rights" is the registered trademark of the P.A.P. The P.A.P. tries to mislead the people by covering up the mistakes of their regime which is going to perish. The P.A.P. hopes to mislead and obscure the vision of the people by giving them national rights. They want to make the people believe that they will not only retain their citizenship rights but they will also get national rights, and that what they are fighting for is more than what the Barisan Sosialis are fighting for so as to deceive the people of Singapore. The P.A.P. think that the citizens of Singapore will be as foolish as a bear and that they can be easily misled. The fox and the bear with a short tail - Inche M. Ismail Rahim (Geylang East) rose - Mr Ong Chang Sam resumed his seat.

(In Malay): Mr Speaker, Sir, I do not understand what bear the hon. Member is referring to. Is it a parliamentary word that can be used, Sir?

I do not think the Member for Choa Chu Kang alleged that any Member of this Assembly is a bear. He was likening the people of Singapore to bears. If the hon. Member likens any Member of the Assembly to a bear, then of course he is out of order. Mr Ong.

(In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I do not say that our friends opposite are foxes or bears. I am trying to help you understand the analogy I mentioned just now. In Northern Europe, there is a very meaningful folk story.

Order. I think the Member is becoming a little tedious. He is now repeating his theme of analogies in other parts of his speech. I think he will be well advised to wind up his speech. Mr Ong.

(In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I shall shorten my speech. The cunning tricks adopted by the P.A.P. through its radio and Press conferences are intended to confuse the people. It tells the people that the time has now come for them to grab the chance of a merger between Singapore and the Federation, and that if they treat the citizenship rights as national rights they will then get benefits and their lives will be happier. It seems that the P.A.P. is very concerned with the people's interests. How sincere is it? As a matter of fact, it is a very fearful trap. The P.A.P. is trying to set a trap for the people. It wants to chop off the heads of the people of Singapore in the name of merger for the sake of the minority leaders in the Party. Mr Speaker, Sir, in the last few days, the Members of this House have witnessed the struggle of a dying Party. The speeches of Government Members have been contradictory and inconsistent as a result of which the people of Singapore are somewhat confused. Which Minister should the people of Singapore believe in? Which Minister is representing the Government? Or are the Ministers representing themselves?

(In Malay): On a point of order. Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to know who wrote the speech which the hon. Member is reading with such great labour?

The point of order being whether the hon. Member is entitled to read. I have suggested in my circulars to Members that if a speech is made in a language other than English, copies of prepared speeches be given to interpreters for the sake of ease of interpretation. I take it that is what has been done in this particular case. Mr Ong Chang Sam. Inche Yaacob rose -

Is it a point of order?

(In Malay): My point is this. I agree that copies of speeches should be given to the interpreters. But if the speech of the hon. Member was written by himself, surely he should not be reading it with great difficulty.

There are different methods of reading. Mr Ong.

(In Mandarin): If the Member for Bukit Timah -

I do not want any debate. Please continue.

(In Mandarin): If the P.A.P. profess themselves to be non-Communist Socialists, then they should not confuse the vision of the people of Singapore with all kinds of distortions and nonsensical speeches. Mr Speaker, Sir, if one is confused over a certain matter and one still pursues a certain line, then the danger is very great. It is just like this. If you are not sure how deep the water is but you still insist on jumping in, then in the end you will drown, as a result of which the people will laugh at you. At the moment, the term "merger" between the two territories is not quite clear. The Prime Minister of the Federation said that this is not a complete merger and that a better term for it i3 a partnership. The Prime Minister of Singapore said that this is a kind of merger and that merger on a partnership basis is better than any other relationship. The Minister for Health said that this is a kind of merger on a partnership basis. His Excellency the Yang di-Pertuan Negara in his speech said that merger is impossible. But the Minister for Labour, in moving his motion, said that it is merger. Mr Speaker, Sir, the people of Singapore are confused, and are not sure which is Right and which is Left. In fact, the P.A.P. intend to throw dust into the eyes of the people of Singapore. They said that that kind of merger is very good because they want to blind the people's vision and so confuse them. May I ask the Government which Minister's speech is correct? And may I ask the Prime Minister to declare openly, sincerely and honestly in this House whether the speech of the Prime Minister of the Federation is correct, or whether what he himself has said is correct? Whether the Tunku has deceived the people, or whether the Prime Minister of Singapore has cheated the people?

Order. I have already warned the Member that he is becoming a bit tedious. I think I must now read the Standing Order so that he will then perhaps be compelled to try and bring his speech to a close. This is Standing Order 54: 'The Speaker or the Chairman, after having drawn attention to the conduct of a Member, who persists in irrelevance, or tedious repetition either of his own arguments or of the arguments used by other Members in debate, may direct him to discontinue his speech.'. But I do not wish to ask the hon. Member to discontinue his speech. I do wish to ask him to be a little more relevant, to speak a little more closely to the merger question and try not to repeat arguments which have been advanced by Members of his own Party. I have made a rough calculation - we have been debating for about 12 hours, i.e., more than two days.

Hear, hear!

(In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, what I was saying just now was in order to help you and the people of Singapore understand the meaning of merger. Otherwise, you will be confused, we will be confused, and the people of Singapore will also be confused over the meaning of merger. Mr Speaker, Sir, let me look into what the Minister for Health and Law said. This is the Nanyang Siang Pau of 23rd November. He said: 'We agree with the negotiations but we do not agree to proposing intransigent proposals. We know that under true negotiations Singapore and the Federation of Malaya will not have generous terms accruing to each side and no generous terms can satisfy either party on either side of the Causeway.' Mr Speaker, Sir, how absurd it is. First, the P.A.P. by itself along has no right to talk about merger, a matter which concerns all the people. Second, granting that the P.A.P. has the right to represent the people of Singapore, does it ask for automatic conversion of the citizens of Singapore into citizens of the Federation? Third, who authorised the P.A.P. to give up so generously the first-class citizenship rights of the people of Singapore? Is the question of merger only to satisfy the interests of the few leaders on the other side of the Causeway? Can the interests of the people be regarded as party interests? Mr Speaker, Sir, the Minister for Health and Law said on 22nd November - let me quote a passage from his speech as reported there: 'All these flimsy arguments about citizenship, status, and so on, are invented by those who are against merger. Nationalists and patriots after understanding that there are no basic differences will not insist on saying that there is a difference in citizenship status.' Mr Speaker, Sir, what is meant by a "flimsy and phoney" argument? A first-class citizen is demoted to a second-class citizen - is that not a fact? Is it not false? Is it not hypocrisy? Does the Minister for Health and Law know what is the definition of the word "invention"? By saying that there are different classes of citizens, this inventor then should be the P.A.P. who invented all these different classes of citizens. I am only mentioning numerous facts to prove that there are different classes of citizens. What we mention is based on facts. The Minister for Law accused us of being anti-merger and of giving flimsy or hypocritical arguments. Mr Speaker, in the course of history, you can never see the true patriots and nationalists who will insist on giving away their country, their national flag and their national anthem and their rights to acquire unequal rights and status. Mr Speaker, the Government of the Federation, in opposing the South African apartheid policy, has set a very good example. But if the people of Singapore are likened to the coloured people of South Africa, and the citizens of the 11 States of the Federation are likened to white men, what difference is there in this kind of analogy? This comparison is very apt. I sincerely hope that under true negotiations of merger, Singapore citizens will have the same equal rights. Let the P.A.P. declare what are the definitions of "nationalist", "patriot", and the so-called "non-Communist". What is the theoretical basis of a non-Communist socialist? Mr Speaker, Sir, let us examine this. The Minister for Culture, as you know, is a non-Communist Malayan Socialist. He is the Chief of Staff in promoting this Malayan culture. He asked, with reference to the speech of the Member for Queenstown, how many of the 600,000-odd citizens of Singapore could enjoy this right? How many of them think they would go to the Federation to stand for election? He also said that even if the majority of the voters were given that right, they were not interested in standing for election. Mr Speaker, how irresponsible that speech is. The people of Singapore now know that the Government of Singapore is dealing with the problem of citizenship on this basis. That is why the citizenship rights of the people of Singapore can so easily be sold out. I want to tell the Minister for Culture this: of course, it cannot be that all these 600,000-odd Singapore citizens will stand for election, but the 624,000 citizens want to enjoy the same political rights as the citizens of the Federation. And Singapore citizens want to move about freely in the other 11 States in the Federation. The 624,000 citizens want to enjoy the same economic life. May I ask the Minister for Culture what is meant by parliamentary democracy? What is the basis of parliamentary democracy? Is not voting the basic political right of the people? In this world, is there any inequality of rights existing in a socialist country? What kind of socialism is the P.A.P. following? Mr Speaker, of the 624,000 citizens of Singapore, how many of them can make use of these rights? They will not strive just for the sake of standing for election? What is conveyed by these two sentences? It shows that the Minister for Culture is ungrateful. During the time of the elections, he went round to all the voters to persuade them to come out to vote.

Order. This again is a repetition of the same theme. I think it must be about the sixth time that the Member has played on this theme. I do ask him once again to come to the end of his speech as soon as possible.

Mr Speaker, Sir, in a few minutes I shall wind up my speech. According to the phoney merger by the P.A.P., the citizens of Singapore will get inequality when they live, but they will get equality when they die. The citizens of Singapore have no-right to enjoy the same political life. However, the citizens of Singapore have the obligation to be called up for service to defend the new Federation. Mr Speaker, Sir, I do not mean that the citizens of Singapore should not be conscripted to defend our motherland. What I mean is that under the phoney merger by the P.A.P., the citizens of Singapore and the Federation have the same obligations but they do not enjoy the same rights. How can you say this is a merger? How can you say that this is a reunification of the two territories? Is this equality? Mr Speaker, Sir, in the past few days, the Members of the Barisan Sosialis have clearly reflected the views of the people of Singapore. If the Party in power want to fight for the interests of the people, they have to be awakened now. They should stop selling out. Mr Speaker, Sir, the Buddhists say, "Put down your sword, and then you will become a Buddha." Let those friends opposite ponder over this saying. Otherwise the people of Singapore will send them to hell. Mr Speaker, Sir, I support this amendment to the motion. 6.48 p.m.

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin rose -

Is the Minister seeking leave to make a statement.

Mr Speaker. Sir, may I seek your permission and that of the House to make a clarification of the point raised by the Member for Anson regarding Tommy Koh?

The Minister has asked leave of this Assembly to make a statement in respect of Tommy Koh. Is it the pleasure of hon. Members that the statement be made now? Hon. Members: Aye.

No dissentient voice. Mr Yong.

Mr Speaker, Sir, since the telegram from Tommy Koh Thong Bee came to my knowledge at 2.45 p.m. today, when you handed it to me, I have asked for a check on the intelligence report regarding Tommy Koh. The facts are that at 8.50 a.m. yesterday, car SU 4444 went into St. George's Road and proceeded to the Whampoa Secondary School examination centre. SU 4444 is a car belonging to Tommy Koh's father and often used by him. A young Chinese sitting in the front seat beside the driver was identified by an intelligence observer as Tommy Koh Thong Bee. Since receiving this telegram, further investigation have been made for corroboration. It would now appear that the young man next to the driver of the car SU 4444 is a member of the family for whom he was mistaken. I tender full and ample apology for having misinformed this House because of the mistaken identity. I also tender full and ample apology to Tommy Koh Thong Bee for any pain and suffering the wrong identification caused him. 6.51 p.m.

Debate resumed.

(In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I do not use unreasonable terms to deal with this serious question in this Assembly. I want to pinpoint on the amendment moved by the Member for Queenstown. I oppose his amendment because it is inopportune and unrealistic. Its purpose, as has been clearly shown by the Barisan Sosialis, is entirely to oppose merger. Why should they talk about genuine merger? They talk about Singapore becoming the twelfth State of the new Federation. They talk about Singapore citizens automatically becoming citizens of the Federation. All this is an eyewash. Let us not try to deceive ourselves. Let all the people of Singapore know now that the Barisan Sosialis are opposed to merger. Their defection from the P.A.P. is because the P.A.P. Government supports and has arranged for a merger with the Federation Government. That is why they had to resort to any means and tactics to break away from the P.A.P. Therefore, their talk about genuine merger and all the rest of it is only to hoodwink the people or calculated to blind their vision. Their true purpose is to delay the implementation of merger and to sabotage any conditions for the merger of a true democratic country. Therefore, we can say that the true purpose of the amendment moved by the Member for Queenstown is to sabotage the work of merger. They know that merger is now in view. They cannot stop it. But on the other hand, they are afraid of merger because they know that after merger, internal security will be in the hands of a strong Central Government of the Federation. The Communist forces, which they represent, cannot develop in Singapore any more. On the contrary, they will be checked. They are afraid of merger. But they cannot stop merger from coming into effect. How can they delay merger? They must find some way to delay merger, to delay the unpleasant day from coming. They have thought out a condition to make the people of Singapore afraid of accepting merger. They have also thought out some conditions which cannot be acceptable to the Government of the Federation. The method is contained in the amendment. Everybody knows that Singapore and the Federation of Malaya have been separated for more than ten years. Irrespective of economy and politics, Singapore has its own special peculiarities and characteristics which are different from the Federation. The Federation also have their peculiar policies which cannot be carried out in Singapore. Now the Barisan Sosialis want a complete merger between Singapore and the Federation of Malaya, and Singapore to be the twelfth State of the Federation. In other words, they want Singapore to follow the same policy of livelihood as that pursued in the Federation. Can this be accepted by the people of Singapore? Singapore is a trading port for the Federation to export its goods. The imports and exports of the Federation have to be directed through Singapore. Therefore, a great portion of materials needed by the Federation are preserved in Singapore. Taxes and revenues are also in the hands of the Singapore Government. The Government can use this public money to improve the livelihood of the people. It can carry out all kinds of social welfare and other services. Therefore, the average national income is more than that of the Federation of Malaya. The public money spent by the Singapore Government on social and other services is much more than that spent by the Federation Government. The social services and other benefits enjoyed by the people of Singapore are of a higher standard and more than those enjoyed by the people of the Federation. Now, if Singapore were to be completely merged with the Federation of Malaya and become its twelfth State, it would mean that the people of Singapore would have to give up their higher standard of living. They would have to adapt themselves to the conditions in the Federation. Can the people of Singapore agree to this? Now, let us examine objectively what kind of situation Singapore will be in if we were to agree to the amendment moved by the Barisan Sosialis. 1. If according to the Barisan Sosialis' type of merger, Singapore is completely merged with the Federation of Malaya to become the twelfth State, the present social services and allowances now enjoyed by the people will decrease. This is because social services are pan-Malayan. The policy of Singapore's social services will have to follow that obtaining in the Federation. Everyone knows that the average social aid is illustrative of what the people of Singapore get. Can the people of Singapore accept this situation? 7.04 p.m.

(In Mandarin): 2. If we follow the method of the Barisan Sosialis, the examinations in Singapore's Chinese schools will be effected in the English or Malay medium. Chinese students in Chinese schools cannot write their answers in Chinese. That is what is being done now in the Federation of Malaya. Under a complete merger, Singapore will have to follow suit. Can the Chinese parents in Singapore or the present students accept this? 3. If we go according to the Barisan Sosialis' method, the Bank of China in Singapore and other foreign banks will have to close down, because at present there is a law in the Federation of Malaya which prohibits foreign banks from carrying out business in the Federation. Under a complete merger, this law will be applicable to Singapore and bank staff will be unemployed. I think, perhaps, the Barisan Sosialis do not want to see this. Perhaps they like to see that there are more unemployed. The more the merrier. They want to see a confused situation. What we must take into serious consideration is that, if we go according to the way of the Barisan Sosialis, then our free port status will be affected and the merchants of Singapore will suffer. Will the merchants of Singapore agree to that? 4. Under a complete merger, products from China, such as textiles, cannot be imported into Singapore because this is the present policy of the Federation of Malaya. Apart from these, there are many other things which cannot be adjusted so very easily at this moment. I have only enumerated some objective problems existing in the two territories. Of course, we entirely agree in principle to a full and complete merger, because basically this will solve our social and economic problems. But as I have already said just now, there exist between the two territories numerous divergencies and differences. Since there exist different objectives, environments and circumstances, therefore, to carry out a complete merger immediately would only cause very great confusion among the people. So this is a road that cannot be followed. Only adventurers will, for the sake of their own personal interests, accept such a course that will be detrimental to the interests of the people. A complete merger of Singapore with the Federation of Malaya will happen one day, but its coming cannot be as what the Member for Queenstown has suggested, i.e., through his amendment. Before the coming of a true merger of Singapore with the Federation of Malaya, we must prepare the groundwork of laying the foundations for a final merger. In this respect - Tun Lim Yew Hock rose -

On a point of order?

On a point of order, Sir. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I refer you to Standing Order No. 6. There is at present not a sufficient quorum in this House.

This is a point of order. I will ask the Clerk to ring the bell. 7.11 p.m. Members summoned into the Chamber as if for a division.

I have no need to count the Assembly now. There are more than 13 Members. That is a sufficient quorum. The debate goes on. I do hope the Speaker will be given an opportunity to rest. Mr Chan Chee Seng.

7.14 p.m.

(In Mandarin): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, the complete merger of Singapore with the Federation will ultimately arrive. But its arrival is not like what the Member for Queens-town has said. The Member for Queens-town has said that to achieve it, he need only move an amendment. Before a complete merger of Singapore with the Federation can take place, we will have to pave the way for it. We have to lay a firm foundation for the ultimate merger of the two territories. On this point, I believe the P.A.P. proposed merger in this transitional period is realistic, practical, objective and feasible. It will lay down good foundations for the ultimate merger of the two territories. We will talk about this in other motions. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, the amendment moved by the Member for Queenstown is intended to mislead the people. That is why I oppose it. A few days ago he uttered weak and empty words. He tried to convince all of us that the purpose of the motion was to mislead and confuse the people and to divert attention from the real issue. Therefore, we have to expose his intention. He wants to entice the people by saying that the citizens of Singapore should automatically become citizens of the Federation. This is an attractive request. But, in fact, everyone of us knows that this demand is not acceptable to the Federation Government. The hon. Member's intention is to create discontent among the people and mutual suspicion among the communities. Moreover, he wants to embarrass the Federation Government. Judging from the nature of the amendment moved, we can easily put forward all sorts of demands. We can even ask for the moon and the stars in the sky, but we have to consider whether our demands are reasonable or not, whether they are feasible, and whether they are in the interests of the people or in accordance with their aspirations. All of us know that there are citizenship laws in the Federation. Anyone who wants to become a Federal citizen has to apply in accordance with the citizenship laws in the Federation and not in accordance with the laws of the Member for Queenstown. The Barisan Sosialis also proposed that Singapore should merge with the Federation on the basis of Penang or Malacca. But in the 7½ hour speech of the Member for Queenstown, there was no mention of Malacca and Penang because the Minister for Finance has taught him a lesson and he has now become wiser. Now let me ask him questions about the citizenship rights of the people of Malacca and Penang. Can all the people in Malacca and Penang become Federal citizens automatically? Or can they become citizens of the Federation according to the law of the Member for Queenstown? Can Singapore citizens become Federal citizens by using the same Law? We have to base our arguments on practical circumstances. We should not try to sabotage the merger negotiations between Singapore and the Federation by putting forward unreasonable demands. We now come back to the question of Penang and Malacca. The situation in these two places is not like what the Member for Queenstown said. Only those people born in Penang and Malacca can become Federal citizens. The other people have to apply for Federal citizenship. Why do the Barisan Sosialis not ask that Singapore should merge with the Federation on the basis of Penang or Malacca? Do they realise that what they asked for before and what they propose now is not the same thing? Just now the Member for Choa Chu Kang has said that his stand is resolute and firm and that he never changes it. I want to ask the Members opposite, when they were in the P.A.P., -

We were never in the P.A.P.!

(In Mandarin): I mean the Members who belong to the Barisan Sosialis, they also said that our stand was very firm. But today when they are in the Opposition, they say that their stand is firm, and tomorrow when they sell out the people's rights, they will also say that they are very firm in their stand. They are firm in putting forward demands which are not in accordance with objective realities. The Barisan Sosialis do not even know what they want. How can the people expect them to put forward more reasonable demands? We know that what the Barisan Sosialis want is not merger. We know that they want to oppose merger. They want Singapore to be still under British colonialism so that they can smoothly carry out their under-ground and above-ground activities. I remember a few days ago some Members of the Barisan Sosialis quoted many historical events and phases from Chinese history. They likened the Federation to the Manchu Dynasty which conquered China. This sort of talk is very dangerous. It will cause suspicion and racial conflict between the people of the two territories. Therefore, I want to advise our friends in the Opposition that they should be careful about what they say. If they support merger in principle, then they should not make speeches which would cause a feeling of uneasiness in the two territories. 7.27 p.m.

(In Mandarin): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, just now I have heard the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Home Affairs talk about a lot of things. I feel that what he has said is contradictory to what his Ministers have said. Yesterday the Minister for Finance-said that we did not break away from the P.A.P. over the question of merger, but just now the Parliamentary Secretary has said that we did so because of the P.A.P.'s proposed merger. The Parliamentary Secretary also touched on the educational problem. He asked whether we would agree with the education policy of the Federation. I think what he said was on the same lines as what the Minister for Education said two days ago. He also said that true merger was good but not realistic. Why should the Party in power want to use terms in their motion to confuse the people? Merger is only a name. If there is to be a merger, then we should have a genuine merger and they should not make use of the term "merger" to confuse the people. The motion of the Minister for Labour runs like this: 'That, whereas it has always been the avowed objective of all nationalists of Malaya to achieve the reunification of Singapore with the Federation of Malaya and to remove the artificial division created by the British by their policy of "divide and rule", this House affirms and declares that the first objective of all true patriots of Malaya is to achieve the reunification of these two territories in a merger of Singapore with the Federation of Malaya.' The terms of this motion mean that there should be a merger, and if there is merger, it should be a genuine merger. They should not use the word "merger" to deceive the people. I feel that the speeches of the P.A.P. leadership are not sincere. They should learn from the Tunku and say that this kind of merger is a partnership. It will be more correct if they use the word "partnership", and not the word "merger" to confuse the people. Mr Deputy Speaker, let me return to the point. Let me talk on the amendment moved by our Chairman. I fully support it because it is based on a stand which is truly for the benefit and interests of the people of the two territories. It is unbiased and just. It is the correct way to deal with true merger of Singapore with the Federation, and with the language issue. It meets with the wishes and desires of the people of the two territories. It also reflects the stand of the Barisan Sosialis on merger between the two territories. The Chairman of the Barisan Sosialis has spent 7½ hours to analyse and to deal with what the Prime Minister has in a few months spread among the people - misgivings and discontent. Our Chairman has dealt with all this. The Prime Minister has been creating artificial tension among the people. He wants to divert their attention from the fact that he is selling them out. He has also analysed the special characteristics existing in the two territories, and of the socialist forces that are now growing and developing, especially the Barisan Sosialis, which is a new political force in Singapore. Its strength must have caused some apprehension in the leadership of the P.A.P. and made them run to the Federation to fall on all fours to beg for help from the Tunku. On the question of citizenship rights, our Chairman has clearly pointed out that we are concerned with the rights of the citizens of Singapore, and we have to clarify our stand on this. He has also pointed out the deceits and hypocrisy of the P.A.P. He has pointed out that the P.A.P. has not only deprived the citizens of Singapore of their citizenship rights, but has also intended to sell out the basic democratic rights of the people of Singapore. What we want is a genuine merger - Singapore entering into the Federation of Malaya, as a State. All Singapore citizens on the day of merger should automatically become citizens of the Federation. All this shows that what we, the Barisan Sosialis, want is a genuine merger in which there is integrity and a reunification of the two territories. We resolutely oppose the phoney merger of the P.A.P. We have also declared that we want to retain the basic citizenship rights of the citizens of Singapore on merger. In order to preserve the basic rights of the citizens of Singapore and the interests of the people of Singapore, however adverse the circumstances and conditions, we the Barisan Sosialis will resolutely -

On a point of order, Sir. I see that the Member is reading his speech.

It is a point of order, but I think the Member is not reading but occasionally referring to his speech. Mr Tan Cheng Tong.

(In Mandarin): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, your ruling is correct. I must show my admiration for you. We also intend to carry out a fight against the intriguers who want to sell out the citizenship rights of the people of Singapore. We know that with the sell-out of their citizenship rights, Singapore citizens will lose all their interests. Therefore, in order to safeguard their present and future interests, we the Barisan Sosialis must point out what the basic conditions for true merger are. We must expose the phoney merger of the P.A.P. Mr Deputy Speaker, the debate today is mainly for all Assemblymen to ponder carefully over this question of genuine merger. On this question there has already been a debate for several months. From the result of the debate on this question, we can find out who are, in fact, representatives of the people and work for the interests of the people, and who are hypocritical and deceiving.

Order. If the translation is correct, I think the word "hypocritical" is used. I ask the hon. Member to withdraw that word.

(In Mandarin): Mr Deputy Speaker, I withdraw this word. Mr Deputy Speaker, the true picture is very clear now. Speaking as a member of the Barisan Sosialis, our stand on merger is in accordance with the wishes and desires of all classes of people. Therefore, we are always resolutely working along this line. We want to fight for a complete genuine merger of the two territories, Singapore and the Federation of Malaya, and to reunify the two territories. The views of the Barisan Sosialis are that we must achieve true complete merger of the two territories, to eliminate all colonial forces remaining in the two territories, and to seek more freedom and democratic rights. Under these circumstances, the two territories can then enjoy real happiness. Therefore, in accordance with the terms of our amendment, there are three conditions for merger of the two territories, namely, that the citizens of Singapore should on the day of merger automatically become citizens of the Federation. If these citizens of Singapore cannot automatically become citizens of the Federation after merger, then the people of Singapore will be losing many important political rights. This is what everybody can understand. It cannot be refuted. Only when the citizens of the two territories enjoy the same citizenship rights can they enjoy equal political rights and other benefits. Let me give an example. Let us look at the P.A.P.'s phoney merger. According to this type of merger, the citizens of Singapore cannot enjoy the same citizenship rights as the citizens of the Federation. The citizens of Singapore then cannot take part in political activities in the various States of the Federation, to form big Parties and to stand for election in the various States. Under these circumstances, whenever the Federation Central Government takes reactionary and dictatorial measures, the people of Singapore will be suppressed and they will not be able to seek redress. On the other hand, if they can have common citizenship rights, then if the Federation Government ignores public opinion, or if they suppress the people in the two territories, then the people in the two territories can unite and oppose the unreasonable policies pursued by the Government. The people in these two territories can unite through the system of one man one vote, and elect a new government which represents the people's interests. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, all these comparisons are based on the premises that we have common citizenship rights and functions. This shows that with basic citizenship rights, we can enjoy political rights. Now I want to talk about the economic problems of the people in relation to the merger issue. If a person in Singapore wants to go to the Federation to open up new land and cultivate it, or if he wants to open a farm in the Federation, then without a real merger - when the citizens of Singapore and the Federation are not enjoying the same citizenship rights - this person will be frustrated in his desire to open a new farm. If a rich person wants to start a new business in the Federation, then, because he does not enjoy the same rights as the Federation citizens, he will be thwarted. He cannot even carry on his business. If a person wants to apply for a taxi licence but he is not a Federal citizen, then he cannot achieve his aim. In short, whether looking at this problem from the daily lives of the people or from the economic point of view, the importance of citizenship rights is indisputable. Therefore, we the Barisan Sosialis advocate that on Merger Day the citizens of Singapore must automatically become Federal citizens. Our demand is a just one. Mr Deputy Speaker, I wish to reiterate what our Party Chairman said at, a mass rally. I think it is necessary to bring out this question. We can show that we are honest, serious and careful on the question of merger. We can also expose the groundless accusations made by the Ministers when they said that we were sabotaging merger, that we were insincere about merger, and that we were not nationalists. We can also expose the fact that they tried to divert the people's attention from the real problem. In the course of the debate on this question, they want to confuse us with all these minor points. The Government has made use of the opinion of the State Advocate-General to illustrate their points. It is useless to do so. His opinion is useless. There are four questions. Now I wish to quote from our Party pamphlet because our views on the question of merger are propounded in this pamphlet. One of our four conditions is that through the system of one man one vote we can establish a more just society. Secondly, without the right of automatic citizenship will those Singapore citizens who have no Federal citizenship be discriminated against and suppressed? Thirdly, if people in Singapore do not have Federal citizenship, will they have freedom of speech and the right of assembly and organisation in the Federation? Fourthly, can the trade union movement in Singapore be unified? Will the workers in the two territories be united to fight for better working conditions? Will graduates from Singapore schools be eligible to work in the Federation civil service? Will Nan-yang University graduates be discriminated against in the Federation? Will those people who have no Federal citizenship, i.e. merchants, contractors and bus companies, be restricted in their business in the Federation? Will the people in Singapore be able to acquire land in the Federation? Will the socialists in Singapore be able to go to the Federation to take part in political activities there? Are all these questions, after merger, in any way connected with citizenship rights? Mr Deputy Speaker, why have I raised these questions? Why have I put forward these four questions? My contention is that although we have been debating this question for seven days, the Prime Minister and some of the Assemblymen have not given a clear-cut view of the matter and have not answered these questions. This shows that we are cautious and very sincere in our approach to the question of merger. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, why did our Party Chairman reiterate that we should have a genuine merger? It is because we want to prevent the P.A.P. from passing off a phoney merger as a real merger. We know that the P.A.P. conspiracy in putting forward the phoney merger proposal is to confuse the people. They have deceived the people many times. They always put forward plausible, vague, ambiguous, dubious and sophisticated arguments-the so-called independence, autonomy in. labour and education, that merger will solve the problems of the people, and all this talk on merger. In order not to allow the P.A.P. to mislead the people on the question of merger, we have put forward genuine proposals for a genuine merger under which, when Singapore is merged with the Federation as the twelfth State of the Federation, all Singapore citizens will automatically become Federation citizens on Merger Day. The basic rights of the people in Singapore will not be sold out by this phoney merger proposal. We will not fall into the trap of these plotters.

Order. Moment of interruption. Mr Rajaratnam.

Resolved, "That this Assembly do now adjourn."-[Mr Rajaratnam]. Adjourned accordingly at Eight o'clock p.m.