Hansard, 1963-04-08

I have to inform Honourable Members that, under the provisions of paragraphs (2) and (3) respectively of Standing Order No. 93, I have appointed Mr A. P. Rajah to be the Chairman of the Public Accounts committee and Mr John Mammen to be the Chairman of the Estimates Committee.

asked the Prime Minister whether he will consider setting up a Commission of Inquiry into the trade union movement with specific reference to infiltration thereof by political parties, whether registered or unregistered.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I will certainly consider setting up a Commission of Inquiry. I think most Members will agree that the Member for Thomson rendered the country a great service by accidentally proposing a Commission of Inquiry for the Chinese Schools Examination Boycott, as a result of which Communists --- An hon. Member: The Member for Anson and not the Member for Thomson.

The Member for Anson - I beg your pardon. The Member for Anson is still standing on the same side of the line. Sir, as a result of that Commission of Inquiry, a certain number of Communists and Communist united front operators working in the guise of educationists and protectors of culture and language were exposed and discomfited. I agree with the Member that a similarly useful role can be played by a Commission of Inquiry in respect of Communist activities in the trade unions. There is, at the moment, another Commission pending at the request of the Singapore National Union of Journalists. It is to inquire into the improper manner in which the Singapore National Union of Journalists was exploited by certain Communist united front operators and into the manner in which their funds were misused for Communist front ends. I think the general investigation can be joined with this specific investigation which has been asked for. The question is to find when a High Court Judge will be free to undertake what will undoubtedly become a long, protracted and sometimes perhaps acrimonious proceedings. The Member will remember that the former Chief Justice retired in January this year and we are at the moment one Puisne Judge short. However, the Chief Justice has assured me that he will make a Judge available as soon as the Court's list makes it possible.

A supplementary question, Mr Speaker, Sir. The Prime Minister, in indicating that he accepts the suggestion for the appointment of this Commission, left it limited to the question of Communist subversion. I ask whether the Prime Minister did that by accident or whether it is intended in the spirit of the question to appoint a Commission to inquire into all political activities and all political infiltration of trade unions, whether registered political Parties or not - the "not", of course, being the Communists.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the distinction between Communist operators and non-Communist infiltrators does not lie in their belonging to a registered or an unregistered society. Many of the Communist operators belong to a registered society, and one of the political Parties is adequately represented in this Chamber. That is in the nature of things in Singapore. I take it that the point the Member for Anson wanted to make was - have I, in framing this reply, taken into consideration his other point, to investigate the activities of non-Communist political leaders in the trade unions. But hypothesi, if they are non-Communists, therefore it cannot he for subversive ends.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the question is "setting up a Commission of Inquiry with specific reference to infiltration", and the aim is to free the working-class movement from its thraldom to political Parties. That would be the aim of such a Commission. My enquiry is: does the Prime Minister accept the position that the trade union movement should be free from slavery to any political Party, and that a Commission would help immensely in clarifying the position and in probably paving the way for legislation for their protection?

Mr Speaker, Sir, that opens up an entirely new aspect of the case. As I understand it, the Member for Anson is now thinking in terms of legislation to free the trade union movement from thraldom - is it thraldom? I have not got the Oxford Dictionary with me here, but I assume, by that, that the Member for Anson means that one is held enthralled by the other. If that is so and if the purpose is then to make recommendations for legislation so that no trade union can either subscribe to, belong to or pay subscriptions to a political Party, I am quite happy to consider that. But infiltration by non-Communists into trade unions and trade union committees is just like some businessmen infiltrating into direct directorships of companies. It goes on regularly. The same man, for instance, turns up in 20 different companies-Fraser & Neave, Malayan Breweries, Red Lion, etc. By sheer persistence and great skill in the management of committees, the same person appears over and over again in the directorship lists of many companies, thereby no doubt invoking a great deal of confidence amongst the public and the consumers of the various commodities. So too with trade unionists. One becomes an adviser, a general affairs officer, and so on. I think the objection to these persons is not that they work in trade unions but that they should work for the purposes of the Communist Party in trade unions. [Interruption] No, Mr Speaker, Sir. Any other political beliefs by all means. I sympathise with the Member for Anson. Twice he has lost his Party whilst he is still in this Chamber. I can quite sympathise with his point of view that one should not work for any political Party at all. I think there is reason and logic behind that point of view after one has had the bitter experiences that he has had. Twice the painful business of bringing a political Party to fruition; both came into life; one assumed power and one looked like coming to power and ---

Order. I think the Prime Minister is now wandering and inciting a debate. I do not think we should allow that at Question Time. Perhaps he will cut his answer short.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I see no harm whatsoever in Members opposite working in trade unions provided they are not doing it for Communist ends. I see no reason at all why no Members on this side of the House should not slave for trade unions if they feel so inclined.

asked the Prime Minister whether Government will consider sponsoring an appeal for monetary contributions from Singapore residents to assist victims of the volcanic disaster in Bali.

Sir, the Government has no objections to any monetary contributions from Singapore residents to assist the victims of the volcanic disaster in Bali. It is best, however, if such subscriptions were to be sponsored by private charitable organisations.

asked the Minister for Health and Law whether he will consider introducing legislation to amend the Courts Ordinance to enable District Judges to commit persons to prison for contempt during proceedings, as well as persons guilty of malicious distortion of court proceedings through radio, rediffusion, television and press reporting.

Mr Speaker, Sir, under the Criminal Procedure Code, the subordinate Courts have certain powers on acts of contempt committed in the presence of the Court. These powers are not as wide as those enjoyed by the High Court. This follows precedents in the United Kingdom where subordinate Courts do not enjoy the extensive powers of the High Court. It is the High Court which has general superintendence over the proceedings of inferior Courts not only to prevent them from exceeding their jurisdiction or otherwise acting contrary to the law, but also to prevent persons from interfering with the course of justice in such Courts. The power of the Superior Court to punish for contempt has been under critical examination in England, and it was considered that such wide power should not be given to the subordinate Courts. However, I agree with the Member for Anson that our circumstances are different and I would welcome concrete proposals from members of the Bar and the Bar Committee itself. Persons guilty of malicious distortion of court proceedings through radio, rediffusion, television and press reporting can be dealt with adequately under the present laws for contempt under the existing provisions of the law.

asked the Minister for Health and Law whether he would consider the report of Sir John Whyatt on "The Citizen and the Administration" and the legislation arising therefrom in New Zealand in the context of the possibility of the applicability of the principle of "Ombudsman" to Singapore.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the report of Sir John Whyatt on "The Citizen and the Administration" and the legislation arising therefrom in New Zealand have been carefully considered, but the view of the Government is that it is premature to apply the principle of "Ombudsman" in Singapore. We have already in existence in Singapore departments that cover to a great extent the powers, sphere of operations, rights and duties of an Ombudsman. The Central Complaints Bureau can be referred to in any case where the citizen complains of maladministration or delays in the public service. The Bureau has already helped to create a better understanding and appreciation of the duties of the civil service in serving the needs of the public. The Disciplinary Proceedings Regulations have been framed so that Civil Service Disciplinary Boards comprise not only civil servants but also members of the public. This will ensure that all matters of discipline will be enquired into and dealt with without prejudice and with due regard to the public interest. The Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau works independently of the police and is responsible to the Minister for Home Affairs and the State Advocate-General. There are some practical difficulties in the institution of Ombudsman which have not been completely solved even in Denmark where it has been in existence for about six years. One of these difficulties is the right of the Ombudsman to look into secret files of Ministers as well as State departments. While the Whyatt Report recommends that the Parliamentary Commissioner should have security of tenure in the same way as the Auditor General in Great Britain, in New Zealand he holds office only for the duration of Parliament. In the context of British parliamentary government and the principle of ministerial responsibility, it is difficult to demarcate the extent of the powers of the Ombudsman. The Whyatt Report has been criticised in Great Britain and its recommendations have not yet been adopted by the British Government. The position will, however, be kept under review. Last year, a legal officer made a special study of the system of Ombudsman in the Scandinavian countries. While the Government feels that it is better to allow existing institutions in Singapore to develop both by experience and activities, a close study will continue to be made of the experiments in other countries.

asked the Minister for Health and Law when he anticipates being in a position to introduce legislation to limit the power of disposal of assets by will.

Mr Speaker, Sir, it will be in the very near future. The Inheritance Family Provisions Bill is in draft and has been referred to the Singapore Bar Committee who have indicated their agreement.

Mr Speaker, Sir, in view of the fact that an almost identical reply was given more than a year ago, can we hope that it will be introduced next June at the next sitting of this Assembly?

Mr Speaker, Sir, everybody knows how harassed we were, but we have plenty of time this Session and it is hoped we will introduce this Bill, as well as the Intestate Succession Bill which has also being cleared by the Bar Committee, this Session.

asked the Minister for Home Affairs whether any detainees under the Preservation of Public Security Ordinance are detained in the Central Police Station lock-ups, what is the longest period any detainee has been in such lock-up, and whether conditions in such lock-ups are subject to scrutiny by visiting justices or other non-police bodies.

Mr Speaker, Sir, a number of persons detained under the Preservation of Public Security Ordinance are at present held at the Central Police Station lock-up for interrogation purposes. The longest period during which any detainee has been held at the Central Police Station lock-up is since the time when the first batch of persons were arrested on 2nd February, 1963. The conditions at the Central Police Station lock-up are subject to inspection by a Board of Inspection consisting of the Solicitor-General and the Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs.

Am I to understand, Sir, that some of them have been in this lock-up for more than two months? And since I am on my feet, if I might ask a second supplementary question? Would the Minister consider the suggestion of Amnesty International made to the Prime Minister that the Red Cross be given permission to investigate conditions?

May I reply?

No. It is Question Time. Mr Ong Pang Boon.

There is no objection to inspection by the Red Cross. As I have said just now, some of them have been in detention at the Central Police Station lock-up since 2nd February.

asked the Minister for Home Affairs when, where and how were detention orders served on detainees under the Preservation of Public Security Ordinance; and when were legal representatives permitted to see them.

Mr Speaker. Sir. Detention Orders were served on detainees within 16 days of their arrest in accordance with the provisions of the Preservation of Public Security Ordinance, 1955. In most cases, the Orders were served on them whilst they were in custody. Legal representatives were allowed to see the detainees immediately after the Statement of Grounds for the detention were served on them.

Only two days ago, the Minister said that legal counsel were allowed to see the detainees after one month. How does this tally with what he has said?

The Minister would perhaps like to refer to his reply? It is at page 32 of the Hansard of 5th April, 1963.

Mr Speaker, there is nothing inconsistent, if the Member looks up the provisions of the P.P.S.O., he will find that the Statement of Grounds will he served on the detainees within 14 days of the making of the Detention Order. And if he totals up the number of days, he will find that the period comes to about a month.

asked the Minister for Home Affairs by which Government was Lim Shee Ping arrested at Nairobi, Kenya, and which Government brought him back to Singapore.

Mr Speaker, Sir, Mr Lim Shee Ping was not arrested at Nairobi, Kenya, but in Singapore when he arrived back from Nairobi on 4th February, 1963. His Federation of Malaya passport was cancelled by the Federation of Malaya Government. He therefore returned to Singapore, where he was detained in accordance with the Internal Security Council decision and sent back to the Federation. I understand he has asked for repatriation to China.

Who sent Lim Shee Ping back from Nairobi to Singapore, Sir? An hon. Member: By B.O.A.C.!

Order.

Mr Speaker, Sir, he had no travel documents; so he returned.

asked the Minister for Home Affairs how many members of the Work Brigade have been registered in the electoral register for the Electoral Division of Sembawang since 23rd August, 1962.

Mr Speaker, Sir, no member of the Work Brigade in the Sembawang Camp has altered his address and registered in the Sembawang Register of Electors.

asked the Minister for Labour (a) what was the total number of registered unemployed on the 28th February, 1963; (b) what was the number of such unemployed receiving public assistance; and (c) what was the sum of public assistance disbursed for the month of February 1963.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I have been asked to reply. The total number of persons actively seeking employment assistance on the 28th February, 1963, was 33,673 persons. It cannot be said that all the 33,673 registrants are unemployed. There are persons who have registered themselves at the Employment Exchange in the hope of getting better employment elsewhere. The total number of persons on the Employment Register receiving public assistance on 28th February, 1963, was 7,851. The answer to the last part of the question is that the total amount of public assistance disbursements for February 1963 to 24,666 cases was $780,621.20.

Do I understand that there were 24,000 cases for public assistance of unemployed in the month of February last?

The unemployment cases who registered for public assistance on 28th February, 1963, was 7,851.

What is the figure of 24,000 given then?

That is the total number of cases that are registered with the Welfare Department for public assistance. It is the total number of cases.

May I have information as to whether, in fact, there are persons registered for employment who are known to be employed? That is to say, there is no register of unemployed. But there is a register where people are taken in who are both employed and unemployed. Is that the position?

Mr Speaker, Sir, there is no separate registration. We have to accept everyone who wants to register with the Employment Exchange and who claims that he is unemployed, because there is no way of checking whether he is employed or not.

In that case, is it fair then to say that the 33,673 claimed to be unemployed?

Mr Speaker, Sir, we must not confuse. When we refer to the public assistance figures, it is the number of cases. A head of family may be unemployed and he registers himself for public assistance. So the number of 7,851 represents the number of cases that are classified as unemployed for public assistance.

Forgive me, Mr Speaker. I have the figures, and it is the gentleman who is confused. I am referring to the figure of 33,673 registered on 28th February, 1963. Are those the people who claimed that they were unemployed? 33,673?

Sir, that is so.

asked the Minister for Education what expenditure was involved in the Commission of Inquiry into the Chinese Secondary Four Examination Boycott in November/December 1961; how many legal representatives were engaged by the Government, on whose behalf were they engaged and from which legal firms; and what amount of legal fees was paid in each case.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I have been asked to reply. The expenditure to date for the Commission of Inquiry into the Government Secondary Four (Chinese) Examination Boycott in 1961 is $18,026.

04. Only one legal representative was engaged by the Government. This legal representative was engaged as Counsel for the Minister for Education. The solicitor concerned is attached to the legal firm of solicitors, Messrs. Lee and Lee. He was paid token fees on the basis of assigned Assize cases, i.e. token fees intended to defray a lawyer of his transport and out-of-pocket expenses when he undertakes the duty to defend an accused charged with murder at the request of the Court. The total amount of legal fees paid to date covering 79 sittings of the Commission amounted to $9,675.

Was he charged with murder?

Order.

The Government has already a Deputy Public Prosecutor helping the Government to look into the investigations. Why was it necessary to have another lawyer from outside to help the Minister for Education?

Mr Speaker, Sir, the legal representative was acting for the Minister for Education in his capacity as a Minister.

How did the counsel from Messrs. Lee and Lee happen to have been employed?

I believe he has faith in the firm.

asked the Minister for Education whether he is aware that children living on Pulau Brani and Pulau Blakang Mati and schooling in Singapore are having transport difficulty in going to and from Singapore; whether he has received petitions from the parents of those school-children; and whether he will make a statement on the matter.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I have been asked to reply. The Minister is aware of the transport difficulties encountered by children living on islands who have to attend schools in Singapore. In the case of Pulau Brani and Pulau Blakang Mati, there are in existence 3 primary schools which cater for nearly 750 pupils. The problems of daily transport across the seas affect about 120 pupils only. On 21st February, 1963, a petition was received purporting to have been signed by 72 residents of Kampong Pulau Blakang Mati. The Ministry has endeavoured to solve the problem by seeking the co-operation of the War Department by adjusting the time-tables of their ferry services. Likewise, the assistance of the Master Attendant's Department and even that of the Straits Trading Company were sought. However, the commitments of these bodies have limited their ability to provide all the transport required for pupils and at times convenient for pupils. Therefore, the Ministry can Only do its best to alleviate the situation by resorting to the following measures:-

A supplementary, Sir. Can we have any indication of the number of these transport bursaries that it is anticipated will be awarded?

Mr Speaker, Sir, it is difficult to predict the number of applications.

For how many people?

It depends on the number of applications.

(In Malay): Mr Speaker, Sir, when were the circulars concerning the transport bursaries for the pupils of these islands issued?

Mr Speaker, Sir, does the Member mean the money which has just been approved?

Mr Speaker, Sir, I think it would be more convenient for me to put my question to the Parliamentary Secretary in English: when were the circulars concerning bursaries for transport issued by the Ministry of Education to the schools in the Southern Islands?

Mr Speaker, Sir, I thought I mentioned that the circulars were issued on 15th March, 1963.

asked the Minister for Education when will a Malay School at Pulau Blakang Mati be built.

Mr Speaker, Sir, tenders have already been called for the building of a 7-classroom primary school at Pulau Blakang Mati. It is expected that the school will be completed before the end of this year for 1964 admissions, and will be able to accommodate more than 600 pupils in two sessions. The language medium of the school has not been decided yet, as it will depend upon the registrations and demand for places by parents in respect of their children.

(In Malay): Mr Speaker, Sir, can the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Education inform the Assembly as to what are the reasons the school in Pulau Blakang Mati could not be erected in 1961, even though the Minister for Education himself had stated in this Assembly that the school will be built in 1961?

Mr Speaker, Sir, further notice is required to answer that question.

asked the Minister for Education whether he is aware that flower-arrangement and photography classes are being conducted by the Adult Education Board; how many students are there in each type of classes; how many teachers are teaching in these classes; what is the cost of conducting each of these classes; and whether he will make a statement as to the need for such classes.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the Minister is, of course, aware that flower-arrangement and photography courses are being conducted by the Adult Education Board. In fact, the Minister opened the first exhibition of the works of the Adult Education Board at the Victoria Memorial Hall on 8th March, 1963. A total of 14 classes on flower arrangement with 323 students have been organised since March 1962. There are two part-time instructors for these courses, one conducted in English and the other in Mandarin. 16 courses on photography have been organised since October 1961, and 608 students have gone through these courses. Two part-time instructors are engaged in these courses, one for the English section and the other for the Chinese section. All these classes are conducted on a self-supporting basis. Courses on photography and flower-arrangement are primarily recreational courses which are intended to assist members of the public to make use of their leisure hours profitably. This is an important aspect of adult education especially in our society today, where trade unions have been successful in getting shorter working hours, thereby increasing the leisure hours of our workers. Some of the students of the photography courses have also been able to secure employment on the strength of the tuition given by the Board in its photography courses.

Sir, how many of the students of the flower-arrangement classes are workers?

Most of them are workers, Sir.

Why are you against flowers anyway?

Order.

asked the Minister for National Development how many Work Brigade Camps there are in the Sembawang Electoral Division and on what dates were the Camps established.

Mr Speaker, Sir, there is only one Work Brigade Camp in the Sembawang Electoral Division, and this was established in September 1960.

3.10 p.m.

Mr Speaker, I beg to move, That at its rising on Tuesday, the 9th April, 1963, this Assembly do stand adjourned to the 7th of June, 1963. Mr Speaker, the Prime Minister already explained to the House on Friday why this Assembly cannot sit on the 10th and 11th of this week. At some later stage this afternoon I will sound the mood of this House as to whether it is desirable or not to continue today's sitting to midnight. Question proposed.

Mr Speaker, Sir, this is another shameful episode of the abuse of power by the Government. We have already had a holiday of eight months ---

You have not recovered yet!

Order.

--- since the middle of July and, but for a few-hour affair after the referendum, we have had no occasion whatsoever to debate matters of national importance. And now just when the Government has been forced by pressure of public opinion to reconvene the Legislative Assembly, they now decide again to postpone the sitting for another two months. What does it mean? It means that in one whole year, Sir, we will have hardly a couple of sittings of the Legislative Assembly. Is this the way the P.A.P. wants to practise parliamentary democracy? The Deputy Prime Minister says that the Prime Minister has already given reasons. Yes, we have heard the reasons, Sir. He said he had to attend certain meetings. But they are no good reasons. If the Prime Minister has to go and conduct meetings with some person or other, does it mean that we in the Legislative Assembly cannot sit? Or does it mean that should the Prime Minister go on a tour somewhere, all government business must stop? Is that the reasoning which the Deputy Prime Minister wants to put forward? Sir, as I have said, this is already a holiday of eight months and it is time that we in the Legislative Assembly be given an opportunity to discuss matters which have direct concern with each and everyone of us in Singapore, and even in the Federation of Malaya and the Borneo territories. The Prime Minister gave an assurance only two days ago that, if necessary, he would reconvene the Legislative Assembly after the Easter holidays. Why has the Government broken its promise so quickly? If it is so absolutely necessary for the Prime Minister to be present at the debate, why cannot we reconvene immediately he comes back from the Federation? Why are they all so afraid? Sir, today the newspapers can, to a certain extent, be considered a department of the propaganda bureau of the P.A.P. Everytime some branch or other of the P.A.P. makes any move to have a meeting, news of this straightaway is in the newspapers. If other organisations hand in scripts to the newspapers ready for print, somehow or other they never see the light of day. When the Prime Minister pays a visit to the constituencies, at least two full pages in the Chinese newspapers are devoted to what the Prime Minister said here and what he said there. Beautiful pictures are taken - all staged, in order to give the impression that there are people who want to welcome the Prime Minister. No, Sir. Let the P.A.P. Government give us a decent chance to have our say in this Legislative Assembly. We are having debates after a lapse of eight months on very important issues. We have the Yang di-Pertuan Negara's speech, and normally, Sir, the speech of the Yang di-Pertuan Negara will be debated for five days, six days, one week or 10 days. Yet the Government wants everything to be over in less than two days. In addition, Sir, there are, as we can see on the Order Paper, very important motions which we have tabled and which the Prime Minister has tried to anticipate. We do not mind that. We will debate them later. But let not the Government try to cut us all short with no chance even to say our bit in the Legislative Assembly. The matter of the arrests, the matter of the treatment of detainees are very important matters, Sir. In fact, they are the concern of not only Singapore, but also the Federation, South-East Asia and the whole world. The very people who backed the Lee Kuan Yew Government are today condemning them for what they have done in Singapore. Of course, the Lee Kuan Yew Government would not like all these exposures to be brought forward. They do not like us to say our bit. They are so afraid of the Barisan Sosialis that they do not want to allow us a chance even to have a say in the Legislative Assembly.

All your ghost writers have disappeared!

In which case, Sir, why should the Prime Minister be scared? Yes, let us have a debate and see what happens.

What happens to the ghost writers?

Of course, Sir, this idea of cutting short the debate to two days and then postponing it to June is to deny us the opportunity of saying our bit. As I have already said, Sir, there is already enough restriction of freedom of expression and publication in Singapore. We as a Party have not been banned; neither have our Party organs been banned. But attempts have already been made to ban our organs indirectly through threats and intimidation of the printers. The printers of our publications - the Plebeian, the Barisan and the Raakyat - were intimidated by the Special Branch. They were told that they must not print our publications. They had their licence suspended for 10 days. They have been given back their printing-press licence, but they somehow or other do not print our publications any more. Even today, the composing and setting of the printing has been - the printers have been -

That is the trouble. No script.

- intimidated from even composing and setting our scripts for printing. Sir, there is hardly any chance for us to have our publications for the people to read and for distribution. The newspapers somehow or other come under great pressure not to print our publications. It looks as if our only venue of free speech left is the Legislative Assembly. For things said in this Assembly, the papers will probably give a certain amount of space. This will allow other people to read what we have said. But surely the Government need not fear this because the newspapers are devoting two-thirds of their space to the P.A.P.; only one-third of the space is reserved for all the Opposition Members put together. So the Government need not fear our speaking our minds in the Legislative Assembly. I would ask the Government not to make a mockery of democracy and guillotine the debate in order to suppress still further whatever freedom of expression there is left in this Assembly. 3.20 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, there is some validity in the suggestion that the session should be permitted to continue for as long as is necessary to complete the work on the matters legitimately on the Order Paper. It was originally suggested by the Government - and it seemed a fair suggestion - that there should be midnight sittings for Friday, Saturday, and Monday to Thursday inclusive. I do not quite know why there has been a change of views because, on the original plan as indicated by the Leader of the House, there was reasonable probability of the completion of the work before the House. Sir, the Leader of the Barisan asked a rhetorical question, whether the work of the Assembly should stop because the Prime Minister has to attend a conference elsewhere. It is a legitimate question, and probably it is a legitimate answer that in so small a House where the Prime Minister needs to go, perhaps with some other Ministerial colleagues, for a major conference, it is necessary to adjourn the House during the period of that conference. But is it necessary to adjourn it for as long as two months? I can understand, Sir, the need for an adjournment when they are away if, in fact, it is going to be more than one Minister who is going to be away, perhaps with some parliamentary Secretaries involved. The plea that I would like to make here, to a sense of responsibility to constitutional procedure, is that the Government majority should not be used to foreclose discussions on matters legitimately before the House where there has been no suggestion at all of any abuse of time on the part of the Opposition, any seeking unnecessarily to lengthen the proceedings. So I should like to see some suggestion made whereby we could perhaps reconvene at an earlier date until the business on the Order Paper is completed.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I made the position of the Government quite clear when I spoke on Friday afternoon. We were prepared to sit Friday, Saturday, Monday, and Tuesday till midnight, an extra four hours everyday or an equivalent of an extra thee full-day sittings. But I think Members of the Opposition must realise, particularly the Members of the Barisan Sosialis, that they are not the whole world and if some other sections of the Opposition do not desire sittings on Saturdays, there is no reason why the Government should force its way through and have a sitting on a Saturday. Hence the Saturday sitting went by the board. We were quite prepared and ready to go on from half-past two to 12 midnight. Today, as the Leader o the House has stated, we are quite prepared to sit till midnight; so also tomorrow. On Wednesday morning, as the Member for Queenstown knows, the Minister for Finance, I and a few other colleagues plus all the important officials, the State Advocate-General in particular, will have to be in Kuala Lumpur. I do not think there is anything on the Order Paper - I say this with great respect to the Member for Queenstown - which is more important than what we are going to discuss in Kuala Lumpur. If I had thought it otherwise, I would have stayed here and postponed the meeting in Kuala Lumpur. I would share his concern if I were him. I would be deeply grieved to see the Communist united front somewhat inert because all the transistors have been pulled out. The loudspeakers are there; the network of wires is there, but the thing that gives out the sound is missing; and until the underground decides to put in new transistors, the set is inert. I share his breavement but I cannot, in any seriousness, admit his purely formulastic motion of condemnation, of no confidence in the Government, because the People's Action Party has pro-colonial policies. Are we to stay here and listen to old recordings of things said and done with? And worse, Mr Speaker, Sir, I am quite convinced that if we were to sit till midnight today and tomorrow, we would more than likely finish the business, for the very simple reason as was illustrated, I think vividly, just now. Without the transistors, there is very little sound coming out. I ask the Member for Anson to gather the Opposition together and vote for a midnight sitting. The Government has no overwhelming majority to force its way through. In fact, the Government can be defeated. We can have a general election all on a motion for the adjournment. We are quite prepared for that. There is no bullying possible. We are completely at the mercy of the Opposition and we do just as the Opposition pleases, provided, of course, it is in the interests of the country. I do not think it is in the interests of the country for my colleagues and I to leave uncompleted matters which concern the future of Singapore in Malaysia. However grave the problems of the detainees, their food, their reading material and their recreation may be to the Member for Queenstown, I cannot concede that that is a more important subject for us to concentrate on and to bend our energies to than to the future welfare and well-being of Singapore in Malaysia. Sir, the decision is in the hands of the Opposition. They can sit tonight till midnight and tomorrow till midnight. We will adjourn till the 7th of June formally. But the moment we have finished these negotiations, and they are intricate negotiations, Sir - in fact, in the middle of this sitting I will have to be excused for a few minutes from this Chamber in order that I can go through certain Defence estimates - defence of Malaysia. We must properly appraise ourselves of our fair contribution. Is there to be a power vacuum in this region? If there is not, who is to take the place of the British forces who will no longer play a part in internal security? Are we to raise four battalions and at what cost? Who is to pay for the four battalions? Who will buy arms for them? All these are matters of great cogency and importance - not of academic importance. Members opposite may talk of revolution in academic terms, but the people who manipulate, the people who are now rendered inert, are not academic revolutionaries. They are capable of mounting the barricades. So we want to be quite sure that there are the right number of men in the right number of places with the right quantity of equipment to meet these people when the time comes. Without wishing to offend the House, I say I do not think we have any serious business on. We reconvene this House for one simple reason - but not because of the pressure of public opinion. The public were relieved that for once there was peace and quiet in Singapore for a good solid seven months while construction and progress forged ahead. People wanted to see the end of all this acrimony, these long-winded futile debates. We reconvened because the Yang di-Pertuan Negara had to go on Haj, and we must have the Assembly in readiness for the moment when the treaty is ready, because that is the moment when we will have to adopt formally all the amending provisions of the Constitution before I can attach my signature to it in London. It is as simple as that. The Yang di-Pertuan Negara's speech is a broad outline of what really can only be another four and a half months of Singapore as we know. After that, it will be Singapore against a wider perspective, a larger horizon, where the sound of small crackers in a confined room will be lost in the infinity of the spaces of Malaysia - and I do not advise firing crackers unnecessarily at wrong people in Malaya. That is the reason why we have reconvened. There is nothing of urgency. The Member for Anson, who is the first to press for the rights and liberty of men, freedom of speech, never wrote to the Leader of the House asking for an emergency sitting over the arrests. There was no excitement and --- Mr David Marshall rose ---

On a point of elucidation?

Would the Prime Minister permit a point of explanation?

Surely.

Because the Member for Anson, it seems unlike the distinguished lawyers on the Government Bench, was conscious that you cannot call an emergency sitting before the Negara convenes the House.

I thought so too, Mr Speaker, Sir, over a Press conference, and I thought perhaps at least he could register a point and call for one. The Member for Hong Lim made a bit of noise in the Press about reconvening. He never formally wrote to the Leader of the House for an emergency session. What would he say if there was one? A very difficult moment for him. Would he side with the Barisan and end up like the Barisan in the gutter? Can he distinguish himself so finely apart from the Barisan that when one part of the wheel crashes into the gutter, the other part still goes on to the straight highway of success? These are things only possible for trick cyclists. So, Mr Speaker, Sir, nobody was really excited. We reconvened this sitting for no special reason than that we must have the Assembly in readiness to adopt the constitutional provisions which are at this moment being drafted and which cannot be finalised until the financial arrangements have been tied up. In between this session, I shall have to sit down with certain military gentlemen who know more about these matters than I do, and find out what would be a fair share of the defence of Singapore in Malaysia. This is very important, because upon that turns the question of whether our annual surpluses, which we have deliberately contrived every year of over $100 million, shall go into Toa Payoh and build 50,000 units; build houses for 50,000 people at Outram Prison, reclaim 20,000 acres of land from Bedok to Nicoll's Highway. Or are we to sink it buying guns, submarines, helicopters, waiting for a war with neighbours with whom we want to be friends? These are important matters. I am sorry to appear harsh to the Member for Queenstown. I do not think he has anything really worth saying or the papers would have printed it. If he had some startling analysis of the political future of Singapore, surely he would have caught the attention of some newspaper editor or a foreign journalist. In fact, I know several. I know one who asked for an interview with him and he refused to give an interview. He is shy of reporters these days, Mr Speaker. He has found out that charging head-tong like a rugger forward into a brick wall can be a very painful business. I tell him that the best thing he can do in the circumstances is to submit with good grace. Malaysia is coming. There is just four and a half months to go. Let us not have any fuss. As the cop says, "Come along quietly now. Let us have no trouble, please." And that is what we want. 7th of June - formally. We have to meet anyway immediately after National Day. The deadline is the end of June for the signing of the treaty. If it is ready before the 7th of June, we shall meet before that. For tonight and tomorrow night, I leave it to Members of the Opposition. I can assure the Member for Queenstown, having slugged it out blow for blow, word for word, through all these months with his mentors over the radio, on the public platform, that we will offer him now --- An hon. Member: Television!

--- television too if he likes. Then the agony of the moment, Mr Speaker, Sir, if I may just recount this, because I think posterity would be the poorer for it if I did not tell you this. The Member for Anson was there. If only we had both the sound and the vision! I remember one famous occasion. Though that was the time when really the moment for decision was coming. The battle was won, fought or lost - fought and won or lost there. The Member for Queenstown dithered whether he was to appear or not to appear. 3 o'clock came. We were waiting for him at the studio. His mentors were not certain. To be or not to be! Suddenly he appeared - at quarter-past three. And he belched, Mr Speaker, Sir! Oh, the excitement of it! I offered him a carminative. He was so angry that I should think that he, a doctor, did not carry a carminative with him, and said he had it in his pocket. I thought, if people want to go to battle, they must be prepared for all this, and they must know when the bells have already rung. The referee has said the round is over. Malaysia is coming. And I advise Members on the other side - they have refused to take my advice on many a previous occasion, much to their discomfiture. I hope they will not find me too troublesome. But I do offer this advice. There is only four and a half months to go, so please contain themselves. If they believe they are good enough to fight for the heavyweight championship of Malaysia - they could not even win the heavyweight championship of Singapore, but now they want to fight for the heavyweight championship of Malaysia - I say just wait till the time comes.

No other Member wishes to speak? The Deputy Prime Minister, in reply.

Sir, I just want to add a little to what has already been said. The Member for Queenstown obviously has forgotten that the Barisan likes very much mass meetings and street meetings. The Government has not at any time stopped them from holding any meeting. Therefore, he was speaking with his tongue in his cheek when he said that all freedom of expression had been curtailed. The Prime Minister has already repeated the offer of a radio forum, and now a television forum, to the Member for Queenstown. Previously he has absented himself from the radio forum, and I do not believe that he will accept a television forum too. Sir, I would just like to appeal to the House that it is with sincerity that when we say we could not meet on the 10th and 11th, it is for reasons which are of national importance, and this supersedes the rest of the motions on the Order Paper moved by the Barisan Sosialis.

Question put, and agreed to. Resolved, That at its rising on Tuesday, the 9th April, 1963, this Assembly do stand adjourned to the 7th of June, 1963. 3.42 p.m.

Mr Speaker, I beg to move the motion standing in my name*. *The motion reads as follows: That this Assembly doth agree with the Committee of Privileges in their Fourth Report as contained in Paper L.A. 18 of 1962. Mr Speaker, this Fourth Report of the Committee of Privileges deals with a certain Inche Hussein Jahidin who was responsible for sending copies of a letter to Government Back-benchers. Subsequently a report was made to the House that this was a breach of privilege and that this letter contained intimidating tones which sought to influence the work of Government Back-benchers. The Committee of Privileges has met and has found Inche Hussein Jahidin guilty of a breach of privilege. However, Inche Hussein Jahidin has apologised to the Committee for dispatching this letter. He has admitted breach of privilege and the Committee has decided not to take further action in this matter.

Question put, and agreed to. Resolved, That this Assembly doth agree with the Committee of Privileges in their Fourth Report as contained in Paper L.A. 18 of 1962.

Order read for resumption of debate on Question [5th April, 1963], "That the Bill be now read a Second time." Question again proposed.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I was saying on Friday evening that the state of affairs described by two hon. Members, from the Southern Islands and Kampong Kembangan, were in fact an indictment against our society. For a poor man to risk $700 to $1,000 of his hard-earned savings buying a house which he knows may well be pulled down - and often he is asked to go into occupation in the middle of the night - he must be in a fairly desperate position. The problem has been considerably alleviated in the urban areas, in the city areas, as a result of massive building of low-cost housing by the Housing and Development Board. But there is no obvious solution to the problem in the rural areas. This Bill seeks summary powers for the rural areas. Sir, the Malays in particular have not taken to flat dwelling, except when they have moved together en bloc either as part of the Regiment, or as part of the Police Force, or as part of the Customs Unit. But in the city where they have so adjusted themselves, the problem can be alleviated. However, in the rural areas, they have shown a definite preference for a house with a piece of land attached to it, which means a piece of land on which chickens and ducks and birds and so on can be kept. I am sorry to say that the Housing and Development Board has not as yet developed or found a plan which will allow maximum utilisation of land for such purposes. The lands which the Malays would like to have for settlement are too near the city for us to gazette as settlement areas. They are too valuable for just the ordinary kampong house. The lands we have available they consider are too far from the city. It is really a sociological problem the answer to which must be found in either developing a kind of house which would be economical or multi-storey houses with a piece of land nearby - which has been done in other countries; they live in flats and they all have little plots of land on which they keep their chickens or grow their vegetables - or we must reconcile ourselves to this constant repetition of illegal structures. Sir, the Member for Kampong Kembangan on Friday evening drew my attention to three or four houses in particular in his constituency, and I have had investigations made into these houses. In the first place, Mr Speaker, Sir, before any building plan can be passed, the owner of the land must signify his consent that he allows this building to be erected or to have been erected on his land. Part of that land in Kampong Kembangan belongs to the Alsagoff Estate. One of it is known as the Perseverance Estate and the beneficiaries are at this moment in the process of litigation in the High Court and nobody can give any consent to any building. The three families that I was referred to, I am sorry to say, knowingly undertook that risk when they built. When they put wood and zinc together, they knew that the beneficiaries were squabbling at the High Court over the Estate and they run the risk of having it smacked down. I do not know what the exact position is at the moment - whether the house is still standing or has already been demolished - but I give this assurance to the Member for Kampong Kembangan, that I will look into the matter and treat it with as much consideration as I can because of the loss that they have incurred. Mr Speaker, Sir, it gives me no pleasure in moving this Bill, but I think Members will agree that it is a necessary one. We must, however, try and find a solution to this, and I hope that Members opposite whose constituents always express their preference for the Malay-type of kampong house would help us in finding this solution. Having gone into the matter at some length on several occasions with my Parliamentary Secretary, I do not see any sizable piece of land acceptable to the Malays as sufficiently near the city to be gazetted as a Malay settlement. There are little bits and pieces in Sembawang; a little bit more in Kaki Bukit near Kampong Kembangan; then it is exhausted. Then they have to go really out into the ulu. Then there is the problem of children going to school; the problem of roads, light, water and so on. Alternatively, if they will give this Geylang Serai project, where we are putting up some 500 odd units meant primarily for the people in the area, a real try and if they will take to flat dwelling, we can arrange to give them bits of land for their chickens and fowls and other animals nearby. That I think is the only possible solution to what is a very difficult situation.

Question put, and agreed to. Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the Assembly. Assembly immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. -[The Prime Minister] Bill considered in Committee.

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

Sir, I have an amendment to propose - that sub-clause (4) of clause 3 be deleted.

Please move.

Sir, I beg to move, In page 3, to leave out lines 16 to 18 inclusive. Sir, clause 3 deals with the offence of having put up a building and then selling it to some innocent victim. Sub-clause (2) deals with an offence committed in the course of putting up a building. While the building is still in the process of being put up, the offender tries to sell it to an innocent victim. Sir, these offences are clear-cut - putting up a building and then selling it, or having put up a building and wanting to sell it. I cannot understand why prosecutions for offences of this nature should receive the sanction of the Minister. Sir, there have been cases where before a prosecution could be instituted, it must have the sanction of the State Advocate-General. One can understand and appreciate and support that. But where the sanction has to come from the Minister, it is all wrong, because he can play politics. That has happened, Sir. There is loss of faith in the P.A.P. Ministers. "So long as you are a P.A.P. member, tidak apa, lah. I will not prosecute you. And if you are not already a member, become a P.A.P. member quickly, and we will not prosecute you." That is why we are objecting on the ground that this leads to political abuse.

I agree to its deletion.

I merely rise to support and express my delight at the amendment moved by the Member for Cairnhill. But in view of the comment of the Prime Minister, I will not take up the time of the House.

Sir, I would just like to explain that I think the reason it was there was that it was taken from an old Ordinance when the then Minister was the Member for Geylang Serai. That is all. Tun Lim Yew Hock rose -

On a point of order?

No, Sir.

Order. Can I just draw the attention of Members to section 170A of the Local Government Ordinance, subsection (4) which came into effect by reason of an amending Ordinance, Ordinance 44 of 1959 ---

In July. Sir.

--- on the 24th of July, 1959. It is the same as sub-clause (4) which reads: `No prosecution in respect of an offence under this section shall be instituted without the sanction of the Minister.'

At that time, Sir, we could not object because there were 43 strong men of the P.A.P., and everytime we opened our mouths they stamped us down! But now it is 25-25.

I take it that the Member for Cairnhill will move an amending Bill to the Local Government Ordinance in time.

There is already a Local Government Integration Bill and we will see that it does not appear any more. Amendment agreed to. Clause 3, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Bill reported, with an amendment; read a Third time and passed.

3.56 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise to move the motion* standing in my name. *The motion reads as follows:- That this Assembly, pursuant to subsection (2) of section 29 of the Registration of Deeds Ordinance (Chapter 255), resolves that rule 24 of the Registration of Deeds Rules, 1934, be amended by deleting the figures "5" and "1" appearing in the first line of the second column of paragraph (1) thereof and substituting thereof the figures "10" and "2" respectively, as contained in Paper S.L. 6 of 1963. All it really means is that we intend to put up the fees payable from $5 to $10 and from an additional $1 to an additional $2 to bring it into uniformity with similar fees payable under the Land Titles Rules, 1960. The reason is that these fees were fixed quite some time ago and they no longer cover the administrative cost of maintaining the necessary personnel and machinery for the purposes of benefiting the landowners. Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move.

Question put, and agreed to. Resolved, That this Assembly, pursuant to subsection (2) of section 29 of the Registration of Deeds Ordinance (Chapter 255), resolves that rule 24 of the Registration of Deeds Rules, 1934, be amended by deleting the figures "5" and "1" appearing in the first line of the second column of paragraph (1) thereof and substituting therefor the figures "10" and "2" respectively, as contained in Paper S.L. 6 of 1963.

Sir, I beg to move the motion* standing in my name. *The motion reads as follows:- That this Assembly, pursuant to subsection (1) of section 106 of the Income Tax Ordinance (Chapter 166), resolves that the Economic Development Board, Singapore, be added to the First Schedule to the said Ordinance with effect from the 1st day of August, 1961. Sir, an application has been received from the Economic Development Board for exemption from income tax under section 13 (1) (e) of the Income Tax Ordinance. This exemption is effected by inclusion of the Board in the First Schedule to the Ordinance. For this purpose, a resolution of this Assembly is necessary, in accordance with section 106 (1) of the Ordinance. The Board is a non-profit making statutory body whose funds are wholly provided by the Singapore Government. Any surplus will be used to augment sums available for development. Similar statutory bodies, such as the Singapore Harbour Board, the Singapore Telephone Board and the Housing and Development Board have all been included in the First Schedule. It is therefore consistent with past policy that the Economic Development Board be similarly included. The Malayan Board of Income Tax have unanimously recommended approval of the Economic Development Board for inclusion in the First Schedule, and the Government accepts this recommendation. Sir, I beg to move.

Question put, and agreed to. Resolved, That this Assembly, pursuant to subsection (1) of section 106 of the Income Tax Ordinance (Chapter 166), resolves that the Economic Development Board, Singapore, he added to the First Schedule to the said Ordinance with effect from the 1st day of August, 1961.

Sir, I beg to move the motion+ standing in my name. +The motion reads as follows:- That this Assembly, pursuant to subsection (1) of section 106 of the Income Tax Ordinance (Chapter 166), resolves that the Malaya Rubber Exchange Singapore, be added to the First Schedule to the said Ordinance with effect from the 20th day of February, 1962. Sir, the Federation Government has established a Rubber Exchange in the Federation through incorporation by an Act of Parliament and assented to by His Majesty the Yang di-Pertuan Agong on 20th February, 1962. The Exchange is set up not to make a profit but to regulate and facilitate the activities of the rubber industry in the Federation. The Malayan Board of Income Tax unanimously decided to recommend the inclusion of the Federation of Malaya Rubber Exchange in the First Schedule of the Income Tax Ordinance. The motion now before the House is that the Federation of Malaya Rubber Exchange be added to the Schedule and thereby granted exemption from payment of income tax. Sir, I beg to move.

Question put, and agreed to. Resolved, That this Assembly, pursuant to subsection (1) of section 106 of the Income Tax Ordinance (Chapter 166), resolves that the Federation of Malaya Rubber Exchange be added to the First Schedule to the said Ordinance with effect from the 20th day of February, 1962.

Sir, I beg to move the motion* standing in my name. *The motion reads as follows:- That this Assembly, pursuant to subsection (1) of section 106 of the Income Tax Ordinance (Chapter 166), resolves that the Ex-Service Association of Malaya Federation of Malaya, be added to the First Schedule to the said Ordinance with effect from the 1st day of January. 1961. The objects of the Association are to foster and maintain the spirit of comradeship amongst ex-service men, to safeguard their interests and express their views, and to raise funds for the assistance of needy ex-service men, women and their families. The income of the Association is obtained from the Poppy Day collections and from its investments, and apart from administrative expenses is wholly expended in assisting ex-servicemen and ex-policemen. The Association assists ex-servicemen whether they are members of the Association or not. The Association has applied for exemption from income tax by inclusion in the First Schedule. The Malayan Board of Income Tax unanimously decided to recommend the inclusion of the Association in the First Schedule to the Income Tax Ordinance, and the Government accepts the recommendation of the Board. The motion now before the House is that the Ex-Service Association of Malaya be added to the Schedule and thereby granted exemption from payment of income tax. Sir, I beg to move.

Question put, and agreed to. Resolved, That this Assembly, pursuant to subsection (1) of section 106 of the Income Tax Ordinance (Chapter 166), resolves that the Ex-Service Association of Malaya, Federation of Malaya, be added to the First Schedule to the said Ordinance with effect from the 1st day of January, 1961.

Sir, I beg to move the motion+ standing in my name. +The motion reads as follows:- That this Assembly, pursuant to subsection (1) of section 106 of the Income Tax Ordinance (Chapter 166), resolves that the First Schedule to the said Ordinance be varied with effect from the 1st day of January, 1961-

Question put, and agreed to. Resolved, That this Assembly, pursuant to subsection (I) of section 106 of the Income Tax Ordinance (Chapter 166), resolves that the First Schedule to the said Ordinance be varied with effect from the 1st day of January, 1961 ---

4.08 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise to move the motion* standing in my name. *The motion reads as follows:- That this Assembly, pursuant to subsection (1) of section 4 of the Nature Reserve Ordinance (Chapter 235), resolves -

Question put, and agreed to. Resolved, That this Assembly, pursuant to subsection (1) of section 4 of the Nature Reserves Ordinance (Chapter 235), resolves-

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move the motion standing in my name* as set out in the Order Paper. *That this Assembly, pursuant to section 3 of the Departmental Titles (Alteration) Ordinance (Chapter 55), resolves that the Schedule to the said Ordinance be amended by the addition under the headings of "Old Title or Name of Offices" and New Title or Name of Office" respectively of the items shown in the following Schedule:- THE SCHEDULE Old Title or Name of Office New Title or Name of Office Commissioner of Prisons Director of Prisons Deputy Commissioner of Prisons Deputy Director of Prisons Chief Officer Chief Rehabilitation Officer Principal Officer Principal Rehabilitation Officer Assistant Director of Botanic Gardens Botanist Keeper of the Herbarium Botanist The Departmental Titles (Alteration) Ordinance (Chapter 55 of the Revised Edition) provides for the substitution of new titles or names of officers where there has been a change of departmental titles. Section 3 of the Ordinance provides that the Legislative Assembly may, by resolution, add to or amend the Schedule to the Ordinance. The change of titles of the Prison officers has been necessitated as a result of changes which have been made in order to implement the recommendations of the Prisons Inquiry Commission. The change of titles of officers of the Botanic Gardens has been recently made as a result of reorganisation in the department. Instead of three separate posts of Assistant Directors of Gardens, Keeper of the Herbarium and Botanists, there are now three posts of Botanists. Sir, I beg to move.

Question put, and agreed to. Resolved - (for text of resolution, see footnote at cols. 165-6).

4.15 p.m.

Mr Speaker, for the fourth successive year, it is my privilege to move the formal vote of thanks to His Excellency the Yang di-Pertuan Negara for his speech to this Assembly*. The years since June 1959 have been eventful and fateful. There were moments in 1961 when the lesser spirits amongst us in this Chamber thought that the battle was lost, that all that we stood for - a democratic, non-Communist, socialist society - would be swept under the relentless onslaught of the Communists. Not wanting to be on the losing side, they made the necessary personal *The motion reads as follows: That the following Address in reply to the speech of the Yang di-Pertuan Negara be agreed to:- "We, the Legislative Assembly of the State of Singapore, express our thanks to the Yang di-Pertuan Negara for the speech which he delivered on behalf of the Government at the opening of the present Session of this Assembly.". adjustments. But there were many others, in this Chamber and outside, who never doubted the outcome of the struggle and who stood firm to see the country through to peace, security and prosperity in Malaysia. There are less than five months to go before Malaysia. The moments of doubts are gone and anxiety has vanished as people bend their energies to planning and construction for the stable years ahead. I do not say that we have put all our troubles behind us. Indeed, it would be disastrous to ignore the underground organisation of the Communists, the constant battle for hearts and minds, the relentless process of attrition as wits and strategy are matched and encounters fought and won or lost temporarily, while the long-term battle goes on - a battle that can be decisively won only by a better life for the people in a more just and equal society. But I think it is fair to say that even the most optimistic of Members on the other side of the House - or perhaps I should say on the other side of the nation - know that there is no hope of establishing a Communist Malaysia in the next decade. Their dreams can only come true if and when a Communist Indonesia were to emerge, and if and when a Communist Indonesia becomes a success. We hope that will never happen. Anyway, for the present, we must gird ourselves for the constant pressure and pin-pricks that they will exert over any issue that would excite any group of men that they could get together to bolster their cause. If they cannot get the people at large excited, they try to get the families of detainees excited by squatting outside my office. If they cannot get parents and students to stage boycotts, strikes and protests, they try to get young men involved in political rallies like the one they held on Sunday 24th last month. We were interested to know who attended that rally. But what was interesting was that the Chairman of the Barisan Sosialis and a number of his committee members were surprised at the organised attendance of young school boys, who, unknown to them, had been separately organised to attend by people who ultimately control the people who control the Barisan Sosialis. We must never make the grave error of the last Government in believing that the neutralization of a few united front activists could mean the end of the Communist capacity to organise and agitate when the time comes for elections. This has been a temporary setback for them in what is a grim long-term struggle for power. I would like to add this note of caution for them. It is our duty between now and the 4� months before Malaysia to ensure that nothing is done in Singapore contrary to the verdict of the people given on 1st September last year. Had they been wise and accepted that verdict, they might perhaps have not precipitated the decision taken at a meeting in Kuala Lumpur on 1st February. I met a friend recently - a personal, and not a political friend - Mr James Puthucheary - in Kuala Lumpur. It was for old times' sake. He is one of their bright minds. He would not mind my telling this to Members on the other side of the House, particularly the Member for Thomson, that the most stupid thing they had done was to keep on fighting against Malaysia after the people had decided in the referendum that Singapore was for Malaysia.

Sham!

Let me tell the Member for Thomson what Mr James Puthucheary said, and he is a brighter mind ---

He is not here to say it.

Mr James Puthucheary will be reading all this tomorrow in the newspapers. He was one of the brighter minds. He said that whatever the rights and wrongs of the referendum - and he found many things wrong with it - once the decision had been taken, that should be the end of the matter. I think it was a pity that he did not express this wisdom more cogently and effectively to the other leading members of the Barisan Sosialis earlier, particularly during the period just before the Brunei revolt. Between now and 31st August, we have one paramount responsibility, that is, to ensure that the situation does not deteriorate, either in the efficacy of the organs of the State or in the overall calm and stability of the situation. Meanwhile, we will forge ahead with our construction. We have some massive schemes. They should be all well on their way before the 31st August. Members already know from the speech of the Yang di-Pertuan Negara that Outram Road Gaol will be demolished soon. In fact, I am informed that demolition operations have already begun on part of the old gaol. A new modern gaol is being planned in Bedok and Changi. The whole site of 36 acres will be ready for building by the end of the year. On this hill of some 36 acres of hard land, some beautiful buildings for 50,000 people will be built. Another massive project that has been started by the Land Office working with the Housing and Development Board is to re-claim 20,000 acres of land stretching from Bedok right up to Nicoll Highway, extending half a mile out to sea along the shore-line. Land is valuable in our little island. An increasing population makes it necessary not only that we build upwards but also that we re-claim all available land at present partly under water from prawn ponds to building lots. In the first phase of this project, some 50 acres will be ready in three months' time near the Fisheries school at Bedok 8� m.s. This is the beginning and will be an open park for the time being. Eventually, 20,000 acres, nearly three times the size of Kreta Ayer constituency, will be re-claimed, partly to be used by the Housing and Development Board for building and partly for sale to private builders - to pay for the cost of the reclamation of the whole. All this increase in building, of course, means an accelerated demand for public utilities - water, electricity and gas. It is not only the increase in population but the increase in consumption of water and electricity per head of population because of more homes and also because of more standpipes and electricity supplies to the kampongs and the rural areas. It becomes urgently necessary for us to plan ahead for new sources of water and power to ensure that supply always exceeds demand. Sir, let me give a brief illustration of the rate of increase. The Housing and Development Board was building at the rate of 12,300 units per annum last year, and 15,000 units per annum this year. In other words, one unit, every 45 minutes. Meanwhile, private developers, reflecting the general prosperity over the last two years, are building multi-storied flats all over the City. The Planning Department under my charge have had to make some adjustments on density control to take into account the realities of urban development in Singapore. An estimated 6,000 units per annum are being put up at present by private developers. All this means an enormous increase of over 21,000 more homes per annum all making demands on the pub-lie utilities, water, electricity and gas. We have been fortunate in avoiding water rationing so far, in spite of the prolonged drought, and in spite of the large number of standpipes that have been installed. There are at the moment 2,400 public standpipes, all giving free water. One-third of these were put up in the last two years - 600 of them. The standpipes alone account for more than 12 per cent of the average user of 72 million gallons a day. I am sorry, Sir, that in some places, through lack of education and a sense of civic responsibility, taps have been left to run throughout the whole night, at a time of prolonged drought. I would like to urge all householders who live near standpipes to take upon themselves the responsibility to help the community to see that standpipes are not running to waste during the night. The reason why we have avoided water rationing was because of the ample stocks of water built up before the drought, about 70 per cent of our total capacity. Another reason was the increased output in Tebrau after extensions at the Tebrau works completed in the middle of last year, increasing the daily output from Tebrau from 30 to 45 million gallons per day. However, I must warn the House that if there is no break in the dry spell in the next week, we may have to introduce ration' ing in order to conserve stocks in preparation for the normal dry weather expected in June, July and August, as our stocks have gone down from 70 per cent to 54 per cent in the impounding reservoirs, the 16 per cent having been used to make up the daily shortage from Tebrau. Sir, Members will already have known that we are planning an extension pipeline to take water from Scudai River at a cost of $16 million. This scheme will be completed in the course of 1964. The first phase has already started, and when operations commence towards the end of this year, 15 million gallons a day can be added to our water supplies. In the course of next year, when the whole works are completed, a total of 30 million additional gallons per day can be extracted. Members may know that last year we invited a firm of water consultants approved by the World Bank to advise us. The World Bank will only give loans after advice of water consultants approved by them. A fee of nearly half-a-million dollars was paid for a thorough survey of our water needs. They have made certain recommendations thereon, one of which was that we should proceed with the Scudai project, whilst work commences on the main Johore River project. Johore River - first phase to be completed by the end of 1967 - will bring an additional 30 million gallons per day and, when completed in 1976, will bring 60 million gallons per day. This scheme is expected to cost a total of $70 million. A World Bank loan for the Scudai River, Johore River and the Jurong Reservoir for industrial water is being negotiated. To sum up, I would like to quote the figures of daily consumption of water in 1959 as against 1963: 1959, 64 million gallons per day; 1963, 73 million gallons per day - an increase of some 15 per cent in the short space of 3� years. Members will realise, therefore, the urgent necessity of getting on with the waterworks to ensure that supply remains greater than demand. So, too, with electricity. Plans have been completed and orders placed for a 22,500 kilowatt additional generating plant to be installed at St. James' Power Station comprising two 11,250 kilowatt gas turbines meant primarily to increase operation over the peak load periods and scheduled for production in December this year. This will take care of the interim increase in demand while the second power station at Pasir Panjang - Power Station "B" of 60,000 kilowatts - is being installed to be ready by the first half of 1965. Sir, all in all, we can look back with some satisfaction on the progress that has been made in the past year. Despite all the obstacles placed by Communist united-front organisations on land clearance and squatter resettlement, we have been able to resettle on fair terms several thousands of squatters. Now all the major projects are under way. By the end of this year the earthworks for Toa Payoh would be completed and 50 acres of building site will be available. The excess earth from Toa Payoh will be transported to Kallang Basin to reclaim another 50 acres for industrial sites. In order to give Members some perspective of these figures, may I mention that on the 50 acres of land at Toa Payoh, an estimated 100,000 persons can be resettled and the Toa Payoh scheme, when completed, will be able to house 350,000 people in a properly laid out satellite town. Members will also know that recently when operations to clear the roads started, the Member for Toa Payoh aided and abetted, or perhaps I should say, he, aiding and abetting some Communist-front operators in Toa Payoh, tried to sabotage the machines that were used in the operations. I think the Member for Toa Payoh realises now the gravity of the situation. If people are determined to embark on unlawful activities, then they must be prepared to take the consequences and it is no use complaining about bad diets and bad rations. All these things should have been carefully considered before one mounts an anti-the-people, anti-the-nation campaign. Once the battle has been joined, then they must expect it to go to its logical conclusion. One cannot, Sir, run with the hare and hunt with the hounds. Sir, the demolition of the Outram Road Prison has already begun and will be completed by the end of this year. This is a take-off for the main project of urban redevelopment which will begin with the help of a team of United Nations experts who have been invited to Singapore to advise on central city redevelopment. Needless to say, all this would be impossible if the economic prosperity to pay for all this were not there. Members will have noted the Yang di-Pertuan Negara's speech that our reserves have gone up from $87 million in June 1959 to $335 million - an increase of $250 million, even after substantial capital outlays had been made from the Development Fund of $100 million per year or about $300 million in three years. In other words, the increase of funds available for development was somewhere in the region of $550 million. There will always be ups and downs in our economic prosperity, Sir, but we have been able to put by sufficient reserves and are continuing to put by enough each year to see us through all our major projects: the Jurong industrial site (9,000 acres), the Toa Payoh scheme, and Central City redevelopment, and we shall build a new skyline for Singapore Harbour, in the words of the Yang di-Pertuan Negara "a new city of beauty and distinction, worthy of the industry and enterprise of our people, and in keeping with our position as the financial, industrial and commercial centre of South-East Asia". Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move. Question proposed. 4.39 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, ---

Sir, on a point of clarification. I just want to clarify a certain point before the Member begins. Sir, I did a bit of mental arithmetic just now and came to tae wrong answer. The area of Kreta Ayer is only 16 acres, and I am told 20,000 acres divided by 16 comes to 1,400 times [Laughter] Kreta Ayer. I beg your pardon.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I am glad the Prime Minister has made the correction, because all his talk of grandiose schemes and new cities and skylines should be similarly corrected. As expected, the policy speech this year has a very hollow ring. There is a great deal of padding put on, but this does not deceive the people that, in fact, all is empty inside. You will notice, Sic, that in the speech of the Prime Minister, he talks of nothing but the number of standpipes and the number of housing units - with a full list of the number of housing units, the number of standpipes and even the number of post offices with which the P.A.P. leaders hope to impress the people of Singapore with their ability, efficiency and good work as a government. And it does look as if the incorporation of the old City Council with the Government departments has its usefulness for the P.A.P. Government, otherwise the P.A.P. would not even have standpipes to crow about. But take away all these governmental and departmental summaries which we can find in all the yearly departmental reports, what is left of the policy speech? What is there which tells us of the real Government policy? In fact, Sir, the whole policy speech is merely a dreary repetition of what the P.A.P. propaganda machine has been mass-producing for many months past. It is only a re-hash of Government handouts to the Press which nowadays are issued after visits of the Prime Minister to the constituencies, in order to deceive the people that but for the Prime Minister's visits to the rural areas the people in those areas would not have got the improvements in the areas and it is the Prime Minister himself who is looking after all their interests. But take away, as I say, all the Departmental Reports, figures and statistics which impress no one: what do we find after four years of P.A.P. rule? (Interruption]

Order.

This is supposed to be a policy speech but there is curiously no mention of how the Government intends to help people solve the most pressing and urgent problems of our society today and, with only four and a half months to go, after four years of office, there is no mention, for instance, of how the P.A.P. Government intends to help the people get rid of poverty, disease, ignorance and want. There is no mention of how the Government intends to help the people get rid of exploitation and oppression. There is no mention of how the Government intends to genuinely help to unify the workers and the trade union movement in order to further strengthen the bargaining power of the workers and the interests of the working class. There is no mention again of the basic struggles of the people - the anti-colonial and the anti-imperialist struggles - and the urgent necessity to get rid of colonialism and imperialism in all their shapes and forms. There is no mention of the struggle for a truly equal and just society - a socialist society which the Prime Minister boasted so much about in the first year of office. And there is no mention of the struggle for the genuine reunification of the Federation and Singapore into a truly independent, democratic and socialist Malaya, free of foreign troops and foreign control. For a Government that professed to fight for all these aims and objects when it was elected to office in 1959, it is simply amazing and unbelievable that there should be no mention of all these aims and objects after nearly four years of office, and what steps the Government proposes to take to achieve them. Instead we get a mass of words, words and words, all camouflage and P.A.P. propaganda with nothing to help us solve the basic problems of our society today. An hon. Member: --- such as housing!

There is still this talk of their Four-Year Plan and even of departments bending their energies to carry out their development projects. But what has happened to the Common Market? Nothing, not a word is mentioned about the Common Market. And, in fact, how many of the unemployed masses have found employment, as a result of P.A.P. work after assuming power? Would the Government tell us the actual number of unemployed in the State of Singapore and the actual number who have got jobs following development projects? They may have millions and millions of dollars in the kitty, but how does that help the poor and the unemployed? Then there is this frequent boasting of "P.A.P. dynamic effort" which says that they have broken the back of the housing shortage. True, there are more housing flats today than in 1959. Well, what is there to boast about? Is that not part or Government's duties and responsibilities? But more to the point is this: how many housing units are there that are mere "standing monuments"? In the words of the Prime Minister - "standing monuments" - due to the inefficiency of P.A.P. planning or rather due to the lack of P.A.P. planning. Anyone can build any number of housing flats as long as he has money to do so. Any contractor, any Housing Estate can do that; we do not need a Government to do that. An hon. Member: Ha!

But what do we build houses for? Why do we build houses? That is a very important question. Are we to build houses and flats just for the sake of building houses and fiats - a matter of art for art's sake? Do we build houses and flats without consideration as to whether or not the people can afford to stay in them? What has happened to the P.A.P. election pledge to build low-cost housing for the poor in Singapore? Does the P.A.P. Government not know that the majority of the people in Singapore are poor and cannot afford high-cost housing? Yes, the P.A.P. has built a number of low-cost housing units. But that is not enough, far from enough! There are too few of these low-cost housing flats. Most of the housing units built are beyond the reach of the ordinary worker and many people just cannot afford to stay in the Housing Board flats built by the Government, and especially so when these flats are built far away from the centres of communication and far away from schooling facilities for their children and from their places of work. As a result, though thousands of flats have been built, thousands also are unoccupied, in spite of all types of offers and inducements by the Government to get the people to live in them. To all intents and purposes, these empty housing units are mere "white elephants". Many of these flats go abegging and no one wants to stay in them. Why should this be so when there are slums all over Singapore and when people have to live in insanitary attap huts and in the kampongs? Is it because the people want to live in attap huts and kampongs? The Prime Minister in the U.N.E.S.C.O. Opening in Singapore a couple of months back said, "Yes". He said the Malays prefer to live in wooden houses on stilts. He said this is due to psychological reasons: that the Malays are satisfied with kampong life and that they cannot adjust themselves to living in Housing Board flats. These are the reasons given by the Prime Minister of Singapore, in a country that is undeveloped and in a country where all the people are poor! For example, does the Prime Minister know that many, in fact, almost all the kampong folks, cannot afford to live in the Housing Board flats, and that they live in kampongs because economically they are bound to the kampongs and not because psychologically they like to stay in kampongs? Give them the money, give them the wherewithal, and the Prime Minister will see that the kampong folks are ready to live in the most beautiful and the best of houses; that they will be able to adjust themselves as well as anyone can. An hon. Member: The Barisan can give the money.

And now we see so many housing units built by the P.A.P. which the people do not want to live in - just cannot afford to live in and do not care to live in, unless compelled to do so by other circumstances. Worse still, when through force of circumstances some people do apply for flats, they are denied them and offered instead only the most undesirable ones, like those in the very top of multi-storeyed flats. Today the flats built by the P.A.P. are being used as police barracks, as admitted by the Ministers themselves. Is that why --- ?

What is wrong with that?

"What is wrong with that?", he asks. Is that why we have a Housing Board, to build flats with the taxpayers' money and turn them into barracks for the police and the troops? Troops used not to protect the people of Singapore and not to fight the external enemy --- ?

--- and the internal one too!

--- but to oppress the people of the country? [Laughter] They are laughing. I suppose they think that they can take pride in this work: to use our taxpayers' money to build barracks for the police and the troops to oppress the people.

You want us to let you riot around with the people!

Is this something to be proud of, to crow about? Does the Prime Minister know of the hardships of the people who have been compelled to live in these housing flats which they can hardly afford? I do not need to touch on the water shortage ---

That is the trouble.

--- that seems to be perpetually plaguing Singapore these days under P.A.P. rule. No one would believe, Sir, that there could be a water shortage in a country that is blessed with a plentiful supply of rainfall every year. [Laughter] But it is happening here in Singapore and from the way the P.A.P. Ministers are laughing, we have to thank the P.A.P. for it!

You are lucky the general pressure is still good.

Of course, this is merely another instance of poverty in the midst of plenty under P.A.P. rule. Then, Sir, there is this National Theatre which the P.A.P. is so eager to open officially that night work is introduced and overtime has to be paid. Of course, we understand the urgent necessity to hurry up the completion of the Theatre while the P.A.P. is still alive, while our Prime Minister is still sitting opposite, while he can still sip beer in this House.

Order, order. I did enquire from the Prime Minister whether beer was being sipped by him in this House. He said it was something which made him think clearly and speak clearly. I must accept the word of the Prime Minister that it was not beer.

On a point of elucidation, Sir,I may apply for a chemist's report for this Chamber tomorrow! [Laughter]

But I do not think there is any reason for laughter and merriment in this House today. The whole of Singapore is mourning [Laughter] and only the Prime Minister and his other hirelings are smiling and laughing.

Point of order. The hon. Member has used the word "hirelings". I think it is out of order, being unparliamentary language. Will the Member withdraw it, Sir?

From the way the Minister for Finance has risen on the point of order and from the laughter that is arising from the Government benches, it seems to me as though that word has not offended. Therefore, I cannot in this context rule that word as being unparliamentary. Dr Lee.

I was talking about the National Theatre, Sir, Of course, the P.A.P. hope to shine in the bright T.V. lights at the grand opening of the National Theatre. Extra money has to be spent, night work has to be pushed forward and pressure has to be put on the contractor and the workmen to finish the work on time - all to please P.A.P. Ministers.

Order. I take it the Member will be taking some time. This is the time to suspend. I will take this Chair again at five-thirty. Order, order. Sitting accordingly suspended at 5 p.m. until 5.30 p.m. Sitting resumed at 5.30 p.m.

Question again proposed.

Mr Speaker, Sir, when the House rose, I was speaking on the National Theatre. Now, of course, we have this new P.A.P. craze called television. Why is the P.A.P. so anxious to have television in Singapore? So anxious, Sir, that the Government is asking every family in Singapore to buy T.V. sets with all sorts of inducements.

Have you got your set?

It is well known that the P.A.P. wants desperately to have T.V. to serve the Ministers as a vehicle for their propaganda. They have learned from experience that the radio and television can play a very great part in shaping public opinion. Their shameless scare propaganda during the last week of the referendum campaign depended greatly on the radio and Rediffusion, assisted by the Press and police vans to carry the threats and intimidation of the Prime Minister about the los3 of citizenship, if the people cast blank votes, into the homes of the people in Singapore. That is why the rural areas which are not so well served with radios and Rediffusion returned a higher percentage of blank votes. This has been admitted as much by the Prime Minister. Now the P.A.P. wants to build hundreds and hundreds of community centres in the rural areas and install in them radio and television sets, all with the hope of soaking the audience with P.A.P. propaganda, because television is a novelty and many people will go to community centres to watch television out of curiosity. The P.A.P. is so anxious for everyone to come under the influence of its propaganda that the Permanent Secretary to the Minister for Culture had to write letters to coffee-shop owners - under instructions from the P.A.P. Ministers no doubt - to request them to install television sets in their premises. The Straits Times, on 29th March, 1963, reported that the Singapore Government had launched a campaign to get T.V. sets installed in bars, restaurants and coffee-shops. Letters, signed by Mr W. S. Woon, Permanent Secretary to the Minister for Culture, had gone out to owners of those establishments. I have a cutting, Sir, of what it says. To each of them Mr Woon says ---

Order. I have indicated in the past that if an extract from a newspaper is to be read, the newspaper itself should be produced and not the mere cutting, and if the hon. Member can assure me that he can produce a copy of the Straits Times before the rising today, he can read the extract.

I will produce that copy, Sir, a little later. It reads: `I am to request you to consider the installation of a television set in your business premises if you have not already done so.' I ask, is this part of the duties of a civil servant to request coffee-shop owners to install T.V. sets?

Is it?

If it is not the duty of civil servants to do these things, what disciplinary action does the Government intend to take concerning such gross indiscipline by a civil servant? I am glad the Minister for Finance is listening to this, and I would like him to state what action he intends to take when he speaks on this debate.

On a point of elucidation. Sir. Since the Member for Queenstown alleges that there has been a breach of discipline, could he please inform me which General Order or which Government Regulation the official has been guilty of breaching?

I think it is the business of the Government to inform us, and let the Minister answer that afterwards.

You are asking.

All I want to know is, what if they do not install T. V. sets in their premises? Is the Government going to suspend their coffee-shop and eating-house licences?

No.

Is this not intimidation?

No.

There is already an example in the case of the printing presses, and such requests from Government officials are nothing but pure intimidation of the poor people of Singapore. Worse still, Sir, is that the Government, in its eagerness to push T.V. for P.A.P. propaganda, even went to lee extent of instructing civil servants to install T. V. sets in their homes, telling them that the Government would be ready to give them interest-free loans to buy T.V. sets and to deduct monthly repayments from their salaries. Let me ask, what business is it of the Government to ask coffee-shop owners and civil servants to buy T.V. sets? Is this an election pledge of the P.A.P.?

On a point of elucidation, Sir. Will the Member for Queenstown please let me know on which date the alleged circular was issued? I am in charge of the Ministry which would issue such circulars and, so far as I know, nothing of this sort has ever come out of my Ministry.

Lies!

Order. I think the Parliamentary Secretary who has used the word "lies" knows that it is unparliamentary. He must now apologise to the House and withdraw the word.

I apologise, Sir, and withdraw the word.

The Minister for Finance knows that the P.A.P. Government likes setting up Commissions. Let them set up a Commission of Inquiry into this and they will know all the details. Let the Minister reply when he speaks. Let me ask, why should the P.A.P. Ministers go out of their way to promote the sale of T.V. sets? Do the Ministers and the Permanent Secretary to the Minister for Culture, Mr W. S. Woon, get commissions from the T.V. firms and the foreign manufacturers for the sales promotion? Otherwise, what interest have the Ministers and government servants to act in the way they have? Sir, the programme in T.V., to my knowledge, is all lousy.

Is what?

And once the novelty has worn off, it is very unlikely that many would bother to pay too much attention to P.A.P. propaganda via T.V. To the P.A.P., of course, T.V. is going to be their life-line. Not being able to get a sizable audience in mass rallies, the P.A.P. hopes to be able to reach tens of thousands in their homes. The P.A.P. hopes to compel the people, willy-nilly, to listen to speeches and party propaganda from P.A.P. Ministers. Let the P.A.P. not misuse public money for its own party propaganda. The P.A.P. has pledged to husband all available resources to help raise the living standards of the people and not to fritter away money for the promotion of private sectional interests and of their colonial masters. At this point, sir, let me refer once again to the boast of the P.A.P. about the increase in revenue and accounts. May I refer you, Sir, to the Financial Statement for the year 1959? On page 44, in the last column, you will see that the surplus funds, market value on 31st December, 1959 amounted to $93,524,577.

46. We will just call it $93 million. Let us turn to page 48 of the same Financial Statement for the year 1959. We see that the net value in Dollars of Development Fund Investments is equal to $46,124,666.

90. Let us briefly call it $46 million. $93 million plus $46 million equal $139 million. Now may I refer you to the 1960 Financial Statement, and draw your attention to the figure that is printed in page 45? Against Surplus Funds, on 31st December, 1960, the figure is $164,004,002.

18. Let us call it $164 million. If you turn to page 49, the Development Fund Investments on 31st December, 1960 amounted to $85,148,387.

36. Let us call it $85 million. If we add $164 million to $85 million, we get the figure of $249 million. We see, Sir, therefore, that from 1959 to 1960 the amount that was invested abroad has increased from $139 million to $249 million - a difference of $110 million. Let me now refer to the Financial Statement for the year 1961. On page 210, in the last column, you get the Surplus Funds on 31st December, 1961. The figure is $199,119,196.

29. You see, Sir, these investments have - I do not think I need run through all of them - all been invested in Aberdeen Corporation, Australia, British Gas, Huddersfield Hull, etc, which are all foreign firms. The next figure to which I would like to draw your attention is on page 215, which tells us of the particulars of the Development Fund Investments on 31st December, 1961. The figure is $117,019,572.

83. If we were to add the $199 million of the Surplus Funds to the $117 million of the Development Fund Investments, we get the figure of $316 million. Sir, all this money has been invested not in Singapore, but in some foreign lands to help other people and not the people of Singapore. That money has been used to help the colonial interests and not the people of Singapore. From 1959 to 1961. we see that the amount invested abroad has increased from $139 million to $249 million to $316 million. Every year it has been increasing, and yet the P.A.P. wants to boast that there is so much and so much and so much in the kitty. As I have already asked, Sir, what is the point of having so much in the kitty and not making use of the money for the welfare of the people of Singapore? There are millions and millions of dollars, as we know, in the United States and elsewhere, but what good is that money to us? I wish the Minister for Finance will explain all this to us. We are very dense in matters of finance, but probably the Minister will care to enlighten the people of Singapore as to why so much of our money has been invested abroad. Let me now come to the hospital services. I would like to ask, what provisions have the Government made for the increasing number of patients who go to hospital for treatment? There are reports of shortages of all sorts of medicines and materials for the use of patients. Why should, I ask, there be shortages? Is it because we do not have enough money to look after the sick? I have just mentioned the hundreds of millions of dollars invested abroad. When the Government claims to have millions of dollars in the kitty, and when millions of dollars has to be spent on advertisements for the promotion of Malaysia and T.V., why should the hospitals run short of medicines and other materials needed to look after the sick? And why do outpatients in the Government Polyclinic in Queenstown have to pay 50 cents per patient? Patients get free treatment in other clinics Why should it be different in the case of the Government Polyclinic in Queenstown? Is it a change of policy, or is it pure discrimination? Regarding education, the Government can never again claim that there is equal treatment for four streams of education in Singapore. We do not know how much connection there is between the mass arrests on 2nd February and the `Torch Campaign' to encourage parents and schoolchildren to pay serious attention to the study of their mother tongue and language. But the P.A.P. education policy has been shown to be discriminatory. For instance, the question of Nantah University has until today remained unsettled. The number of students joining the Malay, Chinese and primary school classes for 1963 has dropped very steeply in comparison with the number of students attending primary classes in the English stream. If we compare the number of primary students for the various streams in 1963 with that of previous years, there is a shocking contrast. This alone is enough to show how successful PA.P. policy has been in its discrimination against Malay, Chinese and Tamil education. Indeed, Sir, so scared is the P.A.P. of the people knowing the actual situation that the Permanent Secretary to the Minister for Education has to clam up and not answer enquiries in several letters from me. I enquired for the figures of primary students in the various streams of education for 1963, as well as for the previous years, in my capacity as Member of the Legislative Assembly for Queenstown, but there was not even a letter of acknowledgement to all my letters. Let the Government take serious note of this discourtesy on the part of civil servants, and take appropriate disciplinary action against whoever is responsible. [Laughter] The Minister for Finance laughs, but let the P.A.P. remember its election pledge to run a courteous civil service in 1959. What has happened? Are civil servants to be discourteous to the people by not answering enquiries from the public and from Members of the Legislative Assembly? Sir, I do not intend to touch at length on many of the other subjects. I shall lease most of the other subjects to my other colleagues. They are subjects like the pro-colonial policies of the P.A.P. which will be the subject of another motion standing in my name. We in the Legislative Assembly have had an enforced long vacation and, but for the popular pressure - in spite of what the Prime Minister has said - for the recall of the Legislative Assembly, the P.A.P. would have given us a longer enforced vacation. An air of uncertainty is ever present, and it is more so today than yesterday, because repression has come, and there may be more repressions to come. The P.A.P. says that there will not be an air of excitement and uncertainty, but on the contrary I say that the air is full of uncertainty, and that this uncertainty increases with the daily development of the international situation. It is so uncertain, in fact, that millions of dollars have gone to Hongkong already. This has been reported in Newsweek and in the Straits' Times. How can such uncertainty give rise to any confidence in the people, as is mentioned in the Yang di-Pertuan Negara's speech? In column 4 of Hansard dated 27th March, 1963, it says, "All is calm and tranquil." Obviously then, Sir, there was no justification for the recent mass arrests. That the P.A.P. had to resort to arrests clearly shows that the P.A.P. cannot compete with the Barisan Sosialis for the support of the people. The P.A.P. has failed in the open argument, and has not, as is alleged in column 5, won the open argument. If there was seven months of peace and tranquility, as is mentioned in column 5, and yet there were arrests two months ago, then it clearly exposes the deceit and Fascist nature of the P.A.P. The sham referendum on 1st September, 1962, merely exposed the deceit of the P.A.P. yet further. The colonialists and their PAP, stooges have made use of the false result of the sham referendum to deceive the world about the true situation in Singapore. And similarly has the Internal Security Council made use of this false result as an excuse and pretext for repressive action against uncompromising anti-colonialists and anti-imperialists, and against all prominent leaders who oppose Malaysia and the P.A.P. The Prime Minister talks of the verdict of the people. But let us see how the verdict was obtained. You will remember, Sir, the referendum was carried out merely as a facade of democracy and of allowing the people a choice of alternatives offered to them. But you will remember also. Sir, that the people were not allowed to say no, and they must choose one of the three alternatives. And voting being compulsory, the people had no way out, no means of abstention. Tearing up of the paper would have meant imprisonment, and putting in a blank paper would also have meant the blank paper being considered as a vote for the Government. Of course, all this was because the P.A.P.'s intention was to coerce the people into choosing the P.A.P. proposals and never to give a chance to those people who opposed the P.A.P. merger proposals. You will remember also, Sir, that we in the Opposition had called on the people to cast blank votes in protest, and as the campaign proceeded, it became obvious from the huge attendances at Opposition parties referendum rallies and the empty attendances at the Government Party rallies that the vast majority of the people would cast blank votes in protest against the undemocratic and dishonest referendum. Then the P.A.P. Government, knowing that they would fail and would morally lose at least, came out with a new gimmick. They stated that blank votes would not necessarily mean Government votes, but could mean the loss of citizenship for more than half of the people of Singapore. Big headlines, Sir, screamed "Blank votes mean loss of citizenship". The Prime Minister made a speech in Fullerton Square and it was broadcast and re-broadcast over Radio P.A.P. and Rediffusion four or five times. Moreover, rumours were started by the P.A.P. that the vote was not secret because of the number on the back of the ballot paper, and discovery of those who cast blank votes would mean loss of citizenship rights, like loss of jobs, 1icences, passports, housing and schooling facilities, welfare aid and other such like dire consequences. Finally, to cap it all, on Polling Day voters were directed by supervisors of polling stations specifically to put a cross against one of the three alternatives. The voters were told that they must cast votes with a cross and not cast blank votes. Under the circumstances, Sir, the result of the referendum was a foregone conclusion. Nevertheless, despite all this, 25 per cent came out courageously in the face of Government intimidation and cast blank votes. Later many who had been coerced into putting in votes for Alternative A came to tell us of the split voting in families. Parents had to vote Alternative A and sons and daughters voted blank. Husbands had voted A and wives had voted blank. This was to insure against the Government really carrying out its threats. Thus, if one was deprived of citizenship rights as a result of casting a blank vote, the other member of the family would be able to say that he or she had voted for A and so would still be able to claim facilities that could only be claimed by citizens. The result of 70 per cent for Alternative A, therefore, did not truly reflect the will of the people of Singapore. They voted for A not because they wanted A, but because they feared B. And thus the P.A.P. Government achieved its purpose through the undemocratic and dishonest referendum.

Order. I am a bit puzzled about this expression, "undemocratic and dishonest referendum". The hon. Member does know, of course, that the referendum was held under the provisions of the Referendum Ordinance, and if this expression "undemocratic and dishonest referendum" has reference to that referendum, in other words, has reference to the referendum as provided for by that Ordinance, and the hon. Member is alleging that the Ordinance laid down something which was undemocratic and dishonest, then he is casting a reflection on the Assembly, and is completely out of order. I ask him to be very careful about using the expression in the course of his speech.

I have no intention, Sir, of casting any aspersions on the House, but it is quite clear that to many of the people outside, their opinion of the referendum is just what I have said, and I am merely reflecting the opinion and views of the vast majority of the people in Singapore.

Order. In that case, if the hon. Member is a guardian, as he ought to be, of the privileges of this House, he should report members of the public for casting reflection on this House. Dr Lee.

Anyway, Sir, to prove that the result of the referendum was false, let me inform the House of two referendum surveys carried out by Nanyang University students and the University of Singapore Socialist Club students. Two referendum surveys were carried out - one was in Tanjong Pagar. We had referred to that earlier. In the referendum survey of Tanjong Pagar, one straight question was posed to the people. They were asked whether they would accept or reject the Government White Paper merger proposals. All they were asked to do was to say yes or no. And the result came back, 90 per cent no, 6 per cent yes, and a 2 per cent here and a 2 per cent there. That was in the case of Tanjong Pagar, the constituency of the Prime Minister himself. But I do not think this House has a record of the results of the other survey referendum that was carried out in the constituency of Kreta Ayer, the constituency of the Finance Minister. In that referendum survey the questions posed were exactly as those posed by the Government on Referendum Day. That is to say, three questions were posed to them - A, B and C. And this is the result of that survey carried out just before the referendum in 1962. Those who voted for Alternative A, that is, the White Paper proposals, 106 votes, and it works out to 1.26 per cent. Alternative B, 93 votes, 1.10 per cent. Alternative C, 16 votes, and it works out to 0.19 per cent. The blanks 8,186 votes, and that works out to 97.13 per cent. Spoilt votes, 27, and it works out to 0.32 per cent. The total number of votes was 8,428. [Interruption]

Order.

From this, Sir, you will see that the referendum that was actually carried out on the 1st of September, 1962, never did reflect the will and desire of the people freely expressed as stipulated in the United Nations Resolutions 1514 and 1541, for the ascertaining of the wishes of the people on their constitutional future. The majority opinion of the people in Singapore has never been truly ascertained in the sham referendum, and we urge the Government to ascertain honestly the views of the people of Singapore on their constitutional future in accordance with the United Nations Resolutions 1514 and 1541. Sir, in spite of the various efforts of the colonial power to form pro-Malaysia parties in the Borneo territories and now even a pro-Malaysia Grand Alliance, it is clear that the majority of the people do not want Malaysia. In Sarawak, the Sarawak United People's Party is still solidly against Malaysia in spite of the arrests and the attempts to brand the Party as a Communist-front organisation. In Brunei, the intensity of opposition to Malaysia has already resulted in open revolt and guerilla warfare. Only in Sabah can they claim some support for Malaysia, and this is more apparent than real. The people in Sabah have been intimidated by communal fears into voicing their support for Malaysia following the Philippines' claim to Sabah and the uprising in Brunei. Even in the Federation itself, Sir, there is today a united opposition to Malaysia, comprising all political Parties in the Opposition. I mention all this only in passing to show that, in truth and in fact, the majority of the people oppose Malaysia not only in the Borneo territories, but also in Malaya itself. The powers-that-be can easily ascertain the views of the people. The Borneo territories have asked for a plebiscite, and neutral bodies, like Malayan student bodies in the United Kingdom, have similarly asked for a plebiscite, to truthfully ascertain the views of the people. In column six of the Hansard of 27th March, 1963, Sir, it says that the Afro-Asian nations have now understood what Malaysia is all about. I can assure you, Sir, since my recent trip to London, all or most of the Afro-Asian nations know the true nature of Malaysia. Previously colonial and P.A.P. and Federation propaganda has been telling the world that there is very little opposition to Malaysia, that the majority of the people are for Malaysia. When I showed them pictures of rallies that had supported us, they were simply shocked. I showed them the pictures of the battle of rallies where the P.A.P.-dominated unions had a rally in the Happy World stadium and where our unions had a rally in the Jalan Besar Stadium. They just could not believe it. An hon. Member: Have another one!

Now that he says it, let the Government give permission to us early and not delay us when we ask for it. Let me read to you, Sir, the resolution of the Afro-Asian nations in Moshi, Tanganyika, the place where the P.A.P. tried to gate-crash uninvited into the Conference. And the resolution, although watered down to a certain extent, still says very interesting things, and I read it out here for the record. This resolution is on North Kalimantan. It says: `The 3rd Afro-Asian People's Solidarity Conference meeting in Tanganyika Town of Moshi from February 4th to 11th, 1963, fervently greets the delegates of fighting North Kalimantan people and expresses full support for the just struggle of the North Kalimantan people against the neo-colonialists. This Conference appeals to Afro-Asian governments and peoples in general to render their full support to the struggle of the people of North Kalimantan against any federation which is now being intensively imposed by the imperialists in co-operation with their agents and to recognise the newly proclaimed full independence of the people of North Kalimantan.' One more paragraph, Sir: `We appeal to and urge all freedom-loving peoples of the world to take definite measures to oppose the reactionary actions of the British Government in sending armed troops to fight and repress the struggle for full independence of the people of North Kalimantan.' That, Sir, is one of the resolutions in Moshi, where the P.A.P. tried, so unsuccessfully, to gate-crash into. An hon. Member: Why point -

I think the Minister can have plenty of time to reply. He need not be so anxious and so eager. Sir, Malaysia, as admitted by the P.A.P. in the speech here, has already given rise to the confrontation policy of our great neighbour, Indonesia, and instead of peace and stability, there is already repression, strife, and threats to peace in South-East Asia. Malaysia is a British plot to prolong colonial domination in South-East Asia. Malaysia is only the political aspect of the British Military Far East Unified Command, which covers exactly the same five territories. It is, in fact, an extension of the working room of SEATO, and consequently Malaysia is opposed by Indonesia and the other Afro-Asian nations. The only way to restore friendly relations with Indonesia, and also the Philippines, and to maintain peace and security in South-East Asia is to scrap Malaysia, abandon Malaysia. Of course, we know that this is not within the power of the P.A.P. Government. The P.A.P. leaders have only found this Malaysian Plan attractive because of selfish and personal reasons. The role of the P.A.P. Ministers all along has been the role of stooges and flunkeys. Sir, in column 6, it says in the last paragraph: `... our destiny is irrevocably interwoven with that of Malaysia.' Sir, let me say this: the destiny of Singapore is not irrevocably interwoven with that of Malaysia. But for the fact of being ruled by the same colonial power, the Borneo territories have nothing in common with Malaya, that is, the Federation and Singapore. The Borneo territories are separated from Malaya by 300 miles of sea. The eastern part of Sabah is more than 1,000 miles from Malaya. Apart from British colonial rule, therefore, the Borneo territories have little in common with Malaya. Their natural links-if we must talk of links-are more with Indonesia. And as for the people of Singapore, our demand, ever since 1948, when Britain separated us from the rest of Malaya, has been for re-unification. But unfortunately the present White Paper merger proposals and Malaysia do not give us a brotherly reunion. They are meant to accentuate differences, and may even create new ones, amongst us and amongst the various communal components of our country. They are meant to delay still further the re-unification of Singapore and the Federation into a genuine Malayan nation. Already colonial repression has taken place as a result of the Malaysian Plan. Surely this is not what the people had elected the P.A.P. in 1959 for. The P.A.P. leaders should forget their own vested interests. Those words, Sir, are in column 6: `We have a vested interest in Malaysia...'. I ask the P.A.P. leaders to forget their own personal vested interests and really endeavour to help the people to fight the basic problems facing Singapore today, the problems of poverty, disease, ignorance, and want. The P.A.P. must admit that in spite of all their opening of new industrial enterprises every other week they have not done anything to relieve the unemployment problem in Singapore. I do not have to repeat again the arguments which completely expose the false propaganda claim of "prosperity through Malaysia", "Independence through Malaysia". Mr Ong Kee Hui, Chairman of the Sarawak United People's Party, and one-time member of the Malaysia Solidarity Consultative Committee, and a one-time active supporter of Malaysia, today calls the slogan of "Independence through Malaysia" a myth. Many who have been misled by colonial propaganda, and today support Malaysia, will also one day wake up as Mr Ong Kee Hui has woken up. They will then see through the falsity of P.A.P. propaganda and curse the P.A.P. for it. Today, as a result of party interests having been involved, the P.A.P. leaders already realise that they have sold Singapore to the Federation lock, stock and barrel. Overall Federation financial control will limit and restrict Singapore's development, both of new enterprises and of expanding recurrent expenditures of the Government. The Prime Minister has admitted as much. There is no promise of a Common Market, but there is already a call for extra burdens by the powers that be in the Federation. This call can only mean ultimate extra burdens also for the people of Singapore. As more and more expenditure is used on the armed forces, this extra burden will become more and more extra. And so will the difficulties of the people of Singapore become more and more acute. Both rich and poor will have to bear this extra burden. In the matter of propaganda, the transfer of television from the Ministry of Home Affairs to the Ministry of Culture does not in any way prevent the overall Federation control over the radio in Singapore. The people of Singapore will not be able to have a voice of their own. In column 20, Sir, the Government says that "no more great issues divide the people". This is not true-completely not true. A great issue divides the people. There is no greater issue that divides the people today than the issue of Malaysia. Malaysia divides not only Members in this House but also the people in the factories and in the workshops, in Government offices and business-houses, in coffee-shops and eating-houses, in flats and in the streets, in town and in the country. [Interruption] Malaysia divides the people not only in Singapore but also in all the other territories that go to form the proposed Malaysia. It divides the people in the whole of South-East Asia - 140 million of them. With such a division - [Interruption]

Order. I have been listening to unseemly noises coming from the Front Bench of the Government side. I would suggest that the Ministers give the Member for Queenstown an opportunity of saying what he wishes to say without interruption.

Thank you, Sir,I was saying, with such a division of the people, national unity is not possible. Moreover, the sense of oneness disappears when barriers are erected between the various territories to limit freedom of travel and to prevent so-called Malaysian citizens from participating fully in the political life of the nation as a whole. Instead, there is today mutual suspicion, mutual fear and even hatred. Should Britain so unwisely still impose Malaysia on the people against their will it can only last so long as there are British bayonets and jets around. But this will mean a heavy price in blood and material for all concerned. I ask the P.A.P. Ministers, "Is this necessary: is this wise?". The failure of the Federation of Central Africa clearly shows us that without the support of the majority of the people, Malaysia cannot succeed: it must fail. There is great talk of Communism in the Prime Minister's speech. It is a talk which the P.A.P. has always been interested in. I think I might as well leave this subject to the motion for the mass arrests when the question of Communism will be fully discussed. But I say, with all the ominous danger signals before us, let the P.A.P. not drift still further away from the straight and narrow path of service to the people. The national interests of the people must come before Party and personal interests and before foreign vested interests. The people of Singapore have no vested interests in Malaysia. It is the British Imperial Chief-of-Stall and the Forces he represents that have vested interests in Malaysia. General Hull publicly stated that Britain is 500 per cent behind Malaysia. This alone shows whose vested interests are involved in Malaysia - definitely not the vested interests of the people of Singapore. The vested interests of the people of Singapore lie in the reunification, as I have said, of the Federation and Singapore into a genuinely democratic, independent Malaya, free of foreign troops and free of foreign control. All of us in Malaya, that is, in Singapore and the Federation, irrespective of race, colour or creed, are members of one family. Therefore, before finally committing the fate and destiny of 1.7 million people to the British-sponsored Malaysian Plan, let the P.A.P. first pause and genuinely and honestly ascertain the views of the people on their constitutional future. Better still, let the House demand that the United Kingdom Government abandon the Malaysian Plan and proposed transfer of sovereignty over Singapore to the Federation as part of that Plan. Let all political detainees be forthwith and unconditionally released and let this be followed by general elections fairly conducted and supervised not by the P.A.P. --- An hon. Member: But by the Barisan.

--- but by the United Nations and then let fresh constitutional talks be held between the United Kingdom Government and the newly elected representatives of the people of Singapore. All eyes of the world are focussed on South-East Asia today. Even the Secretary-General, U Thant, is concerned over developing events in this part of the world as a result of the Malaysian Plan. The world is also concerned over the repressive measures carried Out by the colonial powers and their agents and stooges. Already there are hints of further repressive action. But let me say this: the people of Singapore can struggle constitutionally only so long as there are means still left for constitutional struggle, but it does look as if the P.A.P. is trying its level best to close all doors to constitutional struggle. If the last door to constitutional struggle is closed to the people, then there can remain but one final answer. Let the British and the P.A.P. rein in their horses on the brink of the precipice and turn back before it is too late. Sir, I move the amendment* standing in my name: *The same amendment also stood in the name of Mr Chan Sun Wing. `at end to add- "but this Assembly regrets that the Government has failed to implement its election pledges and urges the Government to truthfully and honestly ascertain the views of the people on their constitutional future".'.

The Original Question was: `That the following Address in reply to the speech of the Yang di-Pertuan Negara be agreed to:- "We, the Legislative Assembly of the State of Singapore, express our thanks to the Yang di-Pertuan Negara for the speech which he delivered on behalf of the Government at the opening of the present Session of this Assembly".' Since which an amendment has been moved: `at end to add - "but this Assembly regrets that the Government has failed to implement its election pledges and urges the Government to truthfully and honestly ascertain the views of the people on their constitutional future".'. The Question is, "That the words proposed to be added, be there added." I think, subject to what hon. Members have to say, there is no clear dividing line between the contents of the Yang di-Pertuan Negara's speech and the suggested amendment, and therefore I propose to allow speeches to range over the speech as well as this amendment, the effect of which, of course, would be that Members would have the opportunity of making one speech, and the Prime Minister, of course, will have the opportunity of replying to comments on the amendment when he replies to the whole debate. No dissenting voice? If there is no dissenting voice, the debate will then proceed on those lines. Any hon. Member wishing to speak?

(In Malay): Mr Speaker, we Members of this Assembly, over the past six months, have not had a chance to debate like players playing in a badminton or a golf game. Similarly, it is with my case, because of lack of practice it is possible that I am a bit rusty today. However, in my opinion, to quote from the speech of the Yang di-Pertuan Negara, the most important thing which we are faced with at the present moment is not the question of how many houses and how many stand-pipes have been put up or roads built, but the most vital thing is the problem of Malaysia. If it was important last year, it is even more important this year because at the latest, by the 31st August, Malaysia will be formed. However much, however bitter, the opposition by political Parties in this country, particularly from the Barisan Sosialis and its colleagues in the united front Communist organisations. I am confident that Malaysia will positively be formed. At the same time, a feeling of regret has emerged, not only from my Party but from all the people of Singapore, after hearing speeches from the Government over the past few months which have created a feeling of provincialism towards Singapore. Such speeches. I think, should not have been uttered by the Government, because if we are really keen to see Malaysia come into being at this moment, we should avoid such sentiments of provincialism because it Will create an unhealthy atmosphere and may lead to a chaotic state in Singapore. I do not know the reasons why the Prime Minister has uttered such a note, but I am sure he must have reasonable grounds for doing so. On my part, however, I feel that questions of eggs, ducks and poultry and so on do not affect Singapore alone, because in the future Malaysia, what happens in Singapore will be the responsibility of not only the Singapore Government but also the future Malaysian Government. If the people of Singapore face hardships, or the people of Brunei or North Borneo face similar hardships, that problem will not only be borne by the respective Governments but will also be the common responsibility of the Central Government. And we should assist every citizen in that particular territory to overcome his difficulties. In addition, the speeches made by the Prime Minister which I have read in the newspapers, to the effect that because the stand of the Government of Singapore is correct, therefore there is no dispute between the Government of Singapore and the Republic of Indonesia, bring no good at all except to widen the gap between the position of Singapore vis-a-vis the Federation Government. I go to the Federation frequently and I mix not only with their leaders but also with the people of the Federation. The people there doubt the stand of the Government of Singapore. I would like to advise the Singapore Government, when making speeches relating to Malaysia or to any aspect of the administration of the Singapore Government not to make speeches which will lead to a feeling of dissatisfaction not only from the people of Singapore but also from the people of the territories which will comprise Malaysia. Mr Speaker, in the Yang di-Pertuan Negara's speech I was pleased to hear that the financial position of the Government today is healthy to the extent that it has a surplus of millions of dollars, which is all for the good of the State. Therefore, I wish to appeal to the Government, just as I had made a similar appeal last year, to reconsider the question of the arbitrary cuts in C.O.L.A. of Government servants which was carried out in 1959. Although the Government has made a partial restoration in the allowances, in my opinion, there should be a full restoration. If the P.A.P. and its leaders, especially the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Culture who is also the leader of the trade unions, are brave enough to fight for increased wages and better conditions of work for workers, then it follows that it is the responsibility of the Government to look after its own public servants. I appeal because, in the speech of His Excellency the Yang di-Pertuan Negara mention is made of the financial position of the Government of Singapore which is in a healthy state. Further, Mr Speaker, concerning education, I wish to draw the attention of the Government to the subject of textbooks. Each year at the beginning of the school session parents are unhappy because, firstly, they find it difficult to buy textbooks for their children; but the most important is the change of the textbooks. If a pupil this year is in Form 3, the books which he uses this year cannot be used the following year in the same form. New books will be used. This not only applies to one school but to all schools throughout Singapore. Therefore, it means that every year textbooks are changed. If in Form 3 a white-cover book is used, for instance, next year Form 3 will use a book with a black cover. This is cause for concern to parents from the financial point of view, especially those with a large number of dependants to support. Another point, Mr Speaker, concerns housing. Although Government has erected thousands of houses and such houses are beautiful, there exists a more important and urgent problem which Government should give attention to and that is the lands belonging to landowners in Singapore for building houses for sale. The position in Singapore is that landowners prefer to build multi-storeyed flats, and they will make huge profits out of such flats, so that the result is that the squatters will have to be evicted and these squatters face difficulties and they have no place to put up their grievance. This has happened in Kampong Amber where a landowner is about to build flats and the squatters there have to be evicted and they have no alternative accommodation. I hope the Government will have them all assistance by whatever means. If I might be permitted to put a suggestion to the Government, I suggest that the Government set up a Re-housing Board just as they have set up a Rent Conciliation Board, where such matters can be thrashed out and that board can become the third party. Another important matter, Mr Speaker. Just now I was dwelling on general matters and not on specific matters. Now I would like to deal with the position of the Malays in Singapore and I hope the Government will give serious consideration to my speech. Mr Speaker, Singapore has been administered according to the Constitution which we approved in 1958 where there is enunciated the special position of the Malays in Singapore. Although it is contained in the Preamble that it shall be the responsibility of the Government of Singapore to care for the interests of the Malays in all spheres and to assist them in their language, economy and culture - Mr Speaker, Sir, four years have elapsed since the P.A.P. came to power in Singapore - but in my opinion, what has been enshrined in the Preamble of the Constitution has not been fully implemented by the Government and has been the cause of dissatisfaction to the Malays in Singapore. I would like to debate the subject one point at a time. First, on the subject of Malay settlements. In addition to the settlement at Jalan Eunos, there are other areas which have been gazetted, including Kaki Bukit, Sembawang, Pasir Panjang, Ayer Gemuroh and Jurong. In these areas which have been gazetted as Malay settlements, only one area, that is the Kaki Bukit area, has been fully developed and building lots allocated to Malays. However, in the case of Pasir Panjang, Ayer Gemuroh and Sembawang, nothing has been done and I know that many have submitted their applications, but it is unfortunate that Government have made no attempt to develop the land and allocate building lots to applicants on the waiting list. The Prime Minister has said that the Malays prefer to live in houses with compounds where they can rear poultry. He has further stated that in areas which are near the City area, land cannot be made available, but land can be made available in the rural areas. But I know the areas I have mentioned, such as Ayer Gemuroh, Pasir Panjang and Sembawang. Although they are a great distance from the city, many Malay applicants have submitted their applications but Government has no immediate programme to allocate building sites. Also on the subject of housing, this has been touched upon by the Prime Minister who says that the Malays have no liking to live in fiats and they prefer to live in kampongs. The Malays like to live in flats in Singapore if we observe the housing estates built in Queenstown and Mountbatten Road. I see that many Malays are occupying these flats. They are military and police personnel; so that, to me, I think the Malays have no objection to living in flats. But there is one major obstacle. The Malays are of Islamic faith. If they live in fiats, they have to mix freely with non-Muslims like Chinese or Indians. If the Government can give an assurance that out of ten blocks of fiats, one or two can be set aside specially for the Malays, I am confident that the Malays will live in them; the idea being that the occupants of a complete block of flats will be of Muslim religion. The third point concerning special rights is education. I congratulate the Government on having built two Malay secondary schools, one at Aljunied Road and the other at Mountbatten Road. It is a long-term programme of which the Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister is aware. But these secondary schools pose a big problem. There is the problem of textbooks. Parents are not only unable to afford textbooks, but there is also the problem of making available to them Malay textbooks. This difficulty is also being experienced by schools in the Federation. I hope the Government, with the formation of Malaysia, will co-operate with the Education Ministry, Federation of Malaya, so that the standard of textbooks used in Malay secondary schools will be of the same standard as that used in the Federation of Malaya. The fourth point concerns language. Here also it is a matter of regret. One of my colleagues has already raised this problem. That is to say, although the Government have declared publicly that Malay has become the national language and one of the official languages in Singapore, the Government have not taken positive steps whereby Malay can ultimately be the national and the sole official language. For instance, in the Federation of Malaya, annual monthly language campaigns are being conducted for the purpose of promoting Malay especially to non-Malays, but here in Singapore no such campaigns have been planned. The fifth point concerns assistance to Sekolah Rakyat. This has been in force from the previous Government, which had rendered help to Sekolah Rakyat (people's schools). The rules then were slightly relaxed. The requirements insisted upon by the Education Ministry now are rather rigid. For instance, the provision of sanitary and health conditions. The school building must conform to certain standards. There have been many grouses from the management of these schools because, before Government could give assistance to them, strict conditions were imposed to the extent that the money given to such schools could not be used for the purpose of defraying the salaries of the teachers. When the accounts of the schools are submitted to the Education Ministry, it is required that the auditors must be qualified auditors. We know that qualified auditors charge a minimum of $100 for fees. Another point concerning the special privileges of the Malays is aid in the economic field. Mr Speaker, everyone who reads the Utusan Melayu and the Straits Times during the past week must have noticed that there has been heated debate between the Utusan Melayu and the Straits Times as to how to help the economy of Malays in the Federation as well as in Singapore. Even more so the Malays in Singapore because it is enshrined in the Constitution of Singapore that the Government should help the Malays in the economic field. For four years the P.A.P. Government have assumed office, but the question of aid to the Malays in the economic field has not been given proper attention, except that free education has been given to the Malays from primary to university level, and of course the distribution of goats to the people in the Southern Islands. I hear that on one island only male goats have been distributed. There is not a single she-goat. Mr Speaker, the question of Malay economy is important. My suggestion is not aimed at producing more Malay directors of this or that company, but with a view to assisting, to uplifting the economy of the Malays. The Government can raise the economic status of the Malays and one way of doing this is for the Government, if possible, to train Malays in factories which are being built on the Jurong Industrial site. I hope the Government will use their good offices to persuade the factory directors to take in more Malays so that they can be trained to hold top posts in these establishments. Another way by which Government can help the Malays is to build small factories where Government can provide capital on a 50-50 basis. Let us not think that the Malays in Singapore cannot provide the capital needed. On the whole, the earnings of the Malays in Singapore are favourable compared with those of the Malays in the Federation, if we observe ten houses occupied by Malays in the Federation, we see that only two have radios, whereas in Singapore, out of ten houses occupied by Malays, ten of them have radios: and now television too, so that the income of the Malays in Singapore, in fact, is more than that of the income of the Malays in the Federation. If the Government can build small-scale factories where Government will provide the capital on a 50-50 basis, I think we can encourage the Malays to participate in business. Another method whereby we can promote Malay economy is - I refer this to the Minister for Finance - to set up investment firms. In the Federation this has been done and it has the support of the Government. The directors comprise two Government servants and two or three others nominated by the Government from among the Malays. In Singapore the Malays cannot use such benefits because we are not citizens of the Federation of Malaya. If the Government can set up such firms, I think this will certainly go a long way to assist the Malays in Singapore. Certainly the Government will tell us - will tell me because I put up this proposal - that the P.A.P. is a socialist Government and according to the principle of socialism, it cannot engage itself in a capitalist system. Mr Speaker, I think it is true. But if I may speak on facts, the P.A.P. claims itself to be socialist. But the policies that have been implemented are not socialist; they are a mixture of socialism and capitalism. The P.A.P. is fraternising with capitalists from abroad in order to persuade them to invest their capital here. From the long-term point of view, the efforts that have been undertaken by the P.A.P. Government to promote and to raise the standard of living of the Malays in Singapore, especially in respect of education, are good but we can see the fruits, say, in the next 10, 15 or 30 years. At this crucial moment, what do the P.A.P. Government intend to do to promote the Malays economically? Let the Government not think that because they claim they are a Socialist Government, they cannot engage in capitalist activities. If the Government are not willing to give serious consideration to this problem, I am afraid there will arise a feeling of dissatisfaction among the Malays in Singapore, which will in turn create problems which we cannot overcome. I would like to advise the Government - after they have been in power for four years, because I know that the P.A.P. are also awaiting the formation of Malaysia - to adopt the suggestions I have put forward. Concerning my own constituency, Geylang Serai, originally there were many objections to the Geylang Serai Project because the inhabitants were not aware of the true object of the Government. However, those people who supported the Project did so on certain conditions. One of the conditions is that the hawkers who have been plying their trade will now be assured of a pitch after the Geylang Serai Project materialises. Secondly, evicted families from Geylang Serai must be given accommodation in the flats to be built. This also has been promised by the Government. Thirdly - and this is most important - when evicted persons have been allocated flats or shophouses, I hope the Government will give an opportunity of ranting the unallocated flats or shophouses to the Malays. As I explained earlier, the area has been predominantly a Malay area for decades, and, therefore, I hope the unallocated stalls or flats will be allocated to Malays. In a nutshell, if you, Mr Speaker, have been following the position of the Malays in Singapore from the point of view of the Singapore Constitution, I regret to say that the Government have not carried out their responsibilities towards the Malays in Singapore as is required of them in the Singapore Constitution. However, on my own part, I wish to say that, on the question of education, I congratulate the Government for carrying out their responsibilities towards the Malays as they have promised - the only one.

7.20 p.m. Resolved, "That the proceedings on item 10 on the Order Paper be exempted from the provisions of Standing Order No. 1 until 12 midnight."-[Dr Toh Chin Chye]

It is my intention to suspend at half-past eight for one hour.

Debate resumed. 7.22 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, we have come to the grand finale of the P.A.P. drama. As we approach nearer to the closing scenes, we cannot help feeling touched to see the last days of this once great Party drawing closer, for it is apparent to us that no miracle can save this P.A.P. Government from doom, not even a miraculous victory in Sembawang - and victory is doubtful - nor a second mass swoop of political opponents, even detaining the Member for Hong Lim, that is, if the Prime Minister can successfully convince the Internal Security Council of the necessity to detain his bitterest rival in the Singapore political arena. 7.23 p.m.

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, the Government's policy speech reads like a funeral oration. There was not the bounce and the note of absolute confidence that were in the speech in the First Session of the Assembly, with 43 seats on the Government side. The tone and the language have changed with each subsequent Session. During the beginning of the Second Session, the number of Government seats was reduced to 40; at the beginning of the Third Session, 13 Members defected from the P.A.P.; and in this final Session, the P.A.P. Government with only 25 Members, having lost their mandate, are living from day to day on the charity of the S.P.A.-Alliance which it despises. The last policy speech of the P.A.P. Government was empty, lifeless, but full of veiled threats. It was couched in the language and the tone of a Government that has been defeated. The P.A.P. are finished. The flock might now know where the future lies, but not the shepherd. We must give the shepherd some credit for his political knowledge and his grasp of the ground position, however superficial it may be. The shepherd knows that the P.A.P. ship is heading for the rocks. Once the ship is piloted along the wrong course, it will eventually hit the rocks and no amount of whitewashing of the ship can save it from disaster. Sir, the ground position is this. Being responsible for the assessment of the ground position for the City Council and the general elections, I think I can speak with some authority on the situation. There is now not one single constituency in Singapore that the P.A.P. can claim as a safe seat - not even one, Sir. Not even Sembawang can be claimed as a safe seat despite its being nurtured for nearly four years with the greatest investment per voter in the provision of water, light, street-lights, telephone booths, rural roads and various other amenities. The days of the P.A.P. are therefore numbered. One thing with the P.A.P. leadership is that they talk of democracy but never practise it. The P.A.P. leadership is incapable of tolerating a democratic Opposition and of gracefully withdrawing from the scene when their time is up. The irony that the democratic Opposition can survive in Singapore is because there are three Governments making decisions upon our future, namely, the Singapore Government, the British Government and the Federation Government. Whatever we might disagree with the policies of the present Federation Government, we must say that it is more capable of tolerating a democratic Opposition. The P.A.P. leadership is different. It comprises of men who refuse to understand the true meaning of competition for political leadership within the democratic framework. Never have we seen in a democratic system the vast array of weapons of oppression, suppression and victimisation being so fully developed and deployed to crush all political opposition. The Lim Yew Hock Government looks like a dwarf in this respect. Therefore, in this three-power control over Singapore, the mockery of it is that the Singapore Government is the most vicious. Personal feelings are mixed with differences of Party policies; political treachery is combined with ruthlessness: arrogance is blended with the capacity to twist. It is with this background that we should read into the deeper meaning of the Government's policy speech. It painted to us a gloomy picture of black clouds hanging over the horizon. The self-styled "saviour of democracy" was in the forefront fighting to save us from the "enemies of democracy" like Saint George fighting the Dragon in order to save England. Sir, it was this same Saint George, as late as March 1961, before he was canonised, in his own self-confession, who told us he regularly held meetings with the Dragon. Although I have known Saint George before he was canonised, it was the first time I heard of the Dragon. The picture of darkness and gloom outlined in the policy speech, is in our opinion, meant to condition the minds of the people, and lay the spade-work for a second mass swoop before the general elections. The coming months will be interesting as we watch events unfolding themselves with even greater speed. If in the by-election of Sembawang, the P.A.P. by a stroke of good fortune happen to win, then we can expect general elections for the Singapore State Assembly, under the new Constitution within the Malaysian Plan framework, to come soon after, but if the P.A.P. lose this seat in the by-election, then we can expect to see more P.A.P. mischief and more magic shows being directed and performed, and the general elections indefinitely postponed, until the S.P.A-Alliance considers it-ripe enough, in its own interests, to withdraw its support, topple the Government and force the elections. Sir, it is therefore time for us to draw a balance-sheet of the P.A.P. Never has a Government lost popular support within such a short space of time. Long before the defeat of the P.A.P. in the Hong Lim and Anson by-elections, they had already lost the masses. The results of rolling of the two by-elections were only manifestations of the shifting of ground which happened long before the two by-elections. The P.A.P. Government lost public confidence very rapid1y after they formed the Government. The masses voted the P.A.P. on the record of the City Council work. It turned out that the Lee Kuan Yew government was not much better, after all, than the Lim Yew Hock Government. The masses soon lost their confidence. They became disillusioned. Political parties are like banks. Once a bank publicly cheats its customers, no amount of publicity or inducements will be able to restore public confidence for customers to place deposits with it. Despite the Prime Minister's visits to the rural constituencies, despite the fanfare, despite the entertainment and the publicity, all these things will not be able to revive the PA.P. The P.A.P. leaders may be able to deceive the British representatives that it commands popular support. The British representatives are not in contact with the ordinary men who make up the sum total of the electorate. The British might be easily persuaded to believe that once the Member for Hong Lim is detained, though ridiculous it would seem to be as he has also been a former member of that most exclusive club, the Internal Security Council, the ground is open for contest only between the Prime Minister and the Member for Cairnhill, and in this contest the P.A.P. thinks, but with which I beg to differ from them, that it will win. Sir, in the elections to come, people will vote for any other Party, or even Independents, but not the P.A.P. The ability to twist and turn both inside and outside this Chamber is no substitute for consistency in politics. In this connection, Sir, it must be remembered that once the British supported the Progressives. The Progressives lost. It later switched its support to the S.P.A. The S.P.A. lost. Now it is betting on the P.A.P. and, from the nature of things, he whom the British supports will lose. I must say that the British have great powers of auto-suggestion. They read the Straits Times. They listened to sweet-honey talk between cocktails. Unfortunately, unlike King Midas, whatever the British touched did not turn into gold, but instead relics for the national museum. Sir, at this juncture, let us take a lesson from the failings of the P.A.P. Government. It tries to be too smart. I has no consistent policies. It plays all sides. Having worked with the Communists until and during the Hong Lim by-election, it played them out. Then leading the Federation leaders up the garden path, it tries to sour up things at the last minute, trying to challenge who should be the rent collector in the future Singapore Government and making a big issue out of it, I would say for electioneering purposes. What the P.A.P. Government is now fighting against the Federation Government is the right of who should be the rent collector. The P.A.P. is now having false dreams after its visits to the rural constituencies that it can continue to be the next Government, and having surrendered to the Federation the meat earlier, namely, the right to regulate and decide our own financial and economic policies, it now wants to fight for the bones - to be a rent collector, in other words. For it seems to them now that unless this is being done, its present Minister for Finance would lose his post if the P.A.P. really can have a second go. The P.A.P. Government is now getting famous, Sir, for its double talk and its double face. There are many examples of this double face policies, and double talk is a dangerous game which is sure of being caught in the end. I would not be surprised if the British lion one day got played out too. Double talk, zigzagging, is a characteristic of the P.A.P. leadership. Take the example of Malayan and Indonesian relations. What is the open and unequivocal stand of the Prime Minister of Singapore on this issue? Indonesia's verbal opposition to Malaysia is one thing. But suppose Indonesia's confrontation policy becomes hot, and suppose it decides to resort to military force, would the Prime Minister of Singapore still sit on the fence as he is doing now, or would he openly come forward to rally the people of Singapore against any militant action by Indonesia? What happens to our so-called great patriot? Why is he so equivocal and non-committal and double-faced? I say I have contributed substantially to the establishment of friendly relations between Singapore and Indonesia. It is in our Party programme, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, to maintain friendly relations with all our neighbours. But I say that in the event we are ever threatened with military action from Indonesia, it is a different matter altogether, and we, as Citizens of this country, no matter whether we are Malays or Chinese, Indians or Eurasians, must be prepared to stand up and defend it. We must be prepared to state unequivocally our stand despite our opposition to the terms and conditions of merger. Nothing. Sir, can save the P.A.P. now. The talk of the Prime Minister just now of his gigantic projects - the Outram Gaol scheme, the Johore River scheme, the Bedok land reclamation scheme, this scheme, that scheme, brought in during this final phase of the P.A.P. reign, are meant to deceive the people for electioneering purposes. The lease of life of the P.A.P. Government is so short now that it can talk big, can talk of huge giant projects without having to assume the responsibility of implementing them or to complete them. None of this talk can deceive the people and help to resuscitate the P.A.P. There is not one single section of the population in Singapore which now supports the P.A.P. Let us ask ourselves which section of the population in Singapore supports the P.A.P., whether they be workers or farmers, trishaw-riders or hawkers, civil servants or shop-keepers, rich or poor. No single section of the population has any more trust in the P.A.P. The P.A.P. might have isolated support from a few individuals in each section, from those who have obtained personal benefits from the P.A.P. Government, but the P.A.P. now has lost all its base. Not one section of the people is its base. Not one single constituency among the 51 is a safe seat for the P.A.P. It is, therefore, easy, Sir, to understand the reasons for the recent mass arrests and maybe possible future mass arrests before the general elections are to come. But all these actions would only bring the P.A.P. further down the drain. The P.A.P. can have sweet dreams and can force the people to go to the polis, but it cannot force the people to vote for it in spite of its community centres and Work Brigade, radio and television. Therefore, despite its much publicised massive construction, it has little chance of staging a come-back. It genuinely believes that if the ground can be cleared - and that the P.A.P. thinks is its last hope - for a fight only between two contestants, the Prime Minister and the Member for Cairnhill, the P.A.P. will therefore win first, because it will try to pose itself as being a socialist Party again. As I see it, the P.A.P. is determined to win at all costs. Never have all the rules of conduct in the democratic system been so much violated. Detention laws, the P.P.S.O., and the Criminal Law (Temporary Provisions) Ordinance, have all been used to deal with personal adversaries and political opponents of all shades of colour. Never have detention laws, which were promulgated with avowed objectives to keep the democratic system working, been so grossly abused and will be abused. Let the political Opposition never deceive itself as to the extent the P.A.P. Government is prepared to go. We were aware of this since our break with them. We knew the P.A.P. leaders too well and that is why they were never able to out-manoeuvre us even once either inside or outside this Assembly. The final course, and this is if the Internal Security Council approves, may be to detain the Member for Hong Lim and put him out of the race.

Now you are pretty safe.

But would that ensure the victory of the P.A.P.? Sir, we have little faith in the P.A.P. Government and its profession to work the democratic system because we are convinced that the detention laws have been grossly abused by the P.A.P. Government, and we ask that the detainees be brought to trial or set free. Sir, there is still some time left before the curtains are finally drawn. Before the P.A.P. leaders continue with the final phase of their heinous plans, why not those in the P.A.P. who make the decisions and who are now absent from this Assembly go away to some lonely and pleasant spot like Raffles Lighthouse where there are nice little rooms for some self-searching thoughts before it is too late? Do the P.A.P. leaders genuinely want the democratic system to survive? Or what they want is merely to maintain their personal power, no matter what the cost?

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, the traditional splendour that marks the opening of the new Session of the Legislative Assembly was dimmed and marred this time. The air of hypocrisy was apparent. There was, of course, the usual din - the ceremonial highlights, the guard of honour, the 21-gun salute, and above all, Sir, the usual annual march of the P.A.P. legislators. As in the case last year, they all marched in their whites, led by the Prime Minister who incidentally was also in his white uniform. Nonetheless, Sir, there was a difference. There was a bitter taste. The hypocrisy of the whole show was evident. There is no democracy in Singapore. The so-called parliamentary democracy is merely in form and not in substance. Democracy in Singapore is a farce that is prostituted by the P.A.P. Government. Sir, let there be no illusions about this. It is no use pretending that this traditional debate on Government policy is a reflection of any democratic system in Singapore. After a long spell of prorogation the P.A.P. finally decided to call for a Session for its own ulterior motives, among which is to show the people in Singapore and also those outside Singapore that there is still democracy in Singapore, and that there is still such a thing as the constitutional method of open argument. Sir, recent events have proved that parliamentary democracy in Singapore is as good as dead. Parliamentary democracy, as such, has been thoroughly discredited and exposed by the P.A.P. which claims to safeguard the whole system. The blatant abuse of the system by the P.A.P., the denial of democratic liberties and rights, the complete control of the Press, the radio, and now T.V.; the shameless rigging of the referendum, the arbitrary arrests, the banning of publications, and even the P.A.P.'s conduct in this Chamber, all expose the hypocrisy of the P.A.P. who claim to be defenders of democracy. Parliamentary democracy has been made a mockery of by the P.A.P. Suppression and reprisals by a vindictive and dictatorial P.A.P. clique, whose deceit and dishonesty surpass that of all previous governments, including the colonial government, is the order of the day. While we have this debate, Sir, let us also bear in mind that all this is farce because of the background and because of what goes on outside this House. This Assembly sitting is just a pretence of democracy in an otherwise complete police State: we are perhaps just one step behind a complete dictatorship. Sir, the emasculated P.A.P. report delivered by the Yang di-Pertuan Negara is tantamount to a plaintive appeal for approval of the P.A.P.'s past and present failures. This is hardly a policy speech. The speech contains an introduction which says nothing, and a conclusion which is equally eloquent in saying nothing. In between, Sir, we have an impoverished review of Government activities which are terribly inadequate even as a record of P.A.P.'s "achievements" in the past one and a half years. Sir, it is suggested that the Barisan Sosialis has lost the open argument this time. What argument and when did we lose it?

Radio Singapore.

The Government's fear of our opposition has driven them to take arbitrary action to remove forcibly their political opponents in Left-wing organisations from the arena, and to deprive us of our inherent right to organise opposition constitutionally. Forms of constitutional struggle that are common in countries which practise parliamentary democracy are not allowed in Singapore. Even this Assembly was given an unprecedented long recess thereby ensuring complete erasure of any form of opposition. The Sembawang by-election has not been held. Sir, all these things are done because the P.A.P. know that it is they who have lost the open argument. The magnitude of the repressive measures adopted by the P.A.P. is a clear indication of the strength of the opposition the Government faces, it is the Government which has lost the open argument, and hence finds it necessary to resort to taking repressive measures. The Barisan, however, Sir, is very confident that notwithstanding any repressive acts of the Government, it shall eventually crush the P.A.P. Sir, the P.A.P. is no longer a political force. It does not represent the Right, nor does it represent the Left. It is an opportunist force. Today, the P.A.P. is still surviving because, and only because, it has the use of the State machinery in its hands. It is a force only in the sense that it has the use of State organs. It has the radio, T.V., the police, the Work Brigade, and it has the Press completely subjugated. It survives because of these. Sir, the introductory portion of the speech with its "quiet note of confidence" is fallacious. The P.A.P. Government has no confidence in itself; neither does it have the confidence of anybody other than colonial and reactionary forces. Sir, I understand that even these reactionary and colonial forces distrust the P.A.P., for they are aware that the P.A.P. will stab them in the back one of these days. Only 53 days before the formal opening of this Session of the Legislative Assembly, the Government arrested 133 of their political opponents and banned 10 publications which had been critical of Government policies. This arbitrary and undemocratic action was that of desperate men who were not confident of their future in a fair and open fight. These actions were the direct result of the lack of confidence on the part of the Government to continue the so-called open argument even though they have the Press under complete control. The P.A.P. resorted to arbitrary detention of political opponents because they did not have the confidence of winning the constitutional fight. Sir, it was because of this lack of confidence that the P.A.P. continues to take all forms of undemocratic actions and to impose severe limitations on the Opposition. The people are denied civil liberties, publications are banned, meetings are restricted, meetings of Left-wing trade unions are banned, the S.A.T.U. is not registered, the S.A.T.U. annual conference was banned, the referendum was legally rigged. All these were done, Sir, not because the P.A.P. was confident, but because these measures were their only means to hold on to power. Perhaps, Sir, after the mass arrests they are trying to feel confident and this desire to feel confident could have crept into the Yang di-Pertuan Negara's speech. Perhaps they feel that there is a short breathing spell for them. This, Sir, we can assure them is a mere illusion and no amount of wishful thinking on the part of the P.A.P. is going to change realities. The P.A.P. is doomed to die sooner or later. The introduction also refers to storms and tempests. This sounds more like a leaf from a Mickey Spillane thriller. There is a definite attempt on their part to give the impression amongst the public that Singapore had been faced with some impending catastrophe which they had averted by their recent actions. There was no such situation. This bogey is presented to the public merely to justify their recent undemocratic actions, to hide the evil machinations and further repressive measures which they have in mind for a future date. The storm, if any, was only in a teacup. Sir, the speech of the Yang di-Pertuan Negara is solely aimed at over-emphasising routine activities of the P.A.P. Government in the past year. The P.A.P. have certain obligations to perform by virtue of the fact that they are the Government. The routine opening of schools, community centres, etc., are about the minimum obligations that can be expected from a government whose members are paid out of public pockets in the expectation that these obligations will be fulfilled so as to ensure the continuity of the normal livelihood of our people. The P.A.P. seek to play up these routine duties of the Government which they themselves described in the previous policy speech on the 31st of August, 1961, as mundane matters; obviously, Sir, in an attempt to win public sympathy. This is exactly what the previous Government under the leadership of the Member for Cairnhill did in its last stages just before the elections in 1959. Sir, it will not be out of place to remind the P.A.P. that this stunt did not deceive the people in 1959, and there is no doubt the P.A.P. also cannot deceive them this time. Sir, the substance of the speech even as a review of Government activities is inadequate. Further, the speech does not even outline the basic features of Government's general policy. Under every head the activities of the past year are recounted and any future plans vaguely left behind. Future plans are completely vague and are in the form of very generalised statements. Column 5 of the Hansard, for example, Sir. We are told that there are funds to see us through all the major projects for the immediate years ahead. Sir, what are these major projects? When we seek to look for them, we find that we are given the oft-repeated Toa Payoh new town, the rebuilding of the old city, and the Jurong industrial base. Three projects which the P.A.P. have been talking about for a very, very long time. Column 6 reads: `Most significant and gratifying of all has been the quiet and steady expansion of new factories. Every other week sees the opening of some new industrial enterprise. Every month sees a major project take shape in the Jurong Industrial Site. The future augurs well.' This again, Sir, is a vague and generalised statement which does not specify Government plans. We are not even told how many workers have been employed as a result of these ventures. We are not told to what extent the unemployment problem has been relieved us a result of these so-called new industries. Sir, the omission is because of the fact that new employment as a result of this has been almost negligible. Column 9 is another example, Sir, of vague generalised statements from a bankrupt Government which has no definite policy. I quote, Sir, from the second paragraph: `The whole task of rebuilding our city is one of monumental proportions. It will need finance of more than a thousand million dollars and will engage our energies over several decades. But at the end of it, we shall have built a new city of beauty and distinction, worthy of the industry and enterprise of our people, and in keeping with our position as the financial, industrial and commercial centre of South East Asia.' Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, "the whole task of rebuilding our city is of monumental proportions." You will note that there is absolutely nothing said except what everybody knows. We know that the rebuilding of our city is of monumental proportions. We do not have to have the Yang di-Pertuan Negara in his speech, which is supposed to be the policy of the Government, which is supposed to contain definite Government proposals and programmes for the future, telling us this, instead of explaining how the policy of the Government is directed to tackle the problem and how do the Government propose to raise more than $1,000 million. Besides this much-talked-about Outram site, which other site have they in mind? The Government do not even say when they propose to begin this Outram scheme and when they expect to complete it. Sir, there are only two paragraphs devoted to the subject of labour in the policy speech of the Government which professes to be pro-labour. One refers to the Industrial Arbitration Court - just one sentence. And the other, Mr Deputy Speaker, refers to the Labour Research Unit - two sentences.

How many sentences do you want?

Sir, the Labour Research Unit is a P.A.P. outfit, financed by the Government. All those who are attached to this unit are well known for their P.A.P. affiliations. Public funds are used to further P.A.P. interests. This unit helps P.A.P. trade unions, provides materials, etc. Even actual negotiations are done by some of them for the P.A.P. unions. When the arrests were carried out, some of these men who are attached to the Research Unit and who are paid by Government, on behalf of the P.A.P., approached the non-P.A.P. unions and offered to negotiate for them because their leaders were in detention. Sir, it is significant to note that a Government which professes to be pro-labour has made no mention of its labour policies in its speech. Sir, it is also significant to note differences among the references to labour in 1960, 1961 and 1963. In 1960, Sir, there was the assurance that the Trade Union Bill, which passed through this Assembly and which was prevented in an unprecedented manner from having the assent of the Yang di-Pertuan Negara, will be re-introduced. In 1961, Sir, there was no-mention of this Bill at all in the policy speech. And again, this year, there is no reference to this Bill. It is now three years since the time this assurance was given in 1960. The unification of the trade union movement was an election pledge of the P.A.P. Up to now, the Government have not kept its pledge. In 1960, the Government talked about a Labour Advisory Committee. We hear nothing about it anymore. In 1960, the Government promised the Employment Bill which would revise the Clerks, Labour and Shop Assistants Employment Ordinances and include protection for other categories of workers not covered by existing labour legislation. I quote the exact words from the Hansard, Volume 13, No. 1, column 14: `An Employment Bill will be introduced which will repeal the three Ordinances dealing with the conditions of labourers, clerks and shop assistants.' That was on 20th July, 1960. In 1961, Sir, they also said that they would introduce this Employment Ordinance. This is Volume 15, column 23, dated 31st October, 1961: `A new Employment Ordinance which will consolidate the existing Ordinances pertaining to labourers, clerks and shop assistants will he introduced in the coming year.' That was 1961. 1963 finds no such reference at all in the policy speech. The Government again have not kept their election pledges, and in the speech before the House we find no reference at all to the revision of the existing outdated Employment Ordinances, and also to the need for proper legislation to protect large groups of workers who are not given safeguards under existing labour legislation. Sir, the P.A.P. have broken every pledge they made to the workers on whose votes they were elected into office. It is hypocritical for the P.A.P. to profess to be pro-labour. Sir, we find all over the P.A.P. report a complete absence of specific Government policies and programmes for the future, except very vague generalised statements, with one or two projects repeated over and over. We realise that the more urgent and immediate problems facing our people are those of housing, schools, hospitals, etc. Sir, to be able to meet the increasing needs of our people, the Government, in the first place, must have a sound economic policy. Since 1959, when the P.A.P. took office, our economic ills, far from improving, have only worsened. Notwithstanding the number of industries that have been given pioneer status, the present unemployment figure is no doubt higher than the 1959 figure. We are certain that the P.A.P. Government cannot solve the basic economic problems if they continue to work within the framework of a colonial economy. Singapore's economy is dependent on its entrepot status, and this is insufficient to meet, as has been proved, the increasing demands for employment opportunities. Apparently, everybody is agreed on the need for industrialisation to reduce unemployment and to increase prosperity. Yet it is strange that the P.A.P. have made no mention of their approach to the problem of industrialisation in the speech of the Yang di-Pertuan Negara. Since 1959, the P.A.P. have not, in fact, outlined their basic policy towards industrialisation, apart from following up on the previous Government's policies of encouraging private investment. This is clear evidence that the P.A.P. have deviated from their election pledges. In 1959, the P.A.P. said that "we should not face our economic problems in an era of freedom with the mental attitude appropriate to colonial servitude." However, today they are still openly depending on the entrepot economy of Singapore, and their bleating about foreign capital for investment is still an attitude appropriate to colonial servitude. Everyone - the capitalists included - knows that the P.A.P.'s economic policy in practice has been a failure. Their industrialisation projects so far carried out have been of little significance. The tendency of the P.A.P. has been to blame militant trade unionism for the insufficient inflow of foreign capital to meet our requirements for industrialisation. We have time and again pointed out the fallacy of blaming labour for economic stagnation. If industrialisation has not taken place at the rate required, then the Government must admit their own failures instead of looking for a scapegoat. Sir, the availability of capital, markets, etc, are far more important conditions that are necessary as pre-requisites to facilitate industrialisation. The P.A.P., apart from blaming militant labour - particularly the Left-wing trade unions - for the P.A.P.'s failure to effect industrialisation on a scale necessary, have done nothing positive in terms of acquiring capital and expanding markets. In 1959, they said "they profoundly disagreed that the survival of Singapore depends on foreign capital and foreign capitalists", but today the emphasis is still on foreign capital and foreign capitalists. Today, the P.A.P. have done nothing to remedy the lack of sufficient capital for industrialisation, other than depending on a few foreign capitalists to open industries, whose impact is insignificant. Contrary to P.A.P. pledges in 1959, the Government's overseas investments have more than doubled. Vague suggestions have also been made that Malaysia will mean economic prosperity for Singapore. Today, the Singapore Government, or the Government of the Federation of Malaya, have not explained how this economic prosperity is to be brought about. It is, however, implied that Malaysia will mean industrialisation, expanded markets, etc. I notice the Minister for Finance has left the Chamber obviously, he has no answer to these things, it has been suggested that Malaysia will mean economic prosperity, expanded markets, greater employment opportunities, etc. One would have expected to find, in the speech of the Yang di-Pertuan Negara, some clear indication as to the future of Singapore in the context of Malaysian economic situation, especially in view of the fact that the Governments concerned appear determined to push through this neo-colonial plot regardless of the strong opposition of the people. To our surprise, we find hardly any reference. There are only two insignificant references in the speech. One is at column 7. There is only one line. It is so insignificant that I cannot even spot it straightaway. The last paragraph reads: `The establishment of Malaysia on 31st August this year will give an added impetus to our industrial growth.' A meaningless statement which is general and vague. Another reference is at column 8: "With Malaysia, our opportunities will be greater." Sir, these are the only two references, and you will note that these are completely bankrupt statements which mean absolutely nothing. They are merely high-sounding. What we would like to know is, how will there be an increase in industrial growth and greater opportunities in the context of Malaysia, as proposed by the Government of the Federation of Malaya and the P.A.P.? We would like to know whether there will he an automatic expanded market as a result of Malaysia. We would like to know whether goods manufactured in Singapore, on entering the Federation of Malaya, will he subject to tax after Malaysia, as is the practice at the moment. We would like to know whether Federation-manufactured goods will continue to enter Singapore tax-free. Sir, on the eve of the neo-colonial British-sponsored Malaysia which the P.A.P. whole-heartedly support, we still have no answers to these questions. The P.A.P. lie has been that Malaysia will mean greater employment opportunities. This is a falsehood propounded by P.A.P. propagandists. Because of the inequality and discrimination in the citizenship status within Malaysia, which adversely affect Singapore citizens, they will not be able to have employment in the Federation of Malaya or the Borneo territories. How then will there be increased employment opportunities? Sir, another lie is that Malaysia will mean a market of 10 million people for Singapore-manufactured goods. So far, there has been no clear statement on this. As far as we can understand, even after Malaysia, the present practice will continue, that is, Singapore-manufactured goods entering the Federation of Malaya will be subject to tax, whilst Federation-manufactured goods will continue to enter Singapore tax-free. Sir, in the speech of the Yang di-Pertuan Negara on 31st October, 1961, we were told in column 5: `Without economic co-operation and a common market between Singapore and the Federation, there can be little hope of a rapid economic expansion and industrialisation that will bring more factories and more jobs for the thousands of our young people leaving our schools and seeking employment.' In 1961, the P.A.P. admitted that without a common market between Singapore and the Federation of Malaya, there was little hope. Up to date, Sir, as far as we know, there is no concomitant arrangement for the setting up of a common market of Malaya, Singapore and the Borneo territories, in spite of the fact that they are on the verge of bulldozing through Malaysia. Sir, in the absence of this, it is reasonable to expect that conditions will remain the same, in the 31st October, 1961 speech, we were also told in column 12: `With merger now in prospect, the assumptions on which the original economic policies of the Government were based must be reviewed.' It is now 1� years since this speech was made. In the speech of the Yang di-Pertuan Negara this year, we still find not even an indication of the basis on which Government's economic policies are to be reviewed and devised. Finally, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, even assuming that some arrangements will be worked out, it is necessary for us to bear in mind the state of the economy of the Federation of Malaya as it is now. The economy of Malaya, as it is presently constituted, can hardly be relied on. The Malayan economy is almost totally dependent on rubber and tin, whose export markets fluctuate. This has caused serious disturbances in the past and no doubt will continue to cause much more serious disruption in the future. The Government of the Federation of Malaya recognise the seriousness of their over-dependence on these two commodities and they are now engaged in attempts to speed up industrialisation, However, in the field of industrialisation, a realistic appraisal shows that the rate of progress in the Federation of Malaya is insufficient even to meet the growing demands of the population of the Federation of Malaya, let alone the whole population of the Malaysia region. The P.A.P., which was elected on a socialist platform as a Left-wing Party, makes no mention of its economic policies outside the status quo of colonial and free enterprise economic system. This is conclusive proof that the P.A.P. have changed colours and are now pursuing policies which are pro-colonial and which are contrary to their election pledges.

I suspend the sitting until half-past nine. Sitting accordingly suspended at 8.29 p.m. until 9.30 p.m. Sitting resumed at 9.30 p.m.

Order read for resumption of debate.

The original Question was, `That the following Address in reply to the speech of the Yang di-Pertuan Negara he agreed to:- "We, the Legislative Assembly of the State of Singapore, express our thanks to the Yang di-Pertuan Negara for the speech which he delivered on behalf of the Government am the opening of the present Session of this Assembly.".' Since which an amendment has been moved: `at end to add - `but this Assembly regrets that the Govern- ment has failed to implement its election pledges and urges the Government to truthfully and honestly ascertain the views of the people on their constitutional future".'. The Question is, "That the words proposed to be added, be there added."

Mr Speaker, Sir, as we listen to the speeches from both the P.A.P. and the Barisan speakers, we are reminded of the kind of uneasy political climate Singapore has had to go through for the last four years. There is so much confrontation about the speeches, Sir, that many people in Singapore have become bewildered. In fact, some have even thought that all this confrontation is a makebelieve, and that some time in the future the P.A.P. and the Barisan will join up again as they did in 1959. However, if we compare conditions generally in 1959 with those of today, perhaps we can arrive at somewhere near the truth. We can better appreciate the real strength and weaknesses of the P.A.P. administration during the last four years. Sir, four years ago, when His Excellency the Yang di-Pertuan Negara made his first speech here, he said that the prime task of the new P.A.P. Government would be to build up a climate of confidence under which trade expansion and industrial growth could take place. In the following year, on 29th September, 1960, the Minister for Finance, in his Budget speech, referred to the rapid population growth in Singapore and the prospect of mounting unemployment, and said that the Government viewed this with grave anxiety and would strain itself to the utmost to avoid this situation of increasing unemployment. Sir, we agree wholeheartedly with the P.A.P. in these two major objectives. Here at least are two milestones by which we can measure Singapore's progress during the P.A.P. administration. However, when I listened to and read again the speech of His Excellency the Yang di-Pertuan Negara this year, I found that there was a strange silence on these two major aims, except a bare reference that new factories would give more jobs to the people. When we examine the situation more closely, we find the real damaging truth: in spite of their good intentions, the achievements and the hard work of the P.A.P. leaders, they have failed to achieve success in these two major aims which they stated to be theirs in 1959. They have not only failed to build up the climate of confidence but they have also aggravated the problem of mounting unemployment. In fact, it would be true to say that the situation has deteriorated since 1959 as regards these two major aims and that if it were not for the timely prospect of Malaysia, the deterioration would have been even worse. Sir, I notice that the Barisan speakers have also been crowing over the failure of the P.A.P. Government to solve the problem of unemployment, but they must realise that they have to take a great portion of that blame. Basically, both the P.A.P. and the Barisan have made the same fundamental mistake in their policy, and that is, they think they can build a better society in Singapore by fomenting class hatred and perpetuating the class struggle. Sir, they also take delight in inflicting on the people of Singapore their confrontation tactics - confrontation in the schools, confrontation in factories, confrontation in the offices, confrontation in the Singapore Harbour Board and confrontation in the Assembly. In an atmosphere of confrontation almost everywhere, with students being roused up against teachers, employees against employers, one group of trade unions against another group, how can we expect a better society to emerge? Some of us have forgotten the lesson we learnt when we were young in school: whatever we sow, that shall we reap. How can we sow hatred and expect to reap something good? We must then expect to reap violence. I must say that there are able men in both the Barisan and the P.A.P., and if they can only purge themselves of this hatred of class against class and race against race and person against person, they will be in a better position to give Singapore that better society that we all aim for, and a more peaceful and prosperous Singapore. We can only hope that in Malaysia we shall take not the road of hatred but of goodwill and continuing co-operation to build something better. Sir, the P.A.P. has produced a very good show-piece in the Jurong industrial scheme, but unless there is a climate of confidence with justice and fair play, not only for the workers, but also for the investors, the scheme may turn out to be just one big white elephant. That is the opinion of many who have a stake in Singapore's future. For why should foreign and local investors be asked to put in investments in the Jurong scheme if the Party in power claims as a matter of policy that in any dispute it would always be on the side of the have-nots? The people who are the haves will be fools if they put in money in order to lose their investments. But why should it be so? Why should it not be justice for all? Why should we not let common sense prevail over any personal hatred or class hatred, or rancour that may be in our hearts? This deliberate encouragement of one class against another class may win for one side some votes, but in the long run it brings mutual destruction to both sides; not only to the haves but also to the have-nots. I would like to ask both the Barisan and the P.A.P. who the real have-nots are in Singapore. To me, Sir, the real have-nots in Singapore are the unemployed. Those in employment already have something. They have something to live on, to build on. The unemployed are the real have-nots, and the people who have done the greatest disservice and the greatest harm to the have-nots in Singapore, I am sorry to say, have been both the Barisan and the P.A.P. with their confrontation tactics. The result has been that we have less and less jobs for more and more have-nots. Sir, this situation has been borne out by the report published in 1960 of the Labour Department under the P.A.P. administration. In September 1957, there were 123,000 workmen in employment. Three years later in 1960 there were 7,400 less workmen in employment. In September 1961, according to the Digest of Statistics, the total number of men employed in all industries was still less than 110,000. So, since 1957, when the P.A.P. took control of the City Council, the climate of confidence in Singapore has deteriorated, and the number of jobs available for the have-nots has been less and less, so that today there are 13,000 less jobs for the have-nots than in 1957. The number of unemployed, the real have-nots in Singapore, has probably increased from 60,000 in 1959, at, say, an average of 20,000 a year, to about 140,000. Sir, this is the tragedy that the Barisan and the P.A.P., who claim to be the loudest champions of the have-nots, have been the ones who have caused the greatest suffering to the real have-nots in Singapore - the unemployed. Sir, if only both the Barisan and the P.A.P., would try a new approach to the problem of helping the have-nots in Singapore, rather than the confrontation approach they have been trying out, very likely there would be this climate of confidence coming to Singapore and we would produce more and more jobs for the real have-nots in Singapore. We do not even have to wait for new factories to produce new jobs. The present enterprises and the present factories are capable of expansion to provide the new jobs, provided there is the assurance that there will be justice for both sides, both the workers and the employers, in the interests of the citizens of Singapore and of the true have-nots, the jobless of Singapore. Sir, I am glad that the P.A.P. looks forward to Malaysia as the hope for a better future for Singapore citizens, but if we carry into Malaysia the old approach of fomenting class hatred and the class struggle, then we shall he carrying into the new Malaysia the disease from the old, and instead of producing more jobs and a better climate, we will simply produce more suffering for the have-nots. In fact in Sabah, North Borneo, the leaders are scared of the people from Singapore. They say, "You fellows are such trouble makers that we do not want you here." Sir, they are short of labour and we have plenty of unemployed in Singapore, and yet they do not want the unemployed of Singapore because of the poison that has been put into their hearts, minds and souls. Some people may say that I am being idealistic, but let us look back to the period in 1946 to 1948 in Malaya. There was then a conflict of two principles. There were some who said that the Chinese in Malaya must be organised to oppose the Malays, and there were others who said that the Malays in Malaya must be organised to oppose the Chinese. That was confrontation, Sir. There were others who said, however, that the Chinese in Malaya must be organised to co-operate with the Malays to build something better for Malaya, a new nation for Malaya, and we are glad to say that there were among the leaders of the Malays those who said that the Malays must be organised to co-operate with the Chinese and the other non-Malays to build something better. I am glad that those leaders who believed not in confrontation but co-operation, with no thought of stabbing their partners in the hack, won the day. Therefore, Malaya today is able to rejoice in having a country where there is racial harmony, where there is a genuine spirit of co-operation. Malaysia is only an extension of that spirit of co-operation. To me, that is only something symbolic of what the United Nations should be in the world. It is something of which Indonesia need not be afraid. If in Malaysia we organise to co-operate with one another, and we are prepared to co-operate with Indonesia, with the Philippines, with Thailand, and with the other nations of the world, we are not a danger to the others. We will only he too happy to produce the right climate. We shall eventually see greater world peace and greater world unity. Sir, this is something altogether new for my colleagues in the P.A.P. and in the Barisan, but I do appeal to them, for the sake of Malaysia, to try this new approach. Sir, let me now come to more mundane subject and congratulate the Minister for Finance on having become a successful State capitalist. He has been able to report a great increase in the financial reserves of the State - over $200 million. At this point, however, we must become conscious of a duty that has not been completely fulfilled - that a small portion of that money was accumulated under the misapprehension that the country was facing a serious deficit in 1959. It has since turned out that there was a surplus in 1959, and a bigger surplus in 1960, and there has been a surplus every year since then, as was the case even before 1959. So, naturally, the question arises, if the P.A.P. Government are good employers and believe in the integrity of honest employers, should they not now fully restore the pay cuts deducted in 1959? And they have tremendous resources now. This has now become conscience money. That amount wrongfully deducted belongs to the rightful owners - the civil servants now under the care of the P.A.P. and the refund can be done in a way without damaging the economy of the country. Sir, in the field of education I am glad that the Government has been able to build enough schools to admit all the Primary I pupils. I am glad also that the compulsory six-day week, a very controversial issue, has been satisfactorily settled and many parents and children have been made happy thereby without the examination results being adversely affected. We have heard also that there has been a rapid increase in enrolment in the schools, but the Minister for Education has admitted that there has been some sacrifice in regard to quality. In many schools parents are frustrated because there have been too many failures. I trust the Government in the coming months will carefully look into this aspect of education to improve on the quality and not concentrate on quantity alone. Sir, I have before me here a copy of a Singapore Government Press statement issued on 21st March, 1963. It begins with the following words: "As the result of the Prime Minister's visits to the rural constituencies of Singapore." I repeat, Sir: "As the result of the Prime Minister's visits to the rural constituencies of Singapore, an extensive rural electrification programme has been prepared so that the wishes of the kampong dwellers for electricity in their houses will come true." Sir, if this report is accurate and the inference is accurate, the implication then is that if the rural dwellers want to have any improvement in their kampongs, they must wait until the Prime Minister has visited them, and if the Prime Minister does not visit them, they will miss their share of the $30 million Development Fund that is going to be spent in the rural areas. Further - and this is a more serious implication - if the constituents in any particular division are not willing to welcome the Prime Minister or are against the Party in power, then they will be deprived of what would have been their share of this Development Fund. It is also unfortunate, Sir, that the Prime Minister is making visits in 1963 so near election time. People in Singapore are talking about it and saying that the Prime Minister is going round campaigning for the next elections, using his position and using the Development Fund. I hope the Prime Minister will give us an assurance that even in the constituencies that he may not be able to visit, if there is a real need and the need is brought to his notice or the notice of other Ministers, it will be given the same consideration as requests coming from constituencies which the Prime Minister has visited.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the amendment proposed by the Member for Queenstown and the Member for Upper Serangoon is in two parts. The first part alleges that the Government has failed to implement its election pledges, and the second part that Government should ascertain the views -of the people in regard to their constitutional future. I should like to deal with the second part first. There are people who try to forget facts that prove uncomfortable and unpleasant to them. However, we will not allow them to forget that the people of Singapore have already decided on their constitutional future, i.e. merger with the Federation of Malaya on the basis of White Paper Command No. 33 of 1961. Over 70 per cent of the people of Singapore voted for merger with the Federation on the basis of the White Paper. This is the verdict of the people. It is final and conclusive. The fact is that the two Members, in whose names the amendment stands, have some difficulty in finding matters on which to join issue with us, and perforce they must rake up old ones that have already been settled. As regards the charge that the Government has failed to implement its election pledges, what does it really mean? Everyone knows full well that the Government has carried out its election pledges wherever it is humanly possible. In many instances these pledges have been overfulfilled and in others new services, amenities and facilities have been made available for the people of Singapore. Let us take the field of housing. The Member for Queenstown, unless he chooses to go about with his eyes closed, can see in his very own constituency the housing units that we are building in increasing numbers day-by day. In just over three years, the Housing and Development Board has built 21,232 units against 23,019 units built by the Singapore Improvement Trust in the 32 years of its existence. In 1962 alone, a total of 12,230 units were completed as against the target figure of 9,735 units laid down in the State Development Plan. In other words, the achievement of public housing has exceeded the target figure by almost 25 per cent. We have pledged to build more low-cost housing for the poorer classes and, in this respect, with a dynamic and vigorous Housing and Development Board, the target achieved has exceeded all expectations. Sir, the present Government inherited from the previous Singapore Improvement Trust a waiting list of 13,000 families on the housing register. If we took the rate of construction of the S.I.T. in post-war years of 1,700 units per year, some of these families would have to wait for five to eight years to get housing accommodation. Now, due to the success of the Government's housing development programme, almost all the 13,000 families on the waiting list in 1959 have been housed, in addition to a further 8,000 families who have newly registered. Altogether about 21,000 families of the lower income group have obtained low-cost housing from the development programme of the present Government. Yet the Member for Queenstown was doing his best to belittle the achievement of the Government in this respect. Priority in allocation of public housing is based on the points system. The Government is now able to relax the qualification for registration and gradually bring the benefit of public housing to a wider range of families in Singapore. During the S.I.T. period, five persons was the minimum number required for public housing, but the Housing and Development Board is now able to reduce this number to four persons for Queenstown and to three persons for the one-room $20 flats. Another relaxation has been made on the qualifications to allow grown-up brothers and sisters to be included in the family unit. Sir, we have now reached the stage where any family, who has the necessary qualifications and is not particular about the choice of locality and the height of the floors, can obtain accommodation in less than a month after registration. In fact, one of the odd results of the rapid rate of building, which has smashed the backbone of the housing problem, is that people are now becoming choosey as to the locality and height of floors on which they wish to have accommodation. There have been many cases where a family has been offered and rejected accommodation several times not because they cannot afford the rent but because of the locality or the height of the floor. Compare this with the old days of the S.I.T. when the building rate was 1,700 units per year and the poor people were so desperately in need of accommodation that they grasped with eagerness any accommodation offered to them in any locality on any floor! Truly we have moved forward compared with those days. Had it not been for the obstruction and intimidation of the Barisan fellow-travellers in the Rural Residents Association and the Country People's Association, there would have been even more houses built for the poorer people. Thus, by their very actions, these so-called champions of the people are slowing down the progress of providing more law-cost homes for the lower income people. While we have been pressing ahead with the housing development, we have not forgotten the social amenities that are necessary for the people in these housing estates. As an illustration, I would like to take Queenstown which is our largest estate. Our plans are to build a total of 17,500 units to house 150,000 people. 11,000 units have been completed, and 6,000 more are under construction. There are six shopping centres: three have been built and the other three will be completed this year. Two cinemas are under construction. A large Polyclinic was completed and opened early this year. In addition to the community centre already built, we will be building three more. Of the five markets planned, three have been completed. A police station is being constructed and there are plans to build a post office. Many children's play grounds are scattered over the estate and there is a provision for a 13-acre public park. Of course, there are schools for the children's education. In addition to five primary schools and three secondary schools that are now functioning, we are going to build three more primary and four secondary schools. We have solved the housing problem to such an extent that we are now able to devote our attention to the much bigger problem of the city area re-development. We know that, in the city area alone, there are some half a million people living in very congested, unhealthy and terribly rickety old houses. For various reasons, many of them prefer to stay in the city area rather than apply for public housing on the outskirts of the town. A start has been made in the Cantonment Road area. Work will start later in the Sumbawa Road area. We realise this task is one of tremendous magnitude but the prospects of a revitalised city worthy of our State is an exciting one. We are pressing ahead with the project. I should like now to mention briefly the various other construction projects which the Government has carried out and will continue to carry out for the benefit of the people. Let me take flood alleviation works. Singapore is generally a low lying country. When heavy rains coincide with high tides, the low lying areas are subject to flooding. The rapid increase in building activities and levelling of hills increase the rate of run-off and make flood control quite a difficult problem. In some cases, these alleviation works prevent damage to properties and farms and, in others, reduce inconvenience to the public. Work on the $3 million Ulu Pandan Flood Alleviation Scheme is proceeding under full steam. This scheme envisages the reversal of flow, diverting water from the area near Queen's Circus towards the west, instead of towards the east as at present. The triple culvert near Tanglin Halt industrial estate was completed in 1962. When the whole scheme is completed, drainage in the Redhill, Alexandra Road and Queenstown area will be very much improved and the danger of floods occurring there will be greatly reduced. The last drain in the Radin Mas area is now almost completed. This will benefit the residents in the low-lying areas in Alexandra Road. During 1962, the concrete drain between Bartley and MacPherson Roads was completed. This year, a further stretch of drain towards Paya Lebar Road will be constructed. Drainage in the low-lying kampong between Bartley Road and Paya Lebar Road will be greatly improved. The drainage works from Mandai Road to Woodlands Road and the scheme at the 5th milestone at Pasir Panjang Road is now almost completed. Work will begin soon on the Chong Pang Village drain at Sembawang. This year, the Government will concentrate on the concrete lining of the important canals, such as the Kallang, Geylang, Rochore and Alexandra Canals. Concrete lining will not only improve the water flow but also facilitate cleansing and maintenance of these canals. The total expenditure on flood alleviation under the Four-Year Plan will amount to $10 million. Sir, in carrying out construction of more houses, schools, clinics, roads, shopping centres and flood alleviation schemes, more and more workers are required. Already thousands and thousands in the rank of the unemployed are finding gainful employment. Yet the Member for Queenstown and other Opposition Members allege that the Government has not tried to tackle the question of unemployment. I am quite sure they are not in their right senses. In the field of animal husbandry, agriculture and fisheries, we have provided services and we will provide even more services as we go on. The fact that we have a healthy and vigorous export trade in chickens and eggs, and to a lesser degree in pigs because of restrictions, bear testimony to the efforts of the Government in providing more and better services for our people in the rural areas. Protection against ranikhet disease today is no longer confined to the adult birds but also extended to day-old chicks. Thus, we render comprehensive protection against poultry diseases. At present, more than 15,000 day-old chicks amid 30,000 adult poultry are vaccinated by Government every day. In 1962 alone, a total of 11� million chickens were vaccinated against ranikhet disease as compared with 6.2 million chickens vaccinated in 1958 and 6.7 million in 1959. We have extended the stud boar service to provide good boars and to improve the strains of pigs produced by our farmers. Now we even have artificial insemination for pigs. Thus many more farmers can receive the benefits of having good pig strains. Apart from Japan, Russia, Norway and one or two other European countries which have already been using artificial insemination techniques in the breedings of pigs, the introduction of artificial insemination service for pigs on a commercial scale here makes Singapore the first tropical country in Asia to adopt this modern scientific technique in pig breeding on an extensive scale, apart from Japan which is a temperate country. With this service the farmers not only are able to obtain good stock, to produce good piglings, but also save a great deal of time and money by simply telephoning the Artificial Insemination Unit which will immediately send out teams to carry out the services on their farms. We have gone beyond our election pledges by building three veterinary extension centres in the rural areas. Two more are under construction. Each of these centres has a veterinary surgeon, a team of assistants permanently stationed in the areas to serve the farmers in that particular locality. We have brought to the farmers a service for the sale of veterinary drugs at cost on their very doorsteps. Farmers realising the benefit of the services are now increasing their purchase of drugs for use under the guidance of our veterinary officers. For example, in 1961 sales of such drugs totalled $64 000, and by 1962 sales have increased to $80,000. We are continuing research in the production of improved chicks and piglings for distribution to farmers. Last year 47,000 day-old chicks of improved straw were sold at the specially reduced price of 20 cents each. At the same time, 425 piglings were also distributed at $1 per katty. These improved breeds of piglings and chicks are produced from carefully selected stock after considerable research work and are for the purpose of upgrading and improving the quality of livestock in Singapore. The House is aware of the Government's effort to maintain outlets for the produce of our farmers in the Federation. The successful result of our representations to the Federation Government in the matter of restrictions on our chickens and eggs is only an example of our efforts in this direction. For about two months, the Prime Minister, the Minister for Finance and I paid visits to the Federal capital to seek a satisfactory solution to the problem of restrictions. Our farmers are aware that during the later stage of negotiations, the Singapore Government had to resort to restricting the import of vegetables and fish from the Federation. These endeavours have proved successful. Since the 15th February this year, our chickens and eggs can move freely into the Federation without payment of any licence fee. The free movement of piglings and sows will continue. I have been assured by the Federation Minister for Agriculture and Co-operatives that, after merger, there will he completely free movement for all Singapore-produced pigs, be they pigs for breeding or for slaughter. I am glad to say that chicken and egg prices which were depressed when the Federation restriction came into force have now recovered. Sir, you will remember that I reported to this Assembly sometime ago that the Government initiated a scheme in the Southern Islands to distribute goats free of charge in order to assist the Malay fishermen there to diversify their sources of income and to improve their livelihood. The goats which have been distributed have been successfully reared by the Malay fishermen and a number of kids born to these goats have been returned to the Government for further distribution to other Malay fishermen. The male goats - the Member for Geylang Serai mentioned earlier - helped to make this possible. In order to increase the efficiency of animal disease control, the Government will establish a veterinary diagnostic laboratory to carry out investigation of various livestock diseases in the State, so that control measures can be instituted against such diseases. These measures will reduce farmers' losses from diseases and thereby assist them directly to obtain better returns for their labour. We will introduce a meat inspection service and provide new slaughter facilities of a high standard so that meat and meat products produced in the State can be exported to other countries. Towards this end, plans for the building of a new modern abattoir are being finalised. Once the new abattoir is established, it will not only encourage the food processing industries in the State but will also benefit our farmers by providing them with a ready market for their products. In the field of agriculture, we are continuing our tractor service to provide our farmers with cheap service at $20 per acre. We are helping our farmers to combat the many agricultural pests encountered in vegetable and food production by carrying out the plant protection service whereby farmers can ask the Government to spray their vegetables and fruits with insecticides at low cost. We will also be making available to the farmers a number of insecticides and fungicides at low prices. Following a series of successful experiments on fertilizers, the Government is selling a cheap and yet effective fertilizer mixture to the farmers. This fertilizer mixture has been very well received. The farmers are purchasing increasing quantities. At present, we are also studying the possibility of supplying farmers with improved vegetable seeds as well as fruit planting materials such as rambutan bud grafts and flower cuttings in order to assist them to obtain a higher income. Recently, we successfully reclaimed some agricultural land, a fish pond and a prawn pond at Sungei Poyang. The reclaimed land is now under process of desalinisation and, when completed in the next few months, will be used for resettlement purposes. The Government is initiating a pilot scheme in this area to help organise farmers and fishermen to form a primary produce co-operative society for the purpose of running the ponds and fish ponds and to market the produce of the farms as well. The inshore fishing areas of Singapore are already fished to the limit, and it is now necessary for our fishermen to look towards the offshore areas for extension of activities. The Government has had some success in encouraging some private companies to extend offshore deep-sea operations and to undertake the training of local personnel. We are also considering the establishment of an offshore fishery school. We have established a primary production extension service for the purpose of solving specific problems and difficulties encountered by the farmers and fishermen. Field officers bring back from the rural areas the problems faced by farmers and fishermen. Technical officers will then devise solutions to overcome the specific difficulties. The extension service will also be engaged in the dissemination of scientific and technical information to the farmers. Towards this end, films are being produced on the subjects of agriculture, animal husbandry and fisheries for showing to farmers in the villages in the evening, and thus bring to them the latest developments and improvements in farming and fishing techniques. With the establishment of a large number of community centres in the rural areas, primary production services are being provided through these centres, bringing these services to the very doorsteps of the farmers. If I may say so, the extremely wide range and comprehensive nature of services that we bring to our farmers and fishermen in the rural areas is without parallel in South-East Asia. As I said, Sir, everyone in Singapore knows that the Government has carried out its election pledges wherever it is humanly possible. In many instances, these pledges have been over-fulfilled and, in others, new services, amenities and facilities have been made available for the people in the city as well as the rural area.

No Member wishes to speak?

Mr Speaker, Sir, I was expecting the Opposition to speak after we have spoken. Mr Speaker, Sir, we have heard a great deal from the Member for Queenstown, the Member for Thomson and also the Member for Hong Lim. I find there was nothing constructive at all in their speeches and some of them were actually very destructive. The Member for Hong Lim must be still day-dreaming of his Ong Eng Guan empire during the City Council days when he mentioned that not one single constituency is a safe seat for the P.A.P. Only a very arrogant man will dare make such a daring statement, and I believe that this type of statement was made in desperation. If the Member for Hong Lim is not careful, he may even lose his own seat in 1964. I will come to the Member for Queenstown who seemed to be indulging in fanciful imagination. First of all, not only were his allegations false but some of them were even factually groundless. He mentioned the National Theatre. Sir. He alleged that the Government was paying overtime to rush the theatre into completion. He forgets the simple procedure that once a contract is let out, it is up to the contractor to complete the job when he has accepted the date. He alleged that a lot of pressure was put on the builders to complete the theatre. I would remind him to go back and read some of the newspapers about the contract that had been given for the building of the National Theatre, which was built to commemorate the attainment of self-government of Singapore. The theatre was made possible because of the generous contributions of the people of Singapore and with the co-operation of the Government. Tenders were called and we gave a definite date for the completion of the theatre. As Chairman of the theatre, Sir, it is my duty to see that the theatre be completed as soon as possible so that the people who have contributed the money would not be disappointed. Singapore is a place of efficiency. We want things done quickly, and I am surprised that the Member for Queenstown would like to see a delay in the completion of the National Theatre. Tenders were let out, as I have said, and the target was the end of May. Not a single cent of overtime was paid to the workers or the contractors who have so kindly lived up to the trust to try to finish the theatre by the end of May, or at the latest in June. After that, we hope to have the South-East Asia cultural festival. Already many countries in South-East Asia, and even from India and Pakistan, have agreed to participate in this grand festival, which is the first of its kind in South-East Asia. Mr Speaker, Sir, the Member for Queenstown also mentioned T.V. He alleged that the purpose of putting up T.V. was to do P.A.P. propaganda. It is surprising that such a wonderful propaganda machine is not being used by the Member for Queenstown. He has been repeatedly invited not only over the radio, but on T.V. We invite him to T.V. and yet he fights shy of coming. If it is a useful propaganda machine, he should make good use of it. Coming to education, Sir, he has alleged that the recent arrests have something to do with the Torch campaign which was organised by their supporters. The Torch campaign, as it was claimed, was to encourage and persuade the people of Singapore to study their mother tongue. If it is the purpose of the campaign to promote the study of the mother tongue. We are all for it. But, Sir, as you know, we have had experience of such campaigns which, in fact, have been engineered by the Communist-inspired Barisan Sosialis for the purpose of political agitation. It is quite clear that the so-called Torch campaign was a flop, because you can see that less than three dozen people attended the opening of the campaign. The Member for Queenstown also mentioned discrimination by the Government in our education policy. He seemed to be perturbed at the decrease of school children in Chinese schools. I agree with him, Sir, that it is a fact that there has been a decrease in the number of Singapore children going to Chinese schools. In fact, responsible Chinese educationists in Singapore, and particularly the Chinese Chamber of Commerce, have been very much concerned and perturbed at this decrease. The Chamber has been receiving memoranda from various educational bodies to find out the actual reason for this decrease of pupils in Chinese schools. I would like the Member for Queenstown to read some of the memoranda submitted by the Singapore Chinese Teachers Union, which represent the majority of the Chinese teachers, as well as the Singapore Students/Parents Association, representing the majority of the parents of Chinese school children. In the memoranda submitted to the Chinese Chamber of Commerce separately, they pointed out that one of then main reasons for the decrease of school children in Chinese schools was political interference and agitation in Chinese schools, particularly the middle schools. I would go further and say that this agitation was engineered by the Barisan Sosialis. All law-abiding Chinese students would like an atmosphere of calm without political interference from political Parties so that they can concentrate on their studies and not indulge in examination boycotts and other activities which leave them nowhere particularly concerning their own future. If political Parties can leave the students alone to concentrate on their studies, we will have a better future for the future generation of this country. The Member for Queenstown also referred to Nanyang University. He said, "What have you done to solve the issue?" The Member for Serangoon Gardens as well as the Member for Upper Serangoon were members of the Nanyang University Liaison Committee of which I was also a member, and they are fully aware of the actual reason why the talks came to a deadlock. It is no use asking the reason when they know what was the reason. We have tried our best, Sir, with sincerity and a spirit of compromise to settle the issue, but an issue can only be settled if there is good-will and sincerity on both sides. The Minister for Education has stressed in his recent speech at the Nantah Convocation that the Government's offer of financial aid to Nantah, that is, the same equal treatment for Nantah as we are giving to the University of Singapore, still stands. The door is still open, subject to a reorganisation of the University according to the Nanyang University Review Committee. We want the University to be run by people who know about universities. Sir, the Member for Queenstown also mentioned about the unity of the people. He lashed out that we have split the unity of the people because of Malaysia. Mr Speaker, Sir, he is very fond of saying "unity", "democracy", but his argument is that the majority of the people should follow the minority, then only will you have unity. We held a referendum where more than 75 per cent voted for the White Paper and less than 25 per cent cast blank votes. And now he is accusing us of splitting the unity of the people of Singapore, just because the 75 per cent did not toe the line of the 25 per cent. That is his argument and his logic, which is only understandable to the Barisan Sosialis stooges. Sir, I now come to the things that we have done in the field of education. I would like to stress that I find that the speakers, particularly the Member for Hong Lim and those Members in the Barisan, have never mentioned this time that the P.A.P. have done nothing. I remember that on previous occasions they were always fond of saying, "What have you done? The P.A.P. has done nothing for the people of Singapore." It is significant, Sir, that in this Session such accusations have ceased. At least they now recognise that we have done some things, if not many things, for the people of Singapore. It is for the people of Singapore, and particularly the Member for Queenstown, to see for themselves the houses that have sprung up. We are a Government that believes in action, and not in empty slogans. Talking of democracy, if there is no democracy, the Members opposite will not be able to speak so freely in this House. They have been allowed to hold protest meetings, and even intimidation in some cases. Our Opposition Members are fond of talking of democracy. Democracy has not succeeded well in South-East Asia because Opposition leaders have abused it. They do not realise that it is the duty of a good Opposition to give constructive criticisms and not just destructive criticisms. As we know, in a real democracy the Opposition should be able to substantiate what they have accused, if they say that the Government has done this or done that. They must be in a position to hold power to replace the Government and to carry out what they have said, and not just make empty and destructive accusations. Sir, during the past three years substantial progress has been made in the field of education. The education pyramid is fast taking shape. Firstly, the defects in the primary base have been put right. In the past, more than 4,000 pupils who were registered in 1958 for Primary I admissions in 1959 could not be admitted to schools. The picture is, however, very different today. There is a place for every child who registers for admission in primary schools. Only a few hundred (i.e., less than 1� per cent) out of an annual intake of nearly 60,000 who insist that they must be admitted to a particular school will have to wait for another year before they can gain admission. With the recent decision to provide six years of free primary education for children between the ages of 6 and 14, we see the welcome move of many poor parents, especially those living in rural areas, sending their over-age children to school; whereas in the past they probably withheld their children from attending school because they would have to pay a monthly fee of $2.

50. Next, the stoppage of automatic promotion in 1959 has resulted in a general improvement in the work of schools over the past three years. The improved results of successful primary school leaving examinations testify to this welcome trend. Secondly, once the primary base of education is firmly established, we have to expand greatly the secondary sector of our education pyramid. One step taken in the right direction was the institution of post-primary classes in 1960, which are to become secondary vocational classes next year, when we expect workshop blocks to be completed and equipment installed. Another decision also taken in 1960 was to have all secondary schools running on a two-session basis. As a result, we have the reasonably happy situation today in that our secondary school enrolment is nearly 90 per cent higher than that obtained in 1959, all within the short space of three years. The rapid expansion in secondary school enrolment would not have been possible without taking simultaneous action in the large-scale employment of University graduates from the University of Singapore and Nanyang University, together with the successful implementation of a crash project scheme of one year special in-service professional training for nearly 300 graduates in two-language media by our Teachers' Training College during the two years 1960-62. Although professional training of University graduates has been turned over to the School of Education in the University of Singapore at its request, where a two-year part-time course is being conducted in two-language media since the last academic year, the valuable experience gained by the professional training of University graduates in the T.T.C. from 1960-62 can always be reinstituted if need be. The fact that more than 5,000 adults, many of whom are our teachers, have attained fairly good standards in public examinations in the National Language conducted by the Ministry of Education during the last three years is indeed a creditable achievement, which speaks well of the sincerity and earnestness of our people to learn and propagate the use of our National Language. Whilst we shall in every possible way encourage the study and use of our National Language, we should at the same time intensify the teaching and study of a second language in our schools. This is the quickest way to break down language barriers which are fast tumbling down in our many new integrated schools. For this year's Primary School Leaving Examination, the second language paper will count as one unit like other subjects such as Mathematics or Science. That is why we have decided that classes for a second language will be conducted for as few as 15 pupils, whereas formerly the minimum requirement was 25 pupils, bearing in mind that a normal class can have as many as 44 pupils. This new formula will mean employment of more teachers for second language teaching. For example, more teachers of Chinese language in English medium schools will be required, and so on. Sir, I have already indicated earlier the valuable part played by our T.T.C. in successfully implementing the crash project for the professional training of University graduates in a two-language media during the years 1960-62. This year our T.T.C. will launch two new courses. First, a two-year in-service course for teachers with H.S.C. qualifications. For the first time, teachers with H.S.C. qualifications are being recruited on an enhanced salary scale of $225 per month. This is in keeping with their higher qualifications as compared with teachers with School Certificate qualifications who are recruited at $152. They will also undergo a shorter course of training, namely two years instead of three years previously. On completion they will be placed on a salary bracket of $295 instead of $240 as hitherto. Secondly, special two-year upgrading courses for Malay teachers with qualifications of Sultan Idris Training College Certificate and Malay Women Training College Certificate will be conducted. It is perhaps timely for me to express my highest appreciation of the important contributions made by our Malay teachers in their dedication in the task of nation building, their strenuous efforts in propagating the study of our National Language, and at the same time their resolve and determination to improve their own professional standards. This indeed augurs well for the future of our Malay schools and for the rapid development of our National Language in other language media schools. Likewise our Adult Education Board has during the course of the last three years extended its activities in many ways. One prominent extension was in the field of secondary evening classes which have an enrolment of about 5,000. The Board has initiated a number of successful recreational courses as well, and plans are in hand for the institution of workers' extension classes amongst trade union members in the near future. In our efforts to expand vocational and technical education, we are fortunate to receive valuable assistance from U.N.E.S.C.O. and from friendly countries like Australia, New Zealand, Japan and Canada in the way of provision of valuable equipment, technical teachers, training specialists and training places in specialised fields such as machining, welding, arts and crafts, educational and vocational guidance and the organisation of practical examinations of technical subjects. Special mention must be made of technical equipment estimated at nearly $2 million which the Australian Government has kindly agreed to donate for equipping four secondary technical schools and 12 secondary vocational schools. In addition, equipment to the value of about $200,000 has been received from the Canadian Government for our new vocational institute, the former Balestier Junior Trade School, where craft training at present being conducted at the Singapore Polytechnic will be centralised. I am sure Members of the House will join me in expressing our deepest gratitude to the peoples and governments of Australia and Canada for their generous contributions of technical assistance at this important stage of our educational development to keep pace with the rapid industrialisation of Singapore. Yet another interesting development in the field of higher education in Singapore is the emergence of the Ngee Ann College at Clemenceau Avenue. This is a private institution and will use Chinese as the chief language medium of instruction. The first 400 students have already been selected and it is understood that the official opening of Singapore's fifth institution of higher learning will be held sometime next month. I am sure all of us in this House and the people of Singapore will join us in wishing the sponsors all success in their endeavours. In conclusion, Sir, may I briefly refer to the development and construction of schools which, as indicated in the speech of the Yang di-Pertuan Negara, is expected to reach $10 million this year. During the last three and a half years, a total of 28 new schools have been completed - 21 primary and seven secondary - with 610 classrooms and accommodation for more than 50,000 pupils. In addition, there is a total of another 20 schools at various stages of construction - nine primary and 11 secondary. They should be completed in time for next year's admissions, providing an additional 425 classrooms or accommodation for more than 35,000 pupils. In other words, by the end of this year, we would have completed the building of 48 new schools with 1,035 classrooms and accommodation for no less than 85,000 pupils. It will be noted that schools are built throughout the island from rural type single-storey schools to 10-storey skyscraper schools in congested city areas with the aim of serving the needs of our people. 11.04 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, when merger and Malaysia come into being by August 1963, defence and internal security will be the responsibility of the Central Government and the Singapore Police Force and the Singapore Military Forces will be transferred to the Central Government. In the meantime, the Government will continue to maintain the high standards and efficiency of the Singapore Police Force and the Singapore Military Forces, and proceed with their necessary expansion and reorganisation to fit them for the increasingly vital and important internal security role they would have to play in the emergent Malaysia. Law and order will be effectively maintained and the good relationship between the Singapore Police Force and the people will be developed and built up by every means possible. Continued pressure against organised crime, in particular against secret society gangsters, has successfully reduced the incidence of this type of crime. This is only possible because the leadership of the Government do not run around with the criminal elements soliciting their support in political campaigns. Other factors may be attributed to: (a) A greater degree of co-operation from the people and confidence in the integrity of the Government and the police which resulted in better information and more accurate intelligence concerning criminal gangsters; (b) A more intelligent and effective application of the Criminal Law (Temporary Provisions) Ordinance; and (c) More effective preventive action. In fact, so far as the secret society gangsters are concerned, there has been a marked decline in serious crimes, namely murders, gang fights, riotings, assaults, extortions and so forth. For instance, in 1962, there were 10 murders as against 18, 10 and 17 in 1961, 1960 and 1959 respectively. Whilst there was only one case of kidnapping for ransom in 1962, there were 4, 13 and 4 cases for 1961, 1960 and 1959 respectively. The figures for extortions have also been improving very steadily over the past two years, as evidenced by the fact that there were 415 such cases in 1962 as compared with 467 in 1961 and 730 in 1960, while the incidence of rioting and assaults by secret society members has also shown a definite decrease in that there were 207 such cases in 1962 as against 211 for 1961, 239 for 1960, and 402 for 1959. With regard to crime in general, comparative figures in respect of seizable offences for the last three years are as follows: 17,500 cases in 1959 17,700 cases in 1960 17,200 cases in 1961 15,700 cases in 1962. Ten vigilante corps consisting of members of the public living in the rural areas who are anxious to assist in the maintenance of law and order have already been formed. The Police Cadet Corps which was established in schools in 1961 has increased in strength from 100 to 560, and will be further increased in accordance with planned development to 620 members for 1963. There is today a significant and heartening development in the relations of the Police Force with the people whom they serve, namely, the introduction of a new spirit of service tempered with friendliness and approachability, which I am happy to say has eliminated to a large extent the previous feelings of distrust and fear which members of the public used to have towards the police. Repeated requests have been made by the residents in Queenstown, including the Member for Queenstown, over the last two years for a new police station to be built somewhere nearer to Queenstown, a satellite town which will eventually cover an area of 600 acres With 17,500 flats and schools, markets, clinics and shops and a population of 150,000. The nearest police station at present is the Tanjong Pagar Police Station which is too far away and inconvenient to the people. In view of the rapid development of Queenstown and the dense con centration of population, it was found desirable to site the new station here in order to serve the needs of the community in the area. The proposal was included in the Four-Year Development Plan in 1961, and I am happy to report that construction of this new $400,000 divisional police station has commenced early last month and is due to be completed in August this year. The construction of the new police station here will serve to further the good relation between the police and the people in that the police personnel who will be working in the new station will themselves be living in the Housing and Development flats among the people. Their wives and children will be going to the same markets and attending the same schools as the wives and children of the people living in the area. This close social contact will build up a two-way traffic of understanding and co-operation. This living together of police personnel among the people is a new trend which it is hoped will be developed in other housing estates that will be built in the future. The raising of the 2nd Battalion of the Singapore Infantry Regiment is proceeding apace, and will be up to full strength by June this year. There will, therefore, be two regular battalions of the Singapore Infantry Regiment fully operational in addition to a number of ancillary units whose regular elements, together with those of the staff at Headquarters, have also been raised so as to give the Singapore Military Forces a balanced force. No government in the past have been so progressive, bold and imaginative in carrying out prison reforms along modern lines of penalogical thinking as the P.A.P. Government, and to that end, has established a newly organised prison rehabilitation service which would include staff with diplomas in social studies from the University. The Pulau Senang Settlement Scheme for the rehabilitation of secret society gangsters, in an atmosphere of community living, without security walls and fence, has continued to flourish and expand, and has received wide acclaim in its role as the Government's primary experiment in penal research. So far, 375 persons have successfully been rehabilitated at Pulau Senang and released. The follow-up scheme of a Work Brigade Camp at Jalan Damai for detainees released from Pulau Senang, as the last lap in their progress towards rehabilitation, has also been very successful. Mr Speaker, Sir, the modern dormitory system at Ulu Bedok Reformatory Training Centre for young offenders has, since its introduction in 1961, been acclaimed by penal experts visiting the State as one of the most progressive of its kind in this part of the world. It is in this same humane spirit and progressive outlook towards criminals that the Government has now taken another bold stride forward to demolish the outmoded Outram Road Prison and to construct new prison accommodation in Changi. As you know, Sir, the Outram Road Prison is over a hundred years old and undoubtedly falls far short of the standards expected of modern prisons. Because of its age, it is not amenable to renovations. Demolition of some of the existing prison premises within the Outram Road Prison has already started, while the Reformative Training Centre at Pearl's Bank has already been evacuated, awaiting demolition at any time. In its place, new up-to-date accommodation will be provided at Changi Prison and the Medium Security Prison at Changi Camp based on the modern dormitory pattern at Ulu Bedok. Extensive structural alterations in Changi have already been put in hand, while new buildings which will provide the necessary extension and up-to-date improvement in prison accommodation in Changi to replace the outmoded Outram Prison are being carried out. When the new buildings are completed early in 1964, the prison inmates at Outram Road Prison, including the political detainees, will be able to live in more congenial surroundings, with more fresh air and sunshine. In addition to improving the prison accommodation, the prison industries - an essential feature in the rehabilitation process of prisoners - are also expanding. Construction of the new $800,000 prison laundry, capable of catering for all Government requirements, will be completed next month, and a further 100 prisoners at a time will have the chance to learn a new trade. In the past, social welfare problems have been dealt with on a patch-work basis. The approach of the present Government is different. We recognise that the basic problems are unemployment, over-crowding and shortage of proper housing, lack of facilities for healthy recreation, and lack of educational opportunities. To tackle these problems at their root, a positive and imaginative approach is necessary. Hence, we have chosen to concentrate our major exertions on industrialisation, merger and Malaysia (which will speed up industrialisation), on the rapid development of housing, on the development of community centres, parks and youth camps, improving and increasing the educational facilities available to the people. The more people get jobs, have proper houses to stay in and places of healthy recreation to go to, and have schools for their children to attend, the less will be the cases needing social welfare help. Positive social uplift is always much better than defensive social welfare help. Nevertheless, for those that still need social welfare assistance. The present Government has both improved and extended the welfare facilities obtainable by the people. For example, a new creche has been opened last year in Mountbatten area and today working mothers in that neighbourhood are able to leave their young children in this creche in the morning before they go to work and collect them back in the evening on their way home. Besides this creche, two other creches are in the process of construction - one in the Bukit Ho Swee area, and the other in the Rochore area - both densely populated areas. A third creche is being built on the ground floor of the Housing and Development Board block of fiats in Cantonment Road, Tanjong Pagar. When ready, these three creches will together cater for nearly 500 babies and young children. At the other end of our social welfare service, from the cradle to the grave, we are not neglecting the welfare of the aged. Work has already begun on a large rural settlement for old people at a 30-acre site in Woodlands. When the first phase has been completed early next year. The settlement will house 300 homeless destitutes and old men and women. Apart from accommodation, there will be facilities for vegetable and flower gardening, animal husbandry, sheltered workshop employment, recreation and medical attention. The Government has also continued to provide assistance to victims of civil calamities. For instance, in the recent Bukit Ban Kee fire, which took a toll of approximately 2,000 fire victims, the Government stepped in immediately to look after the welfare of those made homeless. Within the short space of five days, the fire victims were housed in the Housing and Development Board flats at low rentals and close to their former place of residence. This is concrete evidence of the success of rapid and extensive social development achieved by the Government and reflects also the efficiency of the Social Welfare Service.

11.30 p.m. The rent subsidies scheme, in most cases at a ceiling rate of $35 per month, are being paid by the Government for three months. Besides Government relief, a Bukit Ban Kee Fire Relief Fund was set up to appeal for donations for the rehabilitation of the fire victims, and lo date. The total collected exceeds $70,000, the greater part of which has already been distributed in relief payments to the victims. When the present Government came to power in June 1959, it announced that statutory provisions for the protection of workers, such as payment of workers, such as payment of overtime wages, holiday pay, rest day pay, etc, had been evaded and that strong action would be taken to enforce those provisions. I am glad to say that, as a result of action taken in pursuance of this policy, widespread evasion of statutory obligations is now a thing of the past, and if it exists, it is almost negligible. The Labour Department up to date has recovered, through its Labour Inspectorate alone, a sum of almost half a million dollars and paid it over to the workers concerned. In most cases, the employers paid willingly after the officials of the department had explained the law. Further, when employers refused to, or would not, meet their legal obligations to their workmen, the workmen, encouraged by the pro-labour policy of the Government, and in many cases helped by their unions, took their claims to the two Labour Courts whose services are provided free of charge. One of these Courts was expressly set up by this Government to meet the sudden increase in the number of complaints, so that all claims could be dealt with expeditiously with as little delay and inconvenience to the workers as possible. As a result, from June 1959 up to date, the Labour Courts recovered a total sum of almost half a million dollars and paid it to the workers who came under the Labour Ordinance, the Clerks Employment Ordinance and the Shop Assistants Ordinance. It must also be mentioned that, during the same period, through the good offices of the Labour Courts, a sum of about $50,000 was recovered on behalf of domestic servants who did not fall under the above-mentioned Ordinances but who nevertheless sought the aid of the Labour Department. In accordance with the Government's declared policy, the building of a large centrally-situated Trade Union House took shape during the year. The piling work for the project, which will cost $4.15 million, began in August last year after a brief ceremony at which a worker selected by secret ballot drove the first pile. The building is expected to be completed by November 1964. It will be styled "The Singapore Conference Hall and Trade Union House." It will have all the facilities and amenities which such an institution should have, such as an auditorium for international conferences, a theatrete, flexible conference roofs, a reception hall and lounge, offices for trade unions, a research section and library, canteen facilities, etc. The building, when completed, will be an impressive symbol of the solidarity of all the genuine trade unions in the State. With the split in the trade union movement in 1961, anti-national elements stirred up industrial unrest with a view to sabotaging the Government's industrialisation programme and wrecking the economy of the State. There were 112 strikes and four lock-outs during the year - the highest ever recorded since 1956. The significant point to note about these stoppages is that 75 per cent of them occurred during the second half of the year, that is after the split in the trade union movement. From July onwards, industrial stoppages rose sharply and, for the last three months of the year. There was an average of 19 strikes per month. Further, a motion on this industrial unrest was introduced in the Assembly by the Member for Cairnhill and debated by the House. However, the Government that caters for the task of raising the standard of living of the workers and ensuring that the people receive a fair share of the fruits of industry, went about its duty of maintaining industrial peace with vigour and foresight. In the light of experience of working the Industrial Relations Ordinance, the Government has made a number of amendments to it, in order to achieve greater clarity and remove anomalies arising out of its application. It is provided, inter alia, that all negotiations on industrial matters shall be in accordance with the provisions of the Ordinance and penalties are provided for contravention thereof. This amendment was necessary because certain unions were holding negotiations outside the provisions of the Ordinance and thus defeating the intention behind the Ordinance. It is imperative, in the interests of industrial peace, that the machinery provided for the purpose of settling trade disputes should be followed strictly. I am glad to say that the labour situation during the past year has improved considerably. There was an appreciable decrease in the number of industrial stoppages and man-days lost. There were 88 industrial stoppages with 165,000 man-days lost last year as against 116 stoppages with 411,000 man-days lost in 1961. During the last three months there has been a total of only 9 stoppages. There was also an appreciable decrease in the number for trade disputes referred to the Department last year. There were, 1,064 trade disputes in 1962 as against 1,225 in 1961. In order to obviate any delay in the quick and speedy settlement of trade disputes submitted to arbitration and the certification of agreements, a second industrial Arbitration Court was set up in October last year. As a result of this today the backlog of cases has been considerably reduced. Last year the two Courts arbitrated 31 cases and certified 264 agreements, compared with nine cases and 121 agreements for the 1960-61 period. At the end of last month there were only 30 cases awaiting arbitration. One concrete manifestation of the Government's pro-labour policy has been the creation of the Labour Research Unit. Trade unionists have complained that while employers have excellent research facilities and qualified personnel at their disposal to help them with the presentation of their cases in the Arbitration Court, trade unions have been at a disadvantage. Trade unionists with the necessary experience and qualifications to help trade unions are few in number, and trade unions possess no adequate research facilities. The Government considered the representation of trade unions made through the National Trades Union Congress, and decided to set up a Labour Research Unit staffed by qualified economists, accountants and legal men. Nine trade union leaders have been seconded from their places of employment to serve as industrial officers with the Labour Research Unit. The functions of these industrial officers are to help trade unions with the formulation of their claims in negotiations with employers and with the presentation of union cases before the Industrial Arbitration Court. The Government has also requested the I.L.O. for the services of a research specialist to set up the research section of the Unit. Trade unions have majority representation on the Governing Board of this Unit. I may also state that the Government regards the Labour Research Unit as an independent body, not subject to any official control, and which exists primarily to serve the trade unions. In short, although the Government pays the piper, it is the trade unions who call the tune. The services of the Labour Research Unit are open to all trade unions, whatever their affiliations may be. So far, however, the S.A.T.U. group of unions have not cared to call on the services of this Unit. I need not labour the reasons for this. The pro-Communist leaders of the S.A.T.U. group cannot be expected to conduct research for the benefit of the workers, and the Labour Research Unit, from their point of view, is bad because it only does research to justify the claims of labour and maintains no connection with the Indonesian Communist Party. The most encouraging result of the Government's pro-labour policy has been the continuous defeats inflicted by the workers themselves on the pro-Communist leadership of the trade union movement. It is open knowledge that before the P.A.P. Government took office, pro-Communists in the trade unions had contrived to secure almost complete control over the non-Communist workers of Singapore and to use them not for the benefit of the workers but for the benefit of the Communist cause. Because of the undeniable pro-labour policy of the Government, the Communists have failed this time to bring the majority of workers in Singapore under their hegemony. For the first time in the last decade there exists in Singapore a vital and expanding democratic alternative to the Communist-controlled trade union movement. I do not think that the pro-Communists at the moment would dare to deny that they are rapidly losing their hold on the workers of Singapore. It is common knowledge that ever since the split in the trade union movement there has been a one-way traffic of workers of the pro-Communist S.A.T.U. group to the non-Communist camp. Up to the end of January this year, at least 37 branches involving more than 3,000 workers have shifted over from the S.A.T.U. group of unions to the democratic side. The process is continuing. These 37 branches are: (1) from the Singapore Business Houses Employees Union: (1) American President Lines. (2) The Business Systems. (3) Boustead & Co. Ltd. (4) Borneo Co. Ltd. (5) Caldbeck MacGregor. (6) Everett Steamship. (7) Harrisons Lister. (8) Hagemeyer. (9) Japan Air Lines. (10) May & Baker Ltd. (11) Overseas Corporation. (12) Scott & English. (13) Sandilands Buttery. (14) Lendrum. (15) Lindeteves-Jacoberg. (16) Maynard & Co. Ltd. and (2) from the Singapore Employees Union: (1) Fred Waterhouse. (2) Gleneagles Hospital. (3) Thornycroft. (4) Singapore Plywood. (5) Teck Heng.

On a point of order, Sir.

Point of order.

Is it the intention of the Government Minister to filibuster?

They are very important facts.

It is not a point of order at all.

Mr Deputy Speaker, I deliberately quoted the names of these companies because they are of considerable importance to the workers in these establishments and this is also to prove to the S.A.T.U. group in case they accuse the Government of spreading malicious rumours. (6) Tian Hup Transport. (7) Transport & Storage. (8) Fraser & Neave Ltd. (9) Cathay Organisation. (10) Cathay Hotel. (11) International Films. (12) Malayan Bitumen. (13) Hindhede Quarry. (14) Seiclene Steam Laundry. (15) Kah Kin Rubber Factory. (16) Singapore Baggage. (17) Thong Huat Co. (18) Yeo Hiap Seng. (19) Singapore Steam Laundry. (20) Wah Hong Manufacturing Co. (21) Seng Lee Tobacco Co. These are the 37 trade union branches that have left the pro-Communist S.A.T.U. group to join the democratic trade union movement. On the other hand, a decline in the fortunes of the S.A.T.U. group can be seen, apart from these 37, from the fact that at the time of its formation, the S.A.T.U. group claimed to have the support of 80 odd trade unions, but it could manage to get only 14 unions to issue a joint statement on the eve of the national referendum calling for blank votes. Let me tell the Barisan members why the eyes of the workers of Singapore have been opened and why it is that there is a general movement of workers away from them. In the first place, it is not possible for the pro-Communists to fool all the workers all the time. No amount of anti-Government propaganda will be able to convince the majority of the workers of Singapore that this Government is anti-labour. Our labour record is there for all to see and it is general knowledge that this Government has been responsible for introducing into Singapore the most progressive labour legislation anywhere in South-East Asia. Secondly, the workers of Singapore are able to see that the S.A.T.U. group of trade unions has, in fact, exploited them for pro-Communist anti-national purposes. Whenever the S.A.T.U. group of trade unions indulged in industrial action, their purpose was not to obtain benefits for the workers, but to convert every industrial action into a political campaign against the Government. As a result of the Communist handling of trade disputes, innocent workers found themselves embroiled not only with the employer but also with the law and the police. It is needless to say that this was precisely the strategy of the pro-communist S.A.T.U. leaders to ensure that the workers did find themselves so embroiled. On the other hand, the non-Communist trade unions of Singapore have also initiated industrial action, but they have always taken care to ensure that industrial disputes remained industrial in nature and were not converted into instruments of political action. The democratic trade unions have also had greater recourse to the conciliation machinery provided by the Labour Ministry and to the processes of arbitration. One of the major reasons why workers in increasing numbers are leaving the Communist fold is that they have discovered for themselves that the non-Communist labour movement, simply because of its intelligent and responsible attitude to trade disputes, has been able to secure much better benefits for the workers. Thirdly, the S.A.T.U. group are failing and will continue to fail for the good reason that workers are beginning to realise that the S.A.T.U. leaders are not genuine trade unionists but political prize fighters in the cause of foreign anti-Malaysian forces. The S.A.T.U. group will inevitably fail because the workers of Singapore cannot be expected to trust those who show a greater affinity to the Communists of Indonesia than to the progressive forces of Malaysian nationalism. It will not have escaped the attention of Members of this House and of the workers of Singapore that the S.A.T.U. group of trade unionists have not cared, so far, to publicly deny their sympathies with the Communist Party of Indonesia. I can assure the workers of Singapore that they will not get any such denial from S.A.T.U. for the good reason that the charges are true. One of the stock accusations of the pro-Communist S.A.T.U. group of trade unions is that the Government has failed to support the unification of the trade union movement. When the pro-Communists talked about unification of the trade union movement, they mean the control of the movement by the front agents of the Malayan Communist Party. It is surely impossible to expect the Government to help the Communists to gain control of the trade union movement on the pretext of unification and to surrender the non-Communist majority of the workers of Singapore to the tender mercies of foreign inspired anti-national elements. In the circumstances, it is better that there should be a clear demarcation between pro-Communists and non-Communists in the trade union movement. The Government will continue to encourage the genuine unification of the trade union movement but on the basis of democratic and independent trade unionism. We have no doubt that in the final result the labour movement of Singapore will be so unified. I would like to repeat here the Government's assurance that it has not discriminated and will not discriminate, against those innocent workers who still find themselves within the pro-Communist orbit so long as they observe the provisions of the law and press their claims within the context of the Industrial Relations Ordinance. The Government also repeats its warning to employers not to take advantage of the recent arrests of pro-Communist trade union leaders in order to victimise workers who have the misfortune to belong to the S.A.T.U. group of trade unions. The Government intends to ensure industrial justice to all workers irrespective of their trade union affiliations. However, we have no intention of allowing pro-Communist trade union leaders to mislead the workers into breaking the provisions of the law and will come down with a heavy hand on those leaders if they decide to do so.

(In Malay): Mr Deputy Speaker, in debating the motion moved by the Prime Minister to express our thanks to the Yang di-Pertuan Negara for the speech which he delivered on behalf of the Government at the opening of this Session, I rise to speak after having followed the speech made by His Excellency. There is not a single matter in the speech which could impress us in connection with the Government's policies in the future, except for matters which can be considered routine - old matter repeated; for instance, the construction of houses, installation of standpipes, street lights, etc. I think, as I have said earlier, that these are normal matters which can be heard over the radio, and quite recently through television, and also can be read from pamphlets issued by the Ministry of Culture. In dealing this policy speech, I should like to stress, Mr Deputy Speaker, that what impresses me is that we discover that at the end of the speech there is an appeal to the leaders, particularly to Members of this Assembly, to share the responsibility with the Government to nurture the healthy democratic system in our State. To me this is something relatively new, for the Government to exhort, to appeal to Members of this House, particularly with reference to the Opposition Members. Nobody can deny that the Government for the past three and a half years or so has, in fact, considered the Opposition Members as cannot be relied upon to co-operate with the Government. 12.00 midnight

Order. Moment of interruption.

Resolved, "That this Assembly do now adjourn."-[Dr Toh Chin Chye] Adjourned accordingly at 12 o'clock midnight to Tuesday, 9th April, 1963.

Monday, 8th April, 1963

Dr Lee Siew Choh asked the Minister for Home Affairs to give a full list of persons arrested in Singapore and detained under the Preservation of Public Security Ordinance in Singapore and the Federation of Malaya since 2nd February, 1963, stating (i) the name, sex and age of each detainee; (ii) their occupations, or organisations they belong to; (iii) the date, time and place of arrest; (iv) their exact places of detention; (v) what time after arrest were the families informed of the whereabouts of the detainees; and (vi) when were their families permitted to visit them.

The supply of the list asked for is not in the interest of security. Most of the names are already known to the Press and the public. A few top-ranking cadres are from time to time discovered and no benefit should be given to the Communist organisations in letting them know of intelligence progress. Members of the families of detainees were informed officially by press notification on 5th February, 1963, that they should contact the Special Branch to arrange for visits to detainees. The first of the visits was allowed on 8th February, 1963.