Mr Speaker, Sir, one expects the Opposition at Budget time to make the most of its opportunity to paint the worst possible picture of the health of the country. And at the end of it all - if it is a democratic and constructive Opposition - one should hear how things could be made better, why some of the things that we have been doing have not been enough, and how they can be improved upon. From our Barisan opponents, we get one consistent refrain - Malaysia is a neo-colonialist scheme; Malaysia has brought disaster to the people; nothing will resolve our problems: not the common market, not this capitalist way in which more money will be made by big business. They play only the neutral line: that the dissolution of Malaysia, somehow or the other, will become a chung li kuo chia (neutral), that all will be well, and that the Indonesians will leave us alone if we start trade with them. Ultimately, according to the Member for Tampines, who hinted the way to do it is to have a real Communist economy where there will be no unemployment and where everybody will be put to work. From the other Member of the Opposition, the Member for Hong Lim, there is the usual opportunist tailism. He harks back with nostalgia to colonial days when all was well. When we were in charge of the Police, the policeman saluted the Prime Minister, and even the Mayor. But now all the powers are gone. We have been emasculated. We have been robbed. The country is going to the dogs. Mr Speaker, Sir, let me try to put, not just to the Opposition but to Singapore at large, what were the two extremes - the best we could have had for Singapore and the worst which may yet come about if we do not watch out. Paradise for Singapore would have meant a common market, no charges for water supply, full trade with Indonesia, with Malaya and the rest of the world, the continuance of our bases, and independence guaranteed by some mutual or multi-lateral defence pact. That would have provided us with the ideal - paradise. No need for defence commitments; we just keep one Infantry Battalion for ceremonial purposes. In the colonial days we did not even have to do that. We got the British to pay for all that. They defended us because it was their territory. But, unfortunately, the world does not owe Singapore a living. The Indonesians do not have to trade with us. And we knew as early as 1959 that it was their intention, at the first convenient opportunity, to cut off their trade with us. And every year our man in Jakarta gave us regular reports of their plans to cut off this trade sooner or later. Hence the importance in all those years of finding a more permanent and stable basis of survival. I tell the Members opposite what would have happened if we did not take the precautionary measures that we did if we did not get a common market. If we had zig-zagged in the reckless and dangerous fashion of politics in Singapore of the 1950s, not only would we have confrontation with no trade with the Indonesians, but worse - we might have "double confrontation" with no trade with Malaya or Sabah or Sarawak, no common market, and with water problems. And to cap it all, if we were to follow the wishes of the Barisan Sosialis and abolish British bases, it would mean that one-quarter of the whole economy would be gone. There would be 50,000 unemployed tomorrow. Then we would really hit rock bottom. I am not suggesting that one year after Malaysia we are bouncing with prosperity. We are realists. When confrontation came, we worked out the figures. The total amount of trade we did with Indonesia was 20 per cent of our total entrepot trade. I was curious to ask the Member for Bukit Merah where he got his figures from, because immediately after confrontation, we decided to publish no further figures in order that we should not help the Indonesians to know how much of their rubber or copra still comes back, either by barter traders in small craft or via Hongkong and Japan. Definitely for the last year, as can be seen from the revenue, they did not knock us out for the full 20 per cent of the entrepot trade. How much they did knock us by is their guess-work, because we have not published our figures. But definitely not by 20 per cent. If today we were still a self-governing Singapore, without a common market, we would be facing a much more acute situation. Let us be quite frank about this, Mr Speaker, Sir,I have said this once publicly - it has not been picked up in some of the Press - that feelers have been sent out to me that the In donesians would resume trade if we backed out of Malaysia. They have sent all kinds of feelers, and this is one of them. I ask the Members opposite, and I ask the people at large, to calculate. Where does our long-term interest lie? Not just the day after tomorrow. Five years hence, ten years hence, 20 years! Suppose we are out of Malaysia the day after tomorrow; so the trading craft come back; so we are all friends again. Is that the end of the story! For the last seven years, the Indonesian Consul-General and his Consulate staff here have spent a great deal of effort in setting up little nests of support, not for a flourishing independent Singapore, but for the kind of movement which they prematurely triggered off last year, before their plans were fully matured. I sent back an answer to that feeler. I said, "Do you object to British bases in Singapore?" There was no answer. Tile line is the official line. "Why are we against Malaysia! Because it is a neocolonialist plot which threatens Indonesia." "How is Indonesia threatened?" "Because the British bases are in Singapore." Now, these bases in Singapore will be objectionable whether we are in Malaysia or whether we are out of Malaysia. Simple, is it not? So we move out of Malaysia. So the bases are still as objectionable. Then what happens? But I congratulate the Barisan Sosialis on being consistent, which the Member for Hong Lim never has been. They want Malaysia scrapped. They are against it, lock, stock and barrel. There will be paradise only when this whole neo-colonialist society is scrapped and they build afresh their Communist millennium. Yes. Let us be frank about it. The Member for Hong Lim knows that he is in trouble in that situation. He has got no chance of running around with wild men. He can only talk wild. But these people can act wildly. That is the big difference. And he knows it makes more sense with merger. But he says, "Merger on equal terms." That is a new one, Mr Speaker, Sir. "No power," says he. "All gone." I thought we went through all that very carefully. What he intended last time was what the Barisan Sosialis asked for - complete merger, in toto. Today we would not even be spending one whole day debating a budget of $350 million. Education in the Central Government, Health in the Central Government, Fire Brigade, the whole works. We need only spend half an hour, Mr Speaker, Sir, as the Town Council of Singapore. It is as simple as that. And we get a capitation grant for one year of $10 million from the Central Government to run this. So we may even have to reduce the allowance of Members of this Assembly. It will be very sad indeed. The Member for Hong Lim knows the stark realities, that in this wider framework of Malaysia, there is no longer the possibility of what I would call the lunatic fringe in politics coming up on top. There is more balance. There is more body generally. But let me pick up some of the points made by the Member for Hong Lim, because he has a flair for torturing any truth into an untruth. He said, "Everything fails under the P.A.P. except housing." This is because of his great genius in discovering the man for this job, who can even build 30,000 flats a year. No trouble at all. He said that our industrialisation programme at Jurong was all a matter of opening ceremonies. Mr Speaker, Sir, - this is also in answer to the Barisan Sosialis - nearly 150 pioneer certificates have been issued in the short time after the merger referendum and Malaysia Day. Just over one year! The hulk of it was in that area, where people would calculate on the basis of a market of over 10 million people. That is why the Member for Hong Lim is right. There have been no new pioneer certificates because everybody took them out straightaway. But there are still 45 now being processed. They are putting up their details to see whether they qualify for pioneer treatment. In production today are 43 factories holding pioneer certificates with a total employment capacity of 6,687. Under construction with pioneer certificates already granted are 54 factories. Staff complement in full production will be 9,331. Non-pioneers now in the pipe-line process, 11. Total employment capacity at total production. 4,000. The 45 pioneers now being processed - I have mentioned that - have another capacity of 7,000. So there is a total employability capacity of 27,000. All this would not have happened, Mr Speaker, Sir, without Malaysia. Let us be quite frank about it. We did not go in because we owed anybody anything. We went in because we wanted something for ourselves. The world did not owe us a living. We did not owe Malaya a living. Neither did they owe us a living. But they either kill themselves trying to crush Singapore, or we kill ourselves trying to undermine them, or we try and make a go of it together with Sabah and Sarawak. Let me sum up the long-term position in this way. We may have to go through a fairly difficult period before we emerge from the doldrums. It is something like the early 1959, 1960, 1961 periods. The effects of the common market cannot be felt for at least four to five years. If we do not succeed; if, in fact, the arrangements within Malaysia are not worked out in a fair and equitable way, as was suggested by the Member for Hong Lim, then we shall have to face a new situation. Let us be the first to acknowledge to the Barisan Sosialis that the day Singapore turns sour within Malaysia, that day they have won; because from that day onwards, if Singapore really goes out, Mr Speaker. Sir, and it really says, "Out with Malaysia," and there is a popular demonstration for that, then for the first time the Indonesians have a hook on Malaysia. Then for the first time, if they are really helping to liberate the people, they can sell it. And that is the beginning of the end for Malaysia and for the lot of us. We are hoping that logic, reason and common sense will prevail. That nobody can afford to allow this to fail for their own self-interest. That this thing must be worked out in an equitable and just way. The one good point made in the whole of this afternoon's debate was the one that, in fact, by giving 40 per cent of our national taxes, we are giving more than just paying for the Federal Departments in Singapore. That is correct. We calculated that the right amount - the quantum was 27 per cent plus our share of External Affairs (Parliament, negligible), might make it up to 30 per cent. We went in on the basis of good faith. And there is a proviso - it is part of the Constitution - that every two years it will be reviewed, and if no agreement is reached between the Singapore Government and the Central Government, the World Bank will send an arbitrator. We have deliberately not brought this into the foreground of our Budget debate because we have no desire to have more bones of contention between the Central Government and Singapore. Let us try to make this thing work. I am quite sure that if there comes a time when we cannot agree, we will have to go to arbitration with the World Bank. But that one valid point was completely obliterated by a heap of malice and untruths. I need only take one simple example. It is fatuous and yet it is surprising how - if one allows these lies to be repeated constantly - people may actually believe it. "The iron and steel mill in Jurong was a flop," said the Member for Hong Lim. It is only a scrap mill and we had to stop scrap iron from being exported. So people lost jobs. Then we banned the import of steel bars in order that they can sell. But first, Mr Speaker, Sir, any businessman who has been following the stock market will know that the production of this steel mill, which was one of the first projects in Jurong to get started, was unable to satisfy demand, and it makes hefty profits. In order to satisfy its customers, it enlisted the support of the Government to give it the right to buy scrap iron at market prices, whatever our dealers could get on export, plus 10 per cent, in order that it shall have this raw material. They have now started construction on the second furnace. But if one were to listen to the Member for Hong Lim, the whole world is crashing. It is all wrong. His politics consist of the big give and the big lie. Said he, we have given away $70 million to the Federation. It is nothing like that, Mr Speaker, Sir. We can work out the figures very carefully. I am not saying the sum is negligible. In fact, it will be quite an important factor in our discussions with the Centre, beginning from the first half of next year as the review comes in. But he would just shower largesse all round. Do away with licence fees, up the personal assistance for unemployment from $10 million to $20 million, build more hospitals, build more polytechnics, do all the wonderful things in life, do away with radio licences, taxi licences and the whole world. That is how he runs politics. That is how we had to do a rescue operation very quickly before there was a run on the bank. But I suggest to the House and the country that we are somewhere between Utopia and Hell. The Utopia I have already outlined, where the world owes us a living, Mr Speaker, Sir. The British keep their bases here and tail it off gently over 30, 40, 50 years, to keep our economy boosted up, common market, trade with Indonesia, trade with Malaya, trade with the whole world, all bouncing. Real perdition - failure of the common market, break-up of Malaysia, confrontation, double confrontation also with Malaya, to mutual harm, and the final abolition of British bases as part of this general collapse of the region. These are things which, as of this given moment, are fanciful. But if we allow such men a free run and they are really allowed to do what they want to do, that is where we will all end up - down at the bottom of the cesspit. All that has happened at this moment is that we have lost part of tile 20 per cent entrepot trade, part of 8.7 per cent of our national income, and of the given rate of growth that we were having before Malaysia, over 4 per cent per annum. In two years we make it up; and we may yet make it up. It may yet be the privilege of the Minister for Finance to announce to the House in next year's Budget that we have got back to the 1963 position. I suggest to the country at large that our first job now is to make the best of this given situation. We keep what we get and consolidate on it and build up. If there is more reckless talk, if investors really believe that the Barisan can succeed in making Singapore go sour on Malaysia, then that is the end. What is the point of the common market? What is the point of building factories? I was enchanted as I listened to the Member for Tampines. He was so carried away with wanting to denounce us for the present that he forgot that the picture of the happy days he painted when the Happy World was humming with music, the Great World was humming with people and not as of now, well, those happy days were just a couple of years ago under a PAP. Government, which he was merrily de nouncing and hoping to bring the House down with it. He has forgotten all that. This is not confrontation. This is one of the side effects of confrontation. The riots that took place, communal disturbances. Let me tell the Member for Tampines to calculate, to revaluate his chances of survival. Without the British bases here, without any other major power able to send their navy into the region to help him, and with the Indonesians with a pipeline on large pockets of our own population, having a riot every other week, which would be construed to the whole world as the desire of the oppressed people, the indigenous peoples of the region seeking freedom, bringing upon us a liberation army from our neighbours - that is where he will end up. But, unfortunately, Mr Speaker, Sir, if we allow that to happen, that is also where we will land. I commend to the House the realistic policies that have been pursued by the Finance Minister in trying to get the best berth to Utopia. Mr Koo Young (Thomson) rose -