Hansard, 1967-03-14

asked the Minister of Defence when construction of the proposed Community Centre for Moulmein will commence and the estimated date for its completion.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the Minister has promised the hon. Member the last time she raised the subject that we are making a special effort to build a community centre in her constituency. I am glad to report that the work on site clearance for the proposed community centre at the junction of Balestier Road and Shan Road has already commenced and the erection of the two-storey building will commence shortly as soon as tender proceedings are completed. It is expected that the project will be completed by November this year.

asked the Minister of Defence if he will consider a relaxation of paragraph 4 of the Schedule to the Immigration (Prohibition of Entry) Order, 1966, to allow wives of Singapore Citizens to enter the Republic though they may have been living separately from their husbands for more than five years.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the Government does not consider that a relaxation is necessary. The legislation was introduced after careful consideration of the implications of allowing wives of Singapore Citizens entry without control. The rule has been enforced since December 1959. The Government does not advocate and has no intention of relaxing the control. I would urge the hon. Member first, to ask why Singapore citizens should go overseas to get married when there are so many healthy, well-educated and intelligent young women in Singapore? Are they not doing a disservice to the country? And if, after having married, they have remained separate from their wives for more than five years, something extraordinary must have taken place. Whatever it is, it does not call for sympathetic consideration from the Immigration authorities.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to ask the Minister of State of Defence whether he is aware that permission has been sought to permit those wives of Chinese immigrants who have been separated from their husbands who came to Singapore, say, in 1947, to enter Singapore and whether consideration would be given to them?

Mr Speaker, Sir, as I have pointed out just now, the policy is that if the husband and the wife have been separated for five years and the husband is living here, then no approval can be given for the entry of the wife into Singapore.

I think Mr Ng's question was that the separation was involuntary.

Mr Speaker, Sir, another point is that if they have decided to reside in Singapore, become Singapore citizens and have stayed in Singapore, they should have made the necessary arrangements for their family, or other members of their family, to be together with them. If they have not done so earlier and they want to do it now, I am afraid that it is a circumstance beyond our control and it is no fault of the Government.

With regard to the Minister of State's answer, suppose the wife has been separated for five years, then her husband, who is a Singapore citizen, can marry another girl in Singapore?

Mr Speaker, Sir, as you are aware, and probably the Member for Anson is also aware, we have passed the Women's Charter in Singapore and, therefore, marriages are governed by the Women's Charter.

One more question. According to the Women's Charter, they should be separated for seven years, and then they can claim for a divorce. I wonder whether the Minister of State agrees with the seven-year period of separation.

The amendment Bill has not been passed yet.

Mr Speaker, Sir, according to the Women's Charter, we are told that a man can marry only one wife. When people residing in Singapore applied for Singapore citizenship and got it, whether they came from India or China, and when they applied for an entry permit for their wife, who may be in India or China, they declare in the application forms that they are already married and have a wife. Will the Minister inform me how such people can, in those circumstances, get a divorce, thereby allowing them to marry somebody else in Singapore?

Mr Speaker, Sir, this is not within my portfolio. I do not know whether the Minister for Social Affairs can answer it.

Mr Rajoo, I think we had better wait for the debate on the Women's Charter (Amendment) Bill.

Thank you.

asked the Minister for Culture and Social Affairs if he is aware of complaints about the poor quality of reception on the wave-length over which Tamil programmes are now broadcast by Radio Singapura; and, whether he will take steps to have this wavelength altered.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I am aware of the complaints about the poor quality of the reception on the wavelength 1370 k/c over which Tamil programmes are now broadcast. For this reason, I have made provision last year for the purchase of a new transmitter of 20 kilowatts to take the place of the old one of only 10 kilowatts. This new transmitter was installed in January 1967 and the reception of the Tamil programme should have appreciably improved. With the proposed installation of F.M. (Frequency Modulation) Transmitters in May this year for all language streams, it is expected that reception in all languages would be clear. There is, however, nothing wrong with the present wavelength.

asked the Minister for Law and National Development, in view of the recent floods in the Cambridge Road, Owen Road and Norfolk Road areas, (a) if he will consider taking immediate steps, as a temporary measure, to raise the embankment and widen the canal between Keng Lee Road and the Kandang Kerbau Police Station; and (b) whether he will consider requesting the Housing and Development Board to give priority in the allocation of the Board's flats to applicants from these areas who wish to move out.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the areas about which the Member is worried are extremely low-lying and densely built up and are less than two feet above the level of the highest tide. Therefore, heavy rainfall coinciding with a high tide will cause flooding in these areas. Raising the Rochore Canal embankments, as suggested by the hon. Member, would mean raising the highest level of the water in the canal above that of the level in the culverts and drains leading into the canal. Therefore, unless control flap gates at the discharge ends of culverts and drains are built, the water from the canal could flow into the surrounding areas. If these flap gates are built and closed during heavy rainfall, the rain water in these areas cannot flow into the canal. If there is a high tide coinciding with heavy rainfall and the flap gates are opened, the water in the canal will be pushed by the tide and flow back into these low-lying areas. Immediate widening of the canal as suggested by the hon. Member would not be feasible, due to the fact that the existing roads on either side of the canal have been built very close to the canal embankments. Any minor widening will not do much to alleviate flooding. However, the Bukit Timah Flood Alleviation Scheme is being implemented to alleviate not only the floods in the Bukit Timah area, but also in these areas about which the Member is worried. Work on this major Flood Alleviation Scheme is now in progress and is expected to be completed some time in 1969. Mr Speaker, that deals with the first part of the question. If I may go on to the second part. Some priority can be given by the Housing and Development Board to applicants who wish to move out of these areas. For those already occupying Housing Board flats, transfers can be arranged provided they are not, choosey as regards location. In the case of those who are not at the moment living in Housing Board flats, they should apply in the normal manner, and if they are eligible under the rules, they can be allocated Housing Board flats within a matter of days provided again they are not choosey as regards location.

A supplementary question, Sir. Can the Minister tell me a little more about the flood alleviation scheme in Bukit Timah? If I am allowed to ask a second supplementary question, can he also say where flats are available for those people who want to move out?

The Bukit Timah Flood Alleviation Scheme is being implemented in two stages - Phase 1 and Phase 2. The Government has approved the implementation of the Phase 1 Scheme at an estimated cost of $6,840,000. Approval of the Phase 1 Scheme involves the construction of an entirely new canal which will divert the storm water from Upper Bukit Timah and Sungei Namly catchments, starting at about the 6th milestone Bukit Timah Road to join up with Sungei Ulu Pandan. This Phase has already commenced and, as I have said, work will be completed or is expected to be completed by 1969. Phase 2 of the scheme on which a firm decision has not yet been taken would involve another diversion of flood waters and would mean cutting another canal starting at about the 4th milestone Bukit Timah Road to join up with Sungei Kallang. This deals with the Member's first supplementary question. As far as the second supplementary question is concerned, there are flats in Toa Payoh, flats in Redhill, flats in Upper Changi Road and a few flats in Bukit Ho Swee which are readily available. In Upper Changi Road there are about 400; Redhill about 250; Toa Payoh a few thousand; and Bukit Ho Swee about 100.

asked the Minister for Law and National Development if he will request the Housing and Development Board to permit a choice of locality when they offer flats to applicants who have been given notice to quit State land.

Mr Speaker, Sir, it has already been the practice of the Housing and Development Board to offer to families who have been given notice to quit State land alternative choices of locality where flats are available. However, there have been cases where applicants insist on a particular flat in a particular estate. Obviously, it has not been possible to satisfy most of such requests.

Order read for resumption of debate on Question [13th March, 1967], "That the Bill be now read a Second time." Question again proposed. 2.46 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, another point which I wanted to bring to the attention of this House yesterday when the House adjourned is that while the Ordinance provides for the security of jobs of persons placed in the national service reserve, no provision is made to the effect that no person placed in the national service reserve shall be prejudiced in his employment by reason only of the fact that he is placed in the national service reserve for the duration of such reserve services. I have in mind the possibility that the person placed on the national service reserve may be placed at a disadvantage in respect of promotion opportunities as a result of his military training. Because of such military training requirements, he may not be able to carry out over-time work in his company whenever requested to do so by his supervisors. Because of such a situation, the management may place him in a section of the firm which does not carry much over-time requirements and, thereby, offers much less hope for promotion. Even if he is not required to perform overtime duties, the management, at the same time, may be irritated to a certain extent by the fact that such employee is compelled to take time off from work and may, naturally, react to such irritation by not actively considering such employee for any vacancy in a higher post whenever any such vacancy arises. It would be a sort of half-hearted compensation, if I may say so, for such employee to be assured of his security of employment but, at the same time, to suffer a certain degree of prejudice in his career prospects as far as his firm is concerned. I do not know whether it is implied in the assurance of the Government to those who are required to be called up for national service - that this assurance of a job to all who are called up applies equally to those who already have a job in a private firm, so that any person, whose career may be prejudiced by his military duty, will be given an opportunity for a higher job which he would otherwise have obtained if it had not been for his national service.

(In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, on the National Service (Amendment) Bill, I feel that our brave Colonel should not be afraid of my raising any question on this Bill, as it concerns the life and death of the nation, and it is introduced at a time when the Communist united front is struggling. On the other hand, Britain is trying to cut down her troops and manpower in Singapore. So the introduction of this Bill at this juncture is of special significance, because it symbolises the fact that the people of Singapore will be able to feel and appreciate the end of colonial rule and that we are really independent in the true sense of the word. If we were still under colonial rule, then our colonial masters would still shoulder their military responsibilities to protect their own interests in this region. Therefore, while they controlled the military power in this region, they would not be able to carry out the job properly. For example, if they wanted the people to take up national service, they would meet with great difficulties and troubles. That was why some 10 years ago in Singapore there was the May 13th incident. This took place in a very abnormal situation and under very strange circumstances. The facts of the riots that took place then were distorted and exploited by some quarters. From the colonial rulers, we have inherited a situation in which we do not have sufficient military power. We have inherited a very weak and feeble civil service. We have not been given a very brave, strong and rugged military establishment. This Bill, which is now introduced about a year or so after our independence, throws some more light on the independence of Singapore in that we are now in charge of the defence of our own country. If we were still under colonial rule, we would not be given the full attention and care that we deserve. In those days, our colonial masters would not be able to fully implement national service. At that time, a lot of students applied for postponement from military service, and they fought very hard to get it. They thought they could get some kind of postponement. But now, in introducing this Bill, we have already made concrete proposals for its implementation. Regulations have already been drawn up to grant facilities to those students who want to apply for postponement on valid grounds. This goes to show that an independent government is entirely different from a colonial government. I wish to go on to another point. We can see that a lot of people feel that Singapore is completely indefensible. There is nothing for which we can fight. We cannot hope to triumph in any battle at all in Singapore. Sometimes we can see in the newspapers reports about military pacts entered into between Malaysia and the United Kingdom. Singapore is regarded as a small island, like the Isle of Man, at the southern tip of the Malay Peninsula. It is only a very small piece of land. It has no military significance and value, and it is completely indefensible. This kind of argument seems to have underestimated the military value and strategic position of Singapore. It is not entirely correct. If it is said that our military power is not sufficient to carry out any aggression, of course, I will agree. In fact, it is not our aim to mobilise our people in order to raise an army and go north, south, east or west. We do not have such aggressive intentions at all. Our main aim is centred on defence, and defence only. As a matter of fact, a small island like Singapore has, historically, no intention of any aggression at all. Some 700 years ago there was aggression from Java, and recently Japan also invaded Singapore. We were occupied by Japan and became the victims of aggression. But there is no intention on our record to say that we have invaded any other place at all. So even if we have a strong army, we do not have any experience of invading others, or have any aggressive intentions. Singapore controls traffic in the Straits of Malacca in a region of some 600 miles. It is the gateway from the East to the West, and vice versa. It is the centre of the trade route of South-east Asia connecting Australia and New Zealand. So, strategically speaking, we become a bone of contention in times of war, although we may not have any aggressive intentions of any kind. But we cannot deny, or under-estimate, or overlook the military value and importance of Singapore strategically. Although we are not going to invade anybody, we must not be weak-kneed. We must not be cowed. In addition to the military aspect, there is also the social aspect to be considered. Singapore has a population of about two million. If we want to stabilise the situation in Singapore, we must have a very closely-knit society before we can survive. The National Service (Amendment) Bill provides a certain significance in this respect in that attempts can be made to mobilise the people so as to bring about a closely-knit society. At the same time, we have to bear in mind that we have no resources other than manpower. The people in the age group of 18 or so are even more valuable in terms of manpower, and we must make full use of these resources and make all the people responds to the national service call. To this extent, I feel that if we can fully tap the youthful energies of our people and make use of the spring source of our nation, then it is in keeping with the aspirations of our people and we can create a very bright future. The next point I wish to go into is this. Although we call this national service, it must, of necessity, be connected with the nation, which, in the eyes of the Communists, cannot stand on its own, because the Communists themselves have no national consciousness. If they are to follow Marx, Engels or anybody of that kind, they will try to make use of class conflict or struggle by which they will try to suppress the people and make use of the class struggle as a weapon to suppress the people and to destroy the nation as their ultimate aim. They will start the rule of the proletariat instead. We must, of necessity, give vent to the spirit of democracy so as to protect our way of life. To do this, I personally feel that we must take the opportunity to review the policies of the Defence Ministry. For example, the inculcation of national consciousness is a very important job. I do not know whether it has already been accomplished. In the Officers' Mess of the People's Defence Force, we have not seen the reflection of society in the rank and file. Although it is said that the men and boys are supposed to have come from a multi-racial society, we are unable to see any Chinese newspaper or national language newspaper. Nor are our military songs sung in the Malay language or the national language. In the regular forces, we understand that they are using a kind of trumpet, instead of a bell, to inform the people of meal times. Up to date we do not have any military songs in the national language. So the People's Defence Force has not done its own part in bringing about a greater sense of national consciousness. If an explanation can be given, I shall be very happy to hear it. The next point is that we are Back-benchers in the ruling Party and we have some personal experience in military service and we have undergone a certain kind of training. The people from our ruling Party must set a good example by joining national service. This will nail the lies and the smears of the anti-national elements who say that we are hiding behind the people who are used as cannon fodder. So we must set a good example at the very beginning. We must put ourselves in uniform first. From the branches and headquarters of our Party, we must come forward in uniform to show the people that we are setting a good example. I do not know whether the Minister concerned has given some thought to this aspect so that he will not receive undue criticism. I hope some explanation will be forthcoming in this respect. Finally, Mr Speaker, Sir, when we call up the people for national service, we must not be very much concerned with the payment of allowances or other remunerations, otherwise it would appear that we are engaging employees to do a job. Sir, I support the Bill.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I think national service is the necessary preparation through rigid discipline, military or otherwise, of the citizens for duty to the nation. This service in defence of the community undoubtedly can be termed a noble duty. Our Republic, though barely older than two years, has made great strides in the housing and industrial fields, and socially, too, has yet to mould a community of varied racial origins into one nation possessing the spirit of national consciousness. However, our assets are the youths and I think the Government has been wise to note this and exploit it to the country's full benefit. The slogan, "The youths of today are the leaders of tomorrow" is particularly true. Through the youths, we must cultivate national consciousness and other values of social responsibility which are essential and which we desire to instill in our entire community. According to the Bill, national service means service in the Army, People's Defence Force, the Special Constabulary and the Vigilante Corps. It also sets out the age groups to be called up and how long they are required to serve full-time as well as part- time. Amongst the number of important amendments to the National Service Ordinance, 1952, of Malaysia in its application to Singapore is one in which powers will be vested in the Minister who may "from time to time, by notice in the Gazette" call up youths for national service. Therefore, any proclamation for call-up would be done by the Minister instead of the President being required to proclaim it. I shall be glad if the Minister of Defence can explain why such a prerogative will now be vested in him. My next point is about the age groups to be called up. According to this Bill, 18 year-olds would be required to serve two years full-time and twelve years part-time. I am glad to note that jobs would be awaiting them upon their completion of the two-year full-time service. This is noteworthy in that it gives security to these youths who will not be unduly worried over employment when called upon to serve the country for two years full-time and ultimately twelve years part-time. However, I would be grateful if the Minister would kindly inform this House how many youths would the ten per cent constitute, and what expenditure would be expended on this matter. Furthermore, would it not be wiser if the Government, instead of calling up the 18 year-olds, extend the age group, say, from 18 to 25? I am suggesting this because, in this way, we would be able to equip our youths with the necessary training by which the development of spirit, bearing and skill would be more beneficial to the country as a whole and in which the spirit of national consciousness would be further instilled. And this would meet the requirement of a small and newly independent nation like Singapore - the preparedness that would ensure the survival and continued progress of the nation. Another point is that we know very well that a good number of these 18 year-olds have left secondary schools and many are pursuing higher education. In this respect, will the Minister concerned see to it that whilst they are undergoing national service, their educational pursuits will not be impeded? And for those in the higher institutions of learning, would it not be feasible to group these conscripts and place them under centralised training at a place closer to them whereby minimum time is spent on transport so that no cause for complaint would arise on the question of their studies being hampered or impeded because they have to spend much time in travelling to and from their place of training? This aspect of training, of course, refers to military training for which allowances are paid to cover transport charges and laundry charges for uniforms issued. However, as the Bill clearly states, persons "not being less than eighteen years of age" and who are liable to register under this Ordinance shall be liable to be called up for service in the Vigilante Corps. We all know the usefulness of the Vigilante Corps and the notable work they have done in the past 2« years. The Government, whilst realising the importance of the Vigilante Corps, has seen fit to include service in it as part and parcel of national service. I gather that the Vigilante Corps have been formed at community centre levels and that their duties are mainly to patrol the kampongs and along the shores. These members are doing an admirable job and we have come across occasions when Vigilante Corps members have helped to apprehend burglars and thieves, prevented illegal immigrants and performed a host of public-spirited duties. They are doing this purely on a voluntary basis and this displays a high spirit of social responsibility. It is also manifest that they are not paid any allowance when they go on duty except when the management committees of community centres have to foot the bill for coffee and titbits. It has been suggested that Vigilante Corps members be paid a token sum of money as enjoyed by volunteers in the Special Constabulary and the People's Defence Force. I support this suggestion and no doubt the Minister concerned may argue and say that the Vigilante Corps members enjoy a wider range of recreational facilities. But I must stress that the other forces have such facilities, too. Moreover, service in the Vigilante Corps would be national service, too, and I think it is only fair that those who would be required to serve in the Vigilante Corps be paid a nominal sum when they go on duty. Sir, coming back to the Bill in general, we all know that national service exists in almost all countries in the world. It is the fundamental responsibility of every citizen to answer the call of national service, if we do not take the necessary steps to protect ourselves from the enemies of our nation in order to be able to live in peace and security, I do not think anybody, or any country for that matter, can guarantee our freedom, unless we wish to be subjects of another country! I do not think this is what the people of Singapore want! Singapore, being a small independent country, stands on the southern tip of the Malay Peninsula and it is situated in a position of immense strategic importance. Therefore, it is only right and in the interests of the people and country that we must never allow ourselves to be caught unprepared, as what happened in the Second World War when the Japanese invaded Singapore. Hence the necessity of having a body of disciplined fighting force able to rotect life and property and most important of all - the survival of the country -the existence of this tiny island State in this corner of the turbulent world. It is a well-known fact that if a country shows verve, grit and determination to survive, she will not be molested. The stakes will be too high and the price too heavy to pay if we are a passive lot. Moreover, the character of our community is such that Singapore is a rootless society. Her races are of varied migrant origins. Those who came to Singapore more than a century ago did not intend to make Singapore their home and country. But they have, over a period of more than a century, left behind well over two million people who today make up the population of the Republic of Singapore. The rootless and disorganised society of yesterday will thus have to be an organised society of today. This is unique in the history of Singapore. As I have said, we are now independent and I am sure that all will agree with me when I say that there is no place for us to go to if we are told off by a stronger neighbour. Hence the paramount importance of our Republic to organise a society in which there exists a sense of social responsibility and national consciousness. So national service will be implemented in the very near future. I do not think anybody today in Singapore will be against it. More than a decade ago, people did not understand the reasons for such service, and thus the Communists were able to exploit the issue, resulting in the call-up being a failure. Today the situation is entirely changed. For instance, young men and women have responded far beyond expectations by joining the People's Defence Force and the People's Defence Force (Women). I would therefore suggest to the Minister concerned to increase the intake to, say, 50 per cent instead of 10 per cent of the youths to be called up. Furthermore, if national service continues for ten years during which time an organised society will emerge, Singapore then will be a changed place where her citizens will not only live in confidence and pride but the Republic will also last as long as time. Therefore, in summing up, I would urge all youths who are liable to be called up to rise at once with one voice and respond to this call of duty to the nation. 3.15 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, may I take this opportunity to say a few words on the National Service (Amendment) Bill which is now before the House for its Second Reading? This Bill provides for the conscription of potential manpower of our Island Republic which has been hitherto left untapped. True indeed that during the 140 years of colonial rule and the short-lived Malaysian era, the defence and security of this country was left in the hands of foreigners and our one-time compatriots. Since they were more interested in their own safety and security than in this country, they could not take a real interest and attempt to train our youths to be good soldiers and defenders of this country. After the break from Malaysia on 9th August, 1965, it has become incumbent on our people to take over the responsibility of defence and security of the country. And national service has become a necessity to us. Sir, I support this Bill in full, but I have some doubts about certain provisions which I hope the Minister will clarify for the benefit of the public. Taking into consideration sub-clause (1) of clause 5 and paragraphs (1) (a) and (b) of section 16K of Part VIIB, clause 15, the Minister, by notification in the Gazette, may require a person who has attained such age not being more than 18 months below the minimum age for enrolment in the national service, and such called-up person will render two years' full-time service under subsection (1) of section 16K. Thus the Minister may call up a boy at the age of 16« to enrol for national service and to do actual service between the ages of 18 and 20. On the other hand, this implies that a boy in Primary I at the age of 7, if he passes the annual examinations without fail each year, will at the age of 16 or 16« still be in Secondary IV. Therefore, in accordance with these provisions, while he is still at school, he is liable to be called up for registration for national service. Sir, all of us at one time were school boys ourselves. We know what it was like to pass the school final examinations. The Minister's remarks on education recently notwithstanding, this requires concentration of mind and body on ---

Point of clarification, Sir. Before the hon. Member makes an error on this subject and confuses everybody, may I earnestly ask him to read the pamphlet which I gave the hon. Members of Parliament yesterday? At the age of 16½ the obligation is not to do national service but to register. This will give the Ministry something like 18 months in which to plan ahead. It is nowhere stated in the amending Bill that youths will be called up for national service at the age of 16½. All that is required is that they are to register and to give their particulars.

Sir, my contention is that at least they will be free to complete their secondary education before being called up for national service.

Mr Rajoo, I think the answer to the question you have raised is contained in the provision itself. Clause 5 introduces a new paragraph (1) (b) which refers to persons who: "have attained such age not being more than eighteen months below the minimum age for enlistment or enrolment...". These persons must register at 16« but the minimum age for enlistment or enrolment is still 18 years. The 18-month period is the period of processing prior to enlistment or enrolment. They have to register 18 months before that date. That is the position, is it not, Dr Goh? Dr Goh Keng Swee indicated assent.

Sir, if you are aiming at building an equal democratic socialist society, members of the society will be given equal opportunity in respect of places for Government jobs and finding their own means of living. Assuming that each year there will be about 8,000 to 10,000 youths of call-up age seeking employment, the 10 per cent elite or so will be guaranteed Government jobs in this manner. This period of assuring jobs for those discharged from full-time national service is supported in a pamphlet issued by the Government entitled "National Service and You". I quote from page 21: `No person who has completed his two years' full-time service in the Army need worry about his future, for sufficient numbers of civilian jobs will be reserved for discharged National Servicemen either in Government service, Statutory Boards or large business enterprises to ensure that every one gets a job.' Sir, this may be considered as an incentive to our youths or an inducement to the parents to enrol their sons in army service. But this will be unfair treatment to thousands of other youths who are also eager to seek employment, who are also loyal to this country, and who have equal rights like the 10 per cent elite to be selected for army service and guaranteed Government jobs after their discharge from national service. Sir, qualifications for army service may differ from qualifications for the administrative service. A man with a good physique and even with low qualifications may well qualify for an army job, whereas a man with intelligence but not with a good physique may not be selected for an army job. Sir, the present Government system of guaranteeing jobs will create a farce in our Government machinery. In time to come, the intelligentsia will be out of the administrative service and those who are not the elite will be controlling the Government machinery. Sir, under the circumstances, I feel that more time and consideration should be given to certain provisions of this Bill before passing them.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the introduction of the National Service (Amendment) Bill is aimed at the creation of a healthy, useful and dedicated corps of citizens. In the process of their duties, members serving in the various corps will acquire and enhance their sense of national identity, which will infuse itself into their families and neighbours, and thus multiply its effect. In my opinion, if this Bill is successfully implemented - and I see no reason why it should not - we may expect to have a new generation of dedicated Singapore citizens, fully conscious of our needs, effectively and willingly shouldering the responsibility of citizenship. We live in an island surrounded by turbulent seas of nationalism and racialism. The past few years have shown that we, having no other place to go to, must and will stand up and fight if our very existence is threatened by expansionist ambitions. This Bill lays the cornerstone of our national resolve to be mentally and physically equipped to defend ourselves. A side effect of the implementation of this Bill can be the inculcation of discipline among our population of ages between 18 and 40. This sector is the most physically productive of our working population and a more disciplined working force can but do our economy enormous good. However, in the implementation of this Bill, I would urge the Minister to consider the following points. A fine balance will have to be struck between the call of duty and the compensation for those answering the call. Ideally, of course, all should serve without recompense, but human beings, being what they are, the thin line between enthusiasm and frustration must be found and drawn. I am confident that the Ministry of Interior and Defence will, in the course of implementing this Bill, find this balance. But I would like the Ministry to give serious thought at this stage to the problem and not allow our national goal to be jeopardised by miserliness. I note that no provision is made for allowances to the Vigilante Corps. I feel that the Ministry should give further thought to the question of compensating members of the Vigilante Corps for their time and incidental expenses. The parents of the old school may still feel - although such parents are decreasing year by year - that service in any uniform is reserved for the son who cannot do better elsewhere. This stigma attached to the uniformed service has to be forestalled and countered with adequate explanation. I suggest the Ministry take early steps to make known the ideals and purposes of this Bill through all the mass media open to the Government. Mr Speaker, Sir, this Bill provides every able-bodied citizen between 18 and 40 years the opportunity to serve his country. In this connection, may I quote these stirring words? 'Breath's there the man with soul so dead Who never to himself hath said "This is my country...!"' If everyone in our country says to himself that this is his country, his land and his home, and that he will fight with his life for what he cherishes, then we shall have a nation and a people who will consider it the noblest task to defend his country. May I take this opportunity to urge every person eligible to serve under this Bill to do so as an opportunity rather than as an onerous task. The glory to serve should over-ride any discomfort of services. Mr Speaker, Sir, I heartily welcome and support this Bill.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise to speak very briefly in support of this Bill. Many people may wonder why national service is to be introduced in Singapore, as Singapore is only a small nation in this world. Sir, the answer to this is that Singapore is now an independent nation and, like all other nations, we should have the means and capabilities to protect and defend our nation without having to depend much on outside help. In fact, most of the countries have enforced national service. And there is no reason why Singapore should be so exceptional in this respect. I must, therefore, praise our Government for taking such a decisive step to introduce this National Service (Amendment) Bill in order to enlist our 18-year old citizens for a two-year full-time service in the army or for part-time services in the P.D.F., the Special Constabulary, or the Vigilante Corps. This decisive step has been taken after careful thought and consideration over the last 1½ years, and, in fact, the Government would have taken this step when it started to recruit members for the People's Defence Force last year. Mr Speaker, Sir, as far as one can remember, when the National Service Ordinance was first introduced and came into force in 1952 by the then semi-colonial government, many young people, particularly the students, fled from Singapore to the country of their ancestors in order to avoid being called up. These students did not want to become, in their own words, "the stooges or ashes of the cannon of the then semi-colonial Government". There was no support at all at that time from the people, because they were not subjects of an independent country but were people living in the colony of a foreign power. Since Singapore is now an independent country, national service has become a community obligation collectively and a fundamental responsibility of every citizen individually. Sir, the people of Singapore have learnt a bitter lesson in the struggle for survival after independence and they have now fully understood the meaning of survival. They have great appreciation for our Government for what they have been provided with. For instance, equal status in the society regardless of whatever race they are; security and freedom and social amenities such as housing, education, welfare aid and hospital facilities, etc. Mr Speaker, Sir, I am sure the citizens of Singapore are prepared and ready to stand up at any time in response to the call of the Government to defend our nation in case of emergency. It is, therefore, the duty of each and every citizen to safeguard all the privileges of enjoying the many social amenities with which the Government has provided them. Moreover, national service gives an opportunity to young people of various races to intermix and mingle with one another through training so that they may know one another better. Besides, the training teaches them how to handle arms. Besides this, they will also learn to be patriotic to the nation. What is more important is that these young citizens will be taught to understand their social obligations to the nation and will learn how to cultivate a sense of national consciousness. Mr Speaker, Sir, this is the opportune time for us to test whether our citizens' loyalty is to the country of their birth or to the country of their ancestors. Our Government has already assured us that no person who has completed his two years' full-time service in the army need worry about his future, for the Government will reserve sufficient jobs either in Government service, statutory boards or large enterprises once he is demobilised from active service. If he wishes to further his studies, a place will also be found for him in an institution of higher education. We understand also that the Government is about to introduce legislation to control employment in the private sector and to compel employers to take into employment those citizens who have served their two years' military training. With all these assurances from the Government, I am sure that not only citizens in my constituency will give full support to national service, but also all the people in other constituencies will similarly pledge their support to our Government in introducing this Bill. Mr Speaker, Sir, I urge this House to give its fullest support to this Bill. 3.36 p.m.

(In Malay): Mr Speaker, Sir, if the people in our multi-racial, multi-religious and multi-cultural society wish to live in amity and harmony in an equal, just and democratic society in this Republic, then it is important to have national service which, in essence, means to be prepared in an emergency. We cannot depend solely on outside forces for our protection. We cannot allow ourselves to be caught unprepared. We cannot depend on aid solely on the basis of agreements on paper. My reason for saying so is that every country attaches the utmost importance to its integrity. Therefore, the citizens are responsible for safeguarding the new independent Republic. Every citizen I refer to, Mr Speaker, is a citizen, whether he is a Minister, a Member of Parliament, the child of a Minister or of a Member of Parliament - they cannot be exempted. What is more, the children of Mr Speaker himself or the people of the Republic of Singapore. In short, from the highest strata to the lowest strata; not from the lowest to the highest strata, as has happened in bourgeois countries. For a small and newly independent Republic such as ours, it is a heavy and important responsibility, because the time will come when the preparedness of the citizens will depend on our continued prosperity and survival. In these circumstances, it goes without saying that training is vitally important to inculcate the spirit of national consciousness, which is for the purpose of creating a new, strong and tugged society which has its own self-respect. Of course, the training is not only in the skill of using weapons but also in other modern technical skills like transportation, communications, repairing electrical equipment etc. In addition, there is training in good discipline. Almost every country in this world needs one another. National service is a social responsibility and the fundamental duty of every citizen. As we protect ourselves, our families, and our friends from destruction and loss, likewise we have a collective responsibility to safeguard and protect our Republic from our enemies so that we can forever maintain our peaceful way of life. In addition, national service will also further cement the close ties of relationship between us. It is a real test of those among our citizens whether they have undivided loyalty and allegiance to the Republic and have the interest of the Republic at heart. Those who are indifferent to what is happening around us do not deserve to enjoy the privileges enjoyed by the citizens of the Republic, as mentioned by the hon. Member for Geylang Serai yesterday in his adjournment speech. Another point is that there are hon. Members who are not aware of the achievements or progress made in the People's Defence Force when they say we have no songs to prove the progress of the P.D.F. We have our songs. As an example, I recite one or two lines which read: `P.D.F. is the People's Defence Force - Serve the country. People's Defence Force - excellent service, full of spirit, to serve the spirit and soul, prepare to die for the sake of the country.' The last verse of the People's Defence Force: `Singapore is our mother land, must be protected collectively, and be prepared to destroy our enemies...' That is the song of the People's Defence Force. So hon. Members must know what progress has been achieved by the People's Defence Force. Hence the introduction of the National Service (Amendment) Bill in order to get a mandate from Members of Parliament.

(In Malay): Mr Speaker, the National Service Bill, which has been introduced, is good for a young nation like Singapore, because we have to train our youths and inculcate in them a sense of responsibility towards the defence of the country. Ours is a small country. Although it has no natural resources as other countries have, nevertheless Singapore has its prosperity and wealth which our citizens can well be proud of. Every citizen of Singapore should be conscious of his responsibility, and not just live as a temporary resident without any sense of responsibility towards the nation, as happened during the colonial era. Singapore is now an independent and sovereign State. Therefore, the attitude of transience must be abolished. Every citizen must give his undivided loyalty to the country. The National Service (Amendment) Bill is appropriate. It has been introduced at an opportune time. I am quite sure the youths of Singapore will be proud to have this opportunity to serve the country. We must remember that the gangsters in this country are the products of the colonial era, because the colonial administration was indifferent towards our youths. Hence they became dead-end kids and took to gangsterism. Such people will endanger the country. They are the remnants of colonialism. If we look at Japan, for instance. Her youths have been asked to do compulsory national service. So we find that every Japanese citizen is full of national consciousness, wherever he may be. A sense of responsibility towards the defence of the country can be inculcated in the people of Singapore, who should owe undivided allegiance to it, through the National Service (Amendment) Bill which is introduced in the House. 3.46 p.m.

(In Tamil): Mr Speaker, Sir, I wish to participate in this debate on the National Service (Amendment) Bill. I have many reasons for expressing my pleasure in this Bill. Through national service we inculcate pride in our country. We acknowledge our self-respect. If we are self-centred and do not have regard for the interests of the nation, we will never prosper. But if we regard our own interests as closely intertwined with those of the nation, that will also take care of our own self-interest. But we must have regard for the interests of the people at large, and that is the spirit we must inculcate in our people. The National Service (Amendment) Bill, I believe, will be of great help in developing this spirit. If we help ourselves, God will help us too. But to defend ourselves, we must have sufficient training and this Bill enables us to have such training. This Bill is essential. Young people who take up national service will not only get military training but also training as good citizens, and the sense of social responsibility will be inculcated in them. Parents, particularly mothers, must encourage their children to join up. I support this Bill wholeheartedly. 3.49 p.m.

(In Tamil): Mr Speaker, Sir, most Members have spoken in support of this amendment Bill. So I do not want to make a long speech. I merely want to comment on certain good intentions and objectives of this Bill. It is to be praised that it provides for the training of young people, because this is the age when they attain the peak of their health and this is the opportune time to turn their aspirations and habits into the right direction. Otherwise, everything might be wasted. Therefore, parents should give their full support to this Bill and get their youngsters to take up national service. Every individual should live as a good citizen of Singapore and so ensure a good future for him and for the community. This is an opportune way to do it, just as it is done in Western countries. Whether they are multi-lingual nations or not, they induce people to go for national service, and we can see the benefits they achieve from this. In Eastern countries, this type of national service is not very common. Yet we have decided to pass this Bill. Therefore, it will make us the envy of countries in South-east Asia, and they will also speak encouragingly about us. We do not intend to use national service to fight against other countries or to occupy them. We merely want to strengthen our defences and the fighting power and the character of our youth. That is why we have introduced this Bill and are going to implement it. As good citizens of this country, it is necessary for us to have national service so as to improve our defences in future. In the First World War, we all remember the Japanese invaded Russia. In the Second World War, the Japanese also had to fight against other countries. It is because their youths had been properly trained through national service that they were able to defeat their enemy. In the same way, every citizen of an independent nation should take up compulsory national service training. The fact that this Bill only gives an opportunity for training to the 18-year olds draws one comment from me. There should also be an opportunity for the higher age group to get this training and thereby attain good health and proper training. I wholeheartedly support this Bill and I hope the people will also fully support the provisions therein. 3.54 p.m.

Mr Speaker, since Singapore's independence and after its separation from Malaysia, we have come to realise that as an independent country we cannot rely purely upon another country or countries to protect us in case of war, invasion or other forms of disturbances. Experience has shown that it is better that we protect ourselves than for us to be protected, to save ourselves rather than to be saved, to fight and struggle for our own survival. Since we do not wish to be a satellite country or a protectorate of any other country, every Singapore citizen should realise that to have full sovereignty, the most fundamental thing is to know how to govern and how to protect ourselves. There is a Chinese proverb, Mr Speaker, Sir. May I quote it in Chinese first? Yuen sui chew pu te chin huo. Translated, it means that if there is a fire in the neighbourhood, the waters from the land further away cannot reach and stop the fire in time. For example, if there were a fire at Jalan Besar and we were to wait for the fire brigade from Kuala Lumpur, I am sure the whole of Singapore would be totally engulfed even before it arrived from Kuala Lumpur. Therefore, we would have to use our own fire brigade. [Interruption]

Order. This is the Member's maiden speech. Members should listen to it with courtesy.

it is quite all right, Sir. Our country is small, but our citizens are of high spirit, progressive, industrious and can stand any form of hardships. The introduction of this National Service (Amendment) Bill at this juncture is very timely. This Bill is to show to all nations of the world that we are a determined group, consisting of different races and living under a democratic system of equality and unity. Our country is at present undergoing great changes, and organisation is rapidly taking place in various phases. Most important of all, we like to show other countries that we are definitely not a warlike people or a warlike nation.

3.57 p.m. Instead we are people of a peace-loving nature and are trying to train ourselves to guard against any enemy. As other hon. Members have already pointed out, the Japanese invasion of Singapore at the end of 1941 has taught us a lesson - a bitter, sad and heartbreaking lesson indeed, a lesson which unfortunately cost thousands of lives. The total number of Japanese soldiers who invaded Singapore was only 100,000, but they swept through the majority of the countries in South-east Asia like wild fire; whereas the total number of British, Australian, Canadian, Indian, Malay and Gurkha soldiers totalled about 600,000, which was more than six times the strength of the Japanese invaders. Before the fall of Singapore, our so-called protectors had claimed that Singapore would never perish. On the contrary, the fact was they retreated and surrendered, leaving Singapore in the hands of the Japanese. The enemy brutally slaughtered thousands of our citizens, including infants, and also raped many women. Many people suffered from their tortures. During the period of the enemy's occupation of Singapore of 3 years and 8 months, we lived in great fear and hardship, suffering torture and starvation. We were living practically between life and death and felt more dead than alive. I am repeating this story in a somewhat different fashion in order to remind everyone that from this bitter lesson we have at least learnt two things. Firstly, it is imperative that we must know how to govern ourselves and how to protect and safeguard ourselves. We cannot rely upon others, though sometimes they may have fought well, maybe for themselves. Secondly, the size of the army is not necessarily the important factor in winning a war. It is the spirit of fighting, the fighting for a cause. Moreover, it is the well-trained, well-organised and intelligent army that always wins. The National Service (Amendment) Bill not only provides the necessary military training, such as how to use firearms, etc., and teach us how to defend ourselves, but it is also designed to train and organise our people into a tough, well-trained and alert community. It also gives our new society confidence and self-respect. Furthermore, it is educational. It is the beginning of a new era. It is giving us a new phase and eventually it will synchronise with our present industrial revolution. The essence of the Bill is that it is well planned and designed. We have often heard of some so-called brave people saying, "If we are invaded, we will fight to the last man." That is equivalent to the Chinese saying, "Chiaw tu chen cher". But history and time have shown that fighting to the last man or "Chiaw tu chen cher" may not necessarily be the best policy when fighting a war, unless we have been well organised and well trained beforehand, otherwise we will be sacrificing ourselves, and fighting to the last man will be meaningless. Sir, I am all for the National Service (Amendment) Bill. We are a very young nation and this Bill is most essential. I hope that eventually the provisions of this Bill will be extended to cover the older age groups and those under 18 years of age on a slightly different pattern. We might as well start with them when they are young, just like the boy scouts or girl guides. We may call them "young Guards". Our "young Guards" will be entirely different from Hitler's trained youths in Europe when he made use of them to invade other countries. Ours will be different from the Red Guards. Our youths should be trained in such a way that everyone must have a concept of his duty and responsibility to his country. He must be intelligent and know how to fight for his country, and he must always be in a state of preparedness and alertness. The old Chinese saying that "Good boys should never be soldiers" is entirely wrong. It should be discarded completely in the 20th century. There is another saying "i tai Pu lu i tai" which means that the next generation is worse than the previous one. This is also a fallacy because in our well-planned and well-trained society, the newer generation must always be better than the old one.

(In Malay): Sir, I support the National Service (Amendment) Bill which has been introduced by the Minister of State of Defence. As national service is vitally important to an independent and sovereign State like Singapore, I would remind parents and youths, who are required to undergo national service, to be on guard against misleading propaganda from subversive Barisan Sosialis elements and others who owe a divided loyalty to the country in their own interest and in the interest of foreign countries. We must be proud to accept our responsibilities as loyal citizens in the interest of peace, prosperity and well-being of our independent and sovereign Singapore. We should not constantly depend on others. The object of national service is not to invade other countries, but it is solely for our defence against foreign countries and quell internal disorders caused by people who do not owe their loyalty to Singapore. Sir, I strongly support this Bill. As hon. Members and the citizens of Singapore are aware, many things have taken place since we achieved independence - racial disturbances, troubles caused by undesirable elements, and so on. For this reason, I urge all youths to take up national service as loyal and responsible citizens of independent and sovereign Singapore.

Sir, if this National Service (Amendment) Bill were to have been brought up in this House some ten years ago, of course, my colleagues and I would have condemned it bitterly. But the position now is entirely different from that of the old colonial days when we, as nationalists, refused to accept national service under the colonial regime, because we felt that under no circumstances should we serve any foreign colonial master.

4.07 p.m. Sir, today Singapore is an independent Republic accepted by more than 110 nations in the United Nations. Today, we are the sons of the soil of this country; we are the masters; we are the owners of this country. All the prosperity and all the good things of life that we enjoy at the moment must never be given away. If we want to keep all these things, we must have efficient security measures in the sense that every citizen must be well trained physically in the handling of weapons and must cultivate a sense of national consciousness, civic-mindedness and social obligations. Sir, when this amendment Bill is passed, the youths will be brought into the services. They will no doubt be instilled with the spirit of comradeship, loyalty, discipline and a love of their nation. Sir, national service is a patriotic duty. No one in his right mind will be against it except the - if I may be permitted to use this word - "traitors" to the nation. The Barisan Sosialis and racialists who owe their loyalty to other countries will oppose national service. As many of my colleagues have said in this House, the Barisan Sosialis will carry out their campaign against this Bill. Sir, they have already started to do this in its Chinese Party organ, the No. 219th issue dated 5th March, 1967. I consider this an act of high treason and the Government should take immediate action to smack them down! Sir, this amendment Bill was well received by the people in its First Reading on the 27th of February, 1967, because the masses understand the importance of having our own forces to look after our security and the well-being of this country. We cannot rely on so-called help from our neighbour. We can remember how we have been taught a severe lesson and given bitter treatment by foreign troops during the disturbances in 1964. It is still fresh in my mind and in the minds of all the people of Singapore. I have grounds to substantiate the fact that the people are with the P.A.P. Government. For instance, we launched a campaign for our citizens to join the People's Defence Force and the response was extremely good. They understand and realise what the Government is doing and what they themselves are serving. Sir, it is gratifying to know that the Minister has recognised the important part played by the Vigilante Corps in maintaining the peace and well-being of our State, and its inclusion into this Bill is very encouraging. Sir, I am a little disturbed over the terms of punishment in the Bill. To my mind, this Bill is of paramount importance to the security and survival of the Republic and, as such, the punishment of six months' imprisonment and $2,000 fine is too lenient, because we know that we are not dealing with loyal citizens but with traitors of the State. Sir, when we deal with them, we must deal with them hard! Sir, as many of my colleagues said in this House yesterday and today, we are a very peaceful and happy population. We do not want to build a big army which may disturb or scare our neighbour. But I cannot agree with some of my colleagues who have stated that we should have 50 per cent conscription. I fully agree, however, that we must take joint steps so that our neighbour will not be disturbed by our actions. Sir, it is not enough for 49 out of the 51 Members of this House just simply to pass this amendment Bill, but it is the duty of Members of Parliament and leaders of communities to drive home to the people the importance and value of the implementation of this Bill. Sir, I wish to endorse my wholehearted support of this National Service (Amendment) Bill.

(In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, although the whole world is singing of peace, the establishment of a military power and regular forces is still necessary so that it is even more important for citizens to undergo military training. As Singapore is an independent sovereign Republic, we must, like most small nations in the world, have some form of military organisation in our midst. As our island is of strategic importance in South-east Asia, we cannot afford to rely on our allies for our security all the time. The strength of our country is insignificant when compared with the military strength of the world powers even if we mobilise our whole population. In any case, it is better to be armed than to be completely unarmed and be caught unawares. From an economic point of view, Mr Speaker, we are unable to raise a very big regular armed force. Neither have we the military strength to do so. But, strategically speaking, we must try to mobilise our people to do part-time or other forms of military training, and the National Service (Amendment) Bill will provide this opportunity to do so. We shall then seize the opportunity to make use of our youths in military training over a short period and to train them to accept a disciplined way of life. They will be trained in the use of arms and, when necessary, they will be mobilised and called up for service. So our youths owe a duty to society to join national service and they will not, by so doing, increase the burden on the country. On the other hand, they will lend military significance to the defence of our country. At the same time, after some form of military training, the youths of our country will be discharged and revert back to their jobs and take part in productive activities. After such military training, which is very useful, our youths will be trained to become more useful citizens. They will be more productive because they are disciplined and that will be of benefit to society. Youths under the age of 21 constitute a great percentage of our population, and they must respond to the call of the nation. If we can give proper military training to them, then in time of necessity they will be called up into the regular armed forces or be placed in reserve, and because of the special training that they have received, they will also be better able to serve society in the economic field by raising their productivity. All those who are in the age groups liable to be called up will be given ample opportunity to receive military training, and it is a good chance for them to train and strengthen themselves. They will be able to improve their health and become more alert, thereby becoming better youths. So national service will be used to train our people, and our youth particularly, into a disciplined force. They will forever be ready to respond to the call of the nation. Furthermore, they can give even greater impetus to economic development and industrialisation. Mr Speaker, Singapore is a multi-racial society. If we want security, we must be able to see that the various races live in peace. To maintain law and order, we must ensure that the various races be tolerant with one another and not interfere with their respective ways of life. With the implementation of this Bill, all young people of various races and from various walks of life will be receiving similar military training in the same surroundings. They will be living the same life in the army or in the national service camp. They will be receiving disciplinary training and be inculcated with the sense of national consciousness and of social responsibility so that they will become better citizens in future. If all our citizens have national consciousness and a great sense of social responsibility, then we will be certain that there will be no more trouble in a multi-racial society in future, and the development of our nation will be carried out more effectively and efficiently. We shall be able to unite and withstand any possible foreign aggression instead of having a feeling of helplessness and despair. Mr Speaker, we must not stress too much on the military aspects of the training. We must, apart from military training, pay some attention to the cultivation of a good physique and good health and strong character in our people, so that they will become a live force in our nation. It is not necessary that we must have soldiers in our country. What we want are persons who have national consciousness and some form of military training and knowledge. The young people must be made to realise how they can behave properly in society and to discharge their social obligations and their duties as citizens. Therefore, they must always be prepared for any form of call-up, and they must all stand on their own feet and take part in economic activities. In this way, they will be able to do several things at the same time. They can help in the economic development and defence of our nation and in the maintenance of social order as well. From all aspects, we can see that national service is of great benefit to our society after we have achieved independence. I therefore support the National Service (Amendment) Bill and I appeal to all people in Singapore, particularly those youths who fall within the age group and who are liable to be called up, to respond to the call of the nation and to support the implementation of the Bill. Mr Speaker, Sir, I repeat once more - I support the Bill.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I am sure the question of the necessity of having national service is on the lips of a lot of parents and a source of malicious propaganda by the enemies within the Republic. We in Singapore are now enjoying a period of peace and relative prosperity, and it is the duty of our citizens to see to it that this state of well-being is ensured not only for themselves but also for their children. Must we, as a nation, depend on the protective shade given of by the defensive umbrella of a major power'? Are we going to be militarily weak or a submissive nation, or are we going to build our muscles? Every citizen must realise by now that Great Britain will not be able to look after our military needs forever. The introduction of national service is, therefore, a very wise and timely move, as it will stimulate our citizens to wake up and value this land of ours as their motherland. They should be proud that their teenage sons are going to spearhead a new generation of Singaporeans who will know how to protect and, if necessary, defend what is rightly theirs. However, I am not particularly happy to see the division of national service into four kinds, as I feel our young citizens should be given equal treatment. They should all undergo the same form of service, namely, military training - part-time for two years. There is nothing like a spell of military training and discipline to build up a new generation of tough, self-respecting and dedicated citizens. By putting all of them through the same mill will subject all the races to the same environment, so that there will be a togetherness not only in military training but also in the love of the nation, a better understanding of social obligation, and the development of civic-mindedness. Part-time and identical military training for the draftees for the first two years will thus allow them to complete their schooling or to go and find jobs for themselves. In this way, the Government will not be obliged to guarantee jobs to a small section of our national servicemen. My own feeling is that if we are going to introduce national service, we should go all out and put every one of our young men through a period of military training. I know we may not have enough facilities at the moment, but we should try to rectify this. Military instructors should be employed from the United Kingdom or elsewhere, and army camps should be constructed to meet the demands of the thousands of draftees per annum. There is no shortcut to perfection, and it is by toil, sweat and tears that we can develop a new generation of loyal citizens, a generation who will come to appreciate what is being done today by the Government. Mr Speaker, Sir, I am not suggesting that our national service should stop at a stage after two years of part-time military training. It should not be so. Once our young men have undergone military training, they should go on the reserve list and carry on with their national service, again on a part-time basis, in either the People's Defence Force, the Special Constabulary, or the Vigilante Corps, until they reach the age of 40. In conclusion, Sir, may I make a plea on behalf of the Vigilante Corps? I feel that the members of this Corps should be paid an allowance whenever they go on duty.

(In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, ever since 9th August, 1965, when Singapore proclaimed its independence to the world, the three important problems confronting it have been: (1) how to stabilise our political situation; (2) how to develop our economy; and (3) how to strengthen our national defence. The first two problems have been solved in the short time of one year by the far-sighted leadership of the Government and with the backing of the people. We have accomplished much during this short period of one year. Now that we have achieved this, how are we going to protect the fruits of our achievements? That is why the Minister of Defence has to table this National Service (Amendment) Bill which will consolidate our achievements and strengthen our national defence. Everyone is aware that externally and internally there are two kinds of people who do not like to see Singapore succeed. The first class of people are the racial extremists. They do not like to see the success of a multi-racial society. They like to impose their will upon others. They are bent on deceiving the people. The second class of enemies are the open-front organisations of the Communists. They fear that our success and happiness will not help them to incite the people to overthrow our Government. Because of the existence of these two kinds of people, we find it necessary to seek a more stable political situation, and further, to seek greater security for our nation, and to strengthen the nation's defences so that the lives and property of our people may be protected and safeguarded. Mr Speaker, Sir, the Singapore of today is not like what it was when it was under British colonialism. The Singapore of today is a Singapore which belongs to all the people here. The people must not be indifferent, self-centred and self-seeking. They must organise themselves to look after their own interest. There is a Chinese saying that the existence of a nation rests on the shoulders of the people. It is the duty of everybody to see that the nation survives. That is why those people who are liable to be called up must take this opportunity to do their part. Under the leadership of the P.A.P. Government, Singapore has won independence and has enhanced its position internationally. It is playing a more important role in world politics. It is occupying a very important and strategic position in South-east Asia. In view of this, we must set up our own defence system. We must not continue to rely on foreign troops to safeguard our country. We must, as a Republic and as a people, express our loyalty to the nation and give our lives to it. We must not forget that during the Second World War, the Japanese swept into Malaya and there were two disturbances in 1964. These disastrous historical lessons have taught us that it is not wise to rely on other people's troops. We would be merely humiliated and maltreated by other people. Even our very lives and property will not be safeguarded. The people in this Republic are enjoying security, the educational facilities, housing and other public amenities which are being provided by the Government. They must meet their obligation to protect whatever they are enjoying at present, and to ensure that the nation will not be invaded by others. The National Service (Amendment) Bill is only a further measure to prepare our young people to be rugged, brave, imbued with self-respect, and well equipped with modern weapons and dedicated to the protection of our country. My colleagues have already said that national service is not a unique thing. Many advanced countries also have national service. However, I hope the Minister will take note of one point; that is, that those people who are in possession of the blue identity cards and who fall within this age group, if they have acquired the necessary qualifications for citizenship and are desirous of becoming Singapore citizens, should also be called up to take up the national service. This will show whether they are loyal to our nation. Lastly, I wish to express my full-hearted support for this Bill. 4.36 p.m.

(In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to air my views on the National Service (Amendment) Bill. This Bill is very important to the defence of our country. Since 9th August, 1965, Singapore has been an independent sovereign country. Soon after that, Singapore joined the United Nations and ranks equally with all the other nations in the world. Only a minority group amongst our people do not recognise the fact of our independence. Mr Speaker, Singapore has become an independent sovereign country, and because of this status the people of Singapore have become the masters of this place. They have entered a new phase in the history of Singapore. To the people of Singapore who once lived under colonial rule, independence, liberty and sovereignty are precious. They have to cherish and protect them. In order to achieve this, we must first protect the lives of the people; secondly, protect the integrity of the country; and, thirdly, maintain the sovereignty of the country. In order to achieve these three objectives, we must at least have a national force capable of defending ourselves against any foreign invasion or internal subversion. If our defence system has to depend on other countries and not on our own strength, then the sovereignty of our country would, of course, be in the hands of foreigners. We would then enjoy independence in name only, and the fate of the country will be very precarious indeed. In view of this, soon after our independence our country announced a kind of national service scheme to enable our people to serve voluntarily in the People's Defence Force. There has been keen response to this call from people in all walks of life. As citizens of the independent Republic of Singapore, we have the duty to respond to the call to serve the country. Our Ministers and Parliamentary Secretaries and Members of Parliament have set a good example to the people by joining the volunteer forces. Last year, when our Members of Parliament paraded through the streets on National Day, they were applauded by the people who watched the parade. This was an encouraging sight to all. The National Service (Amendment) Bill is in keeping with the interest of our country, and I am sure it will receive warm support from all citizens of Singapore. It will afford an opportunity to patriotic youths to serve the country. They will be inculcated with a sense of discipline, of national consciousness and patriotism. It will also enable our people to take up arms in the defence of our country and to maintain a strong defence force to safeguard the country and train a rugged and closely-knit society which will endure forever. The Minister of Defence has announced in this House that soon the Government will enrol youths of a stipulated age group to serve full-time for two years, and also to serve 12 years part-time in the Vigilante Corps, the Police Force and the People's Defence Force. From his statement, we can see that the Government has also taken into consideration the interests of those who have been called up for service. For instance, to all those who have been affected by the call-up, after two years of training the Government will guarantee that they will be able to return to their jobs in Government departments, statutory boards and private firms. Part-time service will only be undertaken in their spare time and during the week-ends. The Bill also provides that employers should give every facility to youths who have been called up so that they will not be inconvenienced. As for those youths studying abroad, their call-up will be deferred. All those called up will not suffer any disadvantage. However, I would like the Minister to consider certain points. National service should not cause poor youths, who are good in their studies or who are seeking to further their studies, to lose their opportunity. At the same time, it should not provide any opportunity for the rich to evade national service. We know that the Government will select ten per cent - the elite - from the people who are called up to serve in the regular army. This age group will coincide with the age for schooling and some youths will have to depend on scholarships and other forms of financial aid in order to carry on with their higher studies. If such youths were selected for national service, they would lose their opportunity and the means available to them for further studies. Thus this may lead to a shortage of personnel in some fields. On the other hand, students from rich families can afford to and may want to study abroad. They may get deferment in call-up, and after some time, when they have grown up beyond the age limit stipulated by the law, they will escape national service. So I would like the Minister to pay attention to this and I hope that he will see to it that the youths are well advised to register for this national service. I appeal to them to respond to this call. 4.46 p.m.

(In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, the National Service (Amendment) Bill has been introduced into this House. This goes to show that the Government of Singapore is a very responsible and good one. Under the guidance and through the efforts of the Minister of Defence, the Bill has been introduced in time. Generally, it is true with all countries that irrespective of their different conditions they have worries of some sort. Especially in the middle of the 20th century, there have been great policy changes and political repercussions throughout the world. If such radical changes in national policy were in the hands of an irresponsible government, the people will lose the safeguards to their lives and property, and the security of the country will also be endangered. Our country will be affected if there are any political changes and repercussions in other countries. Politics is a dynamic phenomenon. So if anything were to happen, then a peaceful and prosperous country might overnight become a conquered country living under the rule of another. This will chill one's bones and it is really something we should watch out against. Ours is a newly independent emergent country. We have mobilised all our people and have gone through a long period of struggle to achieve our present independent status. The People's Action Party has acquired independence for the people of Singapore. I believe it has lived up to the aspirations of the people. It has implemented various measures for their benefit, brought about freedom and equality, and provided what the people want. It is the first time in the history of Singapore that the people have such a capable, strong and efficient government with such verve and spirit and achievements. Some people may say that in a democratic country, the demands of the people are more than those in other countries. Therefore, the facilities of such a country must be more advanced and progressive than those provided by the other countries. There are many countries which call themselves democratic, but because of the emptiness of the leadership who is devoid of capacity and efficiency and the right attitude, such countries, after a long rule under such leadership, have fallen into a mess and the people are in dire poverty and struggling in deep waters and have become completely disillusioned. We must give credit to our Minister of Defence who has drafted this far-sighted scheme in time which will provide an opportunity for our youth to receive training and so put our country always in a state of preparedness. The National Service (Amendment) Bill is not what the Barisan Sosialis think. It is not a means to make cannon fodder or running dogs of our people. Our society and our political entity is formed by the will and energy of our people and is an expression of the idealism and will of our people. Every citizen has a say in the administration of the Government. Yet there are some people who disdain government policies and have caused difficulties to the society and the Government. But if the policies are carried out with full conviction and force for the good of the country, the Government will be able to overcome all difficulties. The force of a united people is like running water which cannot be stopped by the meagre strength of the Barisan Sosialis. The Government will not treat the people just like sheep. If it has good policies and an efficient administration, the people will certainly support it until success is achieved. We should all recognise that the object of the Government's policies is directed at the interests and welfare of the people. The debate today on this Bill could actually have been dispensed with as the people have full confidence in this government. Why do we now debate it? In actual fact, the Minister could have set up a committee to implement it. But because we arc democratic, we must go through the democratic process in respect of every policy and measure affecting the people, and so we have to spend some time studying it. The Bill is based on the interest of all the people. There are various opinions existing in our country. Some people may think that though national service is very good, it is better that other children should be called up and that their children must be exempted. That is not practicable. The proposition advanced by the Barisan Sosialis is not to want any national service at all. They incite the people against it and would rather see the country subject to others. The Government has the means and capacity to take strong measures to expose these destructive elements. In order to practise democracy and efficient government, we should afford the people an opportunity for discussion. This, at the same time, will see the government through any crisis. We believe we can achieve this in our country. The Bill has also something to do with the other aspects of our lives and aims, because it will ensure that the achievements in our culture, economy, education, health and construction can survive and endure. We are living not only in a multi-racial society but also in a society where there is equality of opportunities and services, including equality of religion, economy and education. The people no doubt can have many wants and opinions. For instance, we want better social services, houses, and a higher level of education. We want to develop industrially; we want better health amenities and a better living standard, etc. All this our Government has been trying to achieve for the people. Together with the concerted effort of the people, it has been able to overcome difficulties and carry out various plans and measures. Other than the daily problem of livelihood, there are other problems. For instance, whenever there is a fire or a flood in any area, the Government, together with civic organisations, is able to provide immediate relief to the people affected. We all know that we have good living conditions. We should not allow our paradise to be invaded by anybody. We must also look after the interests and survival of the country and not just after our own self-interests. We must not feel complacent for the present and ignore to watch out for any pitfall in the future. The National Service (Amendment) Bill will create a grand and open path for us to tread upon, a path which will lead to a better future. This Bill will better equip the people to face the present and the future so that it will bring about a sense of confidence in survival and a new spirit to our people, and we can all push out our chests in the Singapore of the 20th century and live and march towards a better future with courage and hope and confidence. The introduction of this Bill at this juncture is most appropriate. Sir, I support this Bill.

I think it is a convenient time to suspend the sitting. I will suspend now and resume the Chair again at 5.30 p.m. Sitting accordingly suspended at 4.57 p.m. until 5.30 p.m. Sitting resumed at 5.30 p.m.

Debate resumed.

Mr Speaker, Sir, almost 26 years ago when the British capitulated to Japanese troops in Singapore, Singaporeans of our generation learned of what can happen to a people in a country caught unprepared and unaware of the external possibilities in politics and in war. By an ironical twist of history, the people of Singapore were to be reminded of this same possibility less than three years ago when riots took place in Singapore, but this time an internal problem made possible and caused by external circumstances. In between this period, we have had armed Communist insurrections, Communist-inspired violence and unrest engineered by local stooges of foreign manipulators. The weapons of destruction now at the disposal of several nations are too terrifying if not too advanced for small nations like ourselves, regardless of whether they are developed or under-developed, to join the arms race. Today, jet fighters and jet-fighter bombers are said to be inadequate for the new situation and scope of total war. Singapore alone in any case cannot defend itself from nuclear attack. Be that as it may, we are living in an era when peoples and States are faced with newer types of aggression and foreign intervention. For some nations, international subversion has today become a convenient substitute for outright external aggression. It is in this context that we see the introduction of national service in the new setting of our independent and sovereign status. However much our adversaries - and here I refer to the Communists and their front organisations like the Barisan Sosialis - might attack national service, they know that this time we mean to be prepared against any possible emergency they might raise. With the passing of the National Service (Amendment) Bill, we are witnessing the opening of a new chapter in our history. We are moving into a new era of new possibilities and we should be alert to the new dangers in the region and further afield in the world. There are, on the other hand, the possibilities of new alignments and new alliances as we pursue our policy of non-alignment and as we cultivate for ourselves the maximum number of friends in peace and in war. There is an air of new consciousness among the people of Singapore. There is a new spirit of multi-racialism which is unique in this part of the world. This has been made possible by our internal policies which deliberately try to remove contradictions among the various linguistic, cultural, religious and racial groups. Even today, our armed forces have, as its head, a Eurasian. Brigadier Campbell is no more Chinese than I am an Eskimo. But he is there. That is the new spirit we have started and that is the new spirit which will radiate in the years ahead with our people. I can mention many other cases in various other Government Ministries and departments where, despite the Chinese majority in our Republic, people have come up on the basis of merit. But I need not go into this now. National service in our Republic will serve as a catalyst in building a nation out of our young people. It will teach our people that it is possible to share a common destiny, different and diverse as we are racially and in other respects. It is an opportunity to share common experiences and thereby foster the feeling of living as one people in one Singapore community. It is an augury for the greater success of our policy of multi-racialism in a world filled with racial intolerance, racial bigotry and racial discrimination. 5.36 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I support the Bill in principle. It is the duty of every citizen to ensure the security of his country and I am happy to note that the Government is introducing national registration to give an opportunity to all the citizens to serve their country in this respect. Sir, as the Minister pointed out yesterday, we all know that it is quite difficult to defend our country without external aid in case of a big-scale war, but we cannot have it as an excuse for not developing a defence force and I welcome the idea of regional co-operation in defence, as suggested by the Minister. Sir, I went through the pamphlet entitled "National Service and You". On page 2 of the booklet, mention is made about the allowances payable to those who take part in parades and it is also stated that members of the Vigilante Corps are not paid anything for taking part in national service. Sir, I do not agree on this point. It may be true that members of the Vigilante Corps have their training in the vicinity of their homes. I think allowances are paid to national service men to cover not only their transport expenses but also to meet incidental expenses such as refreshments and laundry. Sir, I would like to request the Minister to consider paying an allowance to members of the Vigilante Corps also. The quantum may not necessarily be equal to that paid to other branches of' national service. 5.38 p.m.

(In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I fully support the National Service (Amendment) Bill. Looking at the Bill as a whole, every one can understand that it is meant to defend our territorial integrity and sovereignty against any invasion or subversion. All independent countries, whether big or small, know that the successful defence of a country is the means of preserving their independence. Service to the country is not only a glorious task but it is also a great contribution by a citizen to his country. Sir, Singapore is a newly independent country and our citizens have a duty to shoulder the responsibility of defence of our country. Since the history of man, in whatever situation, place and development of society, the duty to protect one's country is absolute. This is true in all cases, be it in a capitalist country or a dictatorial country. Singapore has struggled to get rid of colonialism at great sacrifice and in the end we have achieved independence. Independence, sovereignty and "master of ourselves" mean that we have to decide our future for ourselves. This also implies that we have to manage our own defence problems. Therefore, following the independence of Singapore, the defence of this country will naturally fall upon the shoulders of all our citizens. We cannot deny that Singapore is a small country with very limited economic resources. Therefore, it is quite a problem to build up a large standing army in the economic sense. But we have to train and prepare our citizens in military affairs and some of them in military training so that they can take up arms in the defence of their country. Everyone knows that the National Service (Amendment) Bill is very necessary at the present juncture. Ever since the last time when the Government called upon the people to join the Vigilante Corps, the people have duly responded by also joining the People's Defence Force. This goes to show that they have a clear understanding of their duty to the country. I am confident that they will also respond well to this call to serve the nation. We cannot depend on those who only want to enjoy the benefits and rights given by the country hut who are not willing to shoulder their responsibilities and carry out their obligations. So this Bill is necessary to ensure the survival of our country and it is the duty of every citizen to ensure this. I hope that in the implementation of the call-up, we will pay attention to the fact that it will not be carried out to the detriment of our economy. According to the Bill, all youths in the age group of eighteen will be called up. Some of these youths are at an age when they are about to enter Universities after leaving higher secondary schools. I feel that higher education is important to the youths as well as to the country. Therefore, we must provide some means of resolving the problems of those youths who are attending higher education. For instance, in the University of Singapore and Nanyang University, there are several periods of long vacation in a year and perhaps we can make use of these periods to call them up for intense military training - say, for a total of three or four months of the vacation periods. The Government has already allotted four recruiting centres. I think they are not enough, and I suggest that the Defence Ministry should consider an increase. If the community centres in the various constituencies can be made available, it will be most ideal. It will then be convenient to most of the called-up youths. Also the community leaders living around these community centres can also come out to help and simplify matters. 5.46 p.m.

(In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to say something on the National Service (Amendment) Bill. I support it. We know that it is very meaningful as well as important. But some people do not want to join national service. Do they still believe in the old saying that good boys should not become soldiers? I will go a step further and say that women should also take up national service because they are also part of our population. They should also shoulder the same responsibility as men, to be soldiers and defend our country. We should not forget that this old Chinese saying, that good boys should not become soldiers, was evolved when soldiers were meant to protect the interests of the emperors and not the interests of the country. Therefore, the people then were unwilling to become soldiers. That is the reason that brought about this saying. But now the situation is different. In China today the people glorify the fact that they can become soldiers. So it seems that at present China is a country where everybody is a soldier. In the Middle East countries such as Israel, every man and every woman is a soldier. I would like to lend my support to the National Service (Amendment) Bill. I stress the point that not only men but also women should join national service. This is not with the intention to invade other territories or to rob others of their property. No. This is only in keeping with our national policy. We have to have our own national defence force to maintain our internal security and also prevent foreign aggression, and we will maintain a neutral position by making as many friends as possible with other countries. It is very significant and meaningful that we have this national service. I support this Bill. 5.49 p.m.

(In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, living in an independent democratic country such as ours, we know that every conscientious citizen should love his country. It is especially true with a country which has achieved its independence at the sacrifice of much blood and sweat of its people. Therefore, the people should value the fruits of independence more. On the other hand, we should also discuss the prerequisites or the attributes of a State. The prerequisites or attributes of a State are firstly, the people, secondly, territory, and thirdly, sovereignty. With these three prerequisites a State can he founded; not otherwise. These are the three prerequisites of a State. If we hope to protect them, we as a people have to form our political parties from which a government will be formed which will set up various institutions dealing with administration, defence, foreign affairs, finance, etc., with a view to protecting the lives and property of the people, to maintain law and order, to preserve territorial integrity, and to protect its sovereignty against any invasion. In order to achieve this grand ideal in the present situation which exists in our country, the introduction of the National Service (Amendment) Bill in this House is most appropriate and timely. As a representative of the people in this society of parliamentary democracy, it is my duty, in addition to serving my Party, to serve the country and the people loyally. That is my duty. And it is also my duty to bring the voice of the masses into this House so that their desires and ambitions can be heard. This House will formulate laws to meet the needs of the various sections of the people, especially today when there is no Opposition in this House. This unusual phenomenon - the absence of an Opposition - has been created by the irresponsible Opposition who have abandoned their duty to the people. Under these circumstances, we have an added burden and a moral responsibility to discharge. Unfortunately, certain sections of the public have levelled criticisms against us and not against those Opposition Members who have abandoned their duty. This amendment Bill, on the other hand, will take all manner of pretexts out of the hands of the Opposition who will try to make use of any opportunity to carry out their nefarious designs. I would like to add some supplementary views. We know that in the history of man there have been ideas, slogans or certain fancies which are rather rich in emotional content and which, if swallowed wholesale, may cause difficulties and troubles. We have seen certain events in the history of man which have been brought about by such factors. We also realise that all men must have worries of some sort. They must have some consideration for something they do. The time is appropriate for us to prepare ourselves for a rainy day. As a representative of our honest people, I have the duty to give a very frank and plain explanation to the people to enable them to prepare themselves for the sacred task of national defence. I would like to make some propositions for the consideration of this House: (1) During the call-up period of registration for national service, there may he some families with two or three members who are poor. In such a case, perhaps we may consider relaxing certain measures such as deferment of call-up. We should give more sympathetic consideration to such cases. (2) Students who are attending universities, colleges, or secondary schools -- we can give them certain consideration to enable them to continue with their studies and defer their call-up until they have completed their studies. In other words, we may perhaps postpone their call-up. (3) I would also appeal to employers to co-operate with those youths who are called up and to accord them some facilities and convenience, otherwise such youths may meet with certain difficulties. I hope that employers are judicious and patriotic and may be able to accord these facilities and co-operation. I appeal to them earnestly to co-operate in this matter. Finally, I express my support for the National Service (Amendment) Bill. 6.00 p.m.

(In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, the Minister of Defence may be happy to hear that there are so many unanimous voices supporting the Bill. It seems that there is general agreement on this Bill. Everybody agrees that, for the sake of national defence, every conscientious citizen should have the duty and obligation to support this Bill and take up national service to defend his country. As ours is an independent country - for that matter, a very small one - we cannot rely on foreign forces to defend ourselves. This task must devolve on our own people. Dependence on others for our defence will be detrimental to our dignity. National service will give the youth an opportunity to serve the country. Nobody can deny that the majority of our people have been staying here for many generations. Many of them have been born here and have been brought up here, and their fate is inseparably bound up and intertwined with the fate of our country. We have a common destiny. There are some people who are citizens of Singapore, their hearts are not with Singapore, and in a national crisis these people may perhaps want to escape to other countries. If we had to rely on foreign forces and these people to defend ourselves, then it would be to no avail. National service will provide military training to the youths who have been called up, and will give them a sense of pride. This military service will also make the parents of such youths proud of themselves and proud of their children, because they have the opportunity and the glorious task of defending the people and the country. As a small country, we have no intention of committing aggression against any other country. But when any country intends to invade us or threaten us, we must have the means to see ourselves through such a situation. We cannot tolerate others to invade us. Our people are youthful, with much energy and spirit, and we should not stand any aggression. The national service we provide now is not the same as that provided during the colonial regime. At that time the people opposed national service vehemently and brought about various riots and violent events, and many youths went to China and other countries to escape serving their colonial masters through national service. But national service today is meant to provide the means for the people to defend their own country. Only when a country exists can a family exist. The country must come first. This should be the thinking of our people. In order to make a country strong, we must make our people strong. Before the passage of this Bill, I would like to raise a few suggestions to the Minister in charge of it. When some students are attending colleges and universities or secondary schools, it is necessary to see to that their call-up will not impede their studies. I agree to what the Parliamentary Secretary has said just now, that we should make use of the long school vacations to give them full-time training. As for those who join national service of their own accord, the Ministry should recruit them whole-heartedly without any reservation. I understand that when such people wanted to join the People's Defence Force or the other services in response to the government's call, their applications were rejected, perhaps for minor physical reasons. But this would deter their enthusiasm. They wanted to join these services not because they wanted to solve their employment problem. They merely wanted to avail themselves of the opportunity to serve their country. So I hope the departments concerned will recruit as many of such people as possible who have volunteered to join the services of their own accord. Sir, I support this Bill. 6.07 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, over a year ago, a call was made to our citizens to come forward to serve in the armed forces. The response was better than expected and we now have a volunteer force larger than we ever had before or even dreamed of having. A large number of the force is, however, made up of citizens from the lower income groups who came out of their own free will to serve the nation when the call was made, and I take off my hat to them. Where were the young men from well-to-do families, the young intellectuals and those with long hair-dos? They were satisfied with sitting back and saying, "Well, there are enough stupid chaps willing to join up. Why should I?" They were willing then to let the stupid chaps do the fighting should the occasion arise and to protect them if trouble arose. And I think they still have the same view today as they had over a year ago. National service has not come too soon. It is time that every citizen realized that he has a duty to ensure the security and well-being of his country. Our thinking a year ago and our thinking today is the same. As a small nation, we know that it is beyond our resources to have a large standing army. Experience has shown us that it is pointless. What we need is a small but tough, well equipped, well-trained and disciplined force imbued with the spirit that this is their country and that they will defend it with their lives. The plan, therefore, to have full-time military service for a small number of people is a good one. As in the past, a larger number will be asked to serve on a part-time basis in the People's Defence Force, the Special Constabulary and the Vigilante Corps. Let us not, however, get the idea that by serving in the People's Defence Force, we will be serving in a less superior unit than by being a regular or serving as a full-time national serviceman. The greatest mistake we can make is to belittle the part that the volunteer plays in the defence of his country. He is just as well trained, although his period of training is just a few hours a week. It should be appreciated that, after a full day's work, he is prepared to sacrifice a few hours of leisure by going for military training. It would appear that in our eagerness to introduce national service, we are forgetting those that are serving as volunteers. For instance, Sir, in clause 2 (a) of the Bill, the definition of "armed forces" says: '"armed forces" means any force constituted under the provisions of the Singapore Army Act, 1965, and includes the Peoples Defence Force constituted under the provisions of the Peoples Defence Force Act, 1965;'. This, I take it, covers those at present serving as volunteers in the Peoples Defence Force. New section 2lA in clause 20, however, does not appear to cover volunteers as regards pay or leave, but only those in the national service reserve. The reason, I think, Sir, is the fact that several volunteers have lost their jobs for serving their country, and the more fortunate are paid for attending parades. I would like the Minister's assurance that this new section 2lA covers the volunteers now serving in the Peoples Defence Force. If it does not, all that we are trying to build up will be in vain. Those who have come of their own free will to serve the nation are not even protected by law and they will, therefore, lose faith in the Government. There are other things which we have to guard against, and that is to consider one unit of the armed forces more superior than another. By this, I do not mean that there should not be a distinction between the various services. For example, the army or the navy. What I mean is that there should not be a distinction between a regular soldier, a national serviceman, and a volunteer in regard to the uniform he wears and the accessories. We are endeavouring to have a closely-knit society in Singapore. Let us now take this opportunity, with national service, to build up an army where every soldier, irrespective of which unit he belongs to, can say with pride, "I am a member of the Singapore Army," and not, "I am only a national serviceman," or "I am a professional soldier." Sir, I hope the Minister will bear this in mind whenever he is advised to create a distinction between the various units in the armed forces. I would, in concluding, say that I fully support the Bill.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the introduction of the National Service (Amendment) Bill is a very serious matter which will affect the lives of our youths and will change the whole character of our people and our Republic. I support this Bill and I am proud to be associated with its introduction. No self-respecting country can depend or continue to depend on outside forces to protect it. National service will provide an opportunity to integrate the various races of our citizens into a closely-knit society. It will bring together our youths from all grades. Whether they are rich or poor, whether they come from wealthy merchants or shop-keepers, they will have an equal opportunity and play their part in the building of our nation. The introduction of this Bill is most significant especially at a time when the British, through their representatives, are urging their Government to consider seriously to reduce or withdraw their security commitments in this area and in the Far East. It is likely that in the near future the British Government will hold discussions with the Singapore Government en the reduction or withdrawal of their armed forces. I am glad this Bill, which has been introduced, will give cur Minister of Defence pride in the discussions as we will not be found wanting in the will or determination to organise our people to defend and to protect our own country. Mr Speaker, Sir, it is an honour to take up national service, and to ensure that the scheme is successful, parents should give every encouragement to their children to take up national service. In the implementation of this Bill, I would urge the Minister to exercise extreme firmness in dealing with those who evade or attempt to evade national service. But I also do hope that the Ministry's staff should be considerate and fair where fairness and consideration are merited. 6.21 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, it is an accepted principle throughout the world that the privilege of citizenship carries with it the liability to engage in military training for the defence of the country. It is clear that this principle does not need any elaboration. But before I go further, I would like to make a passing reference to the very few of our people who consider that we are not, in fact, a free and independent country. Logically, these people, if they possess pink identity cards, should exchange them for blue ones. For then they would have at least a little ground to object to military training in defence of the country. In fact, I should say they would then have no right at all to raise their voices for they are not citizens. But for those of our citizens, our able-bodied young men, they will have to have the sense of responsibility to defend the democratic institutions upon which the liberties of our people depend. The question may be asked, how far are we justified in calling upon the individual citizen to make a personal sacrifice for the benefit of the State? Can we admit in any circumstances that there should be compulsory national service? I will just quote a couple of examples in reply to them. We all do accept compulsion in taxation, for we look upon it as necessary and inevitable if a government were to carry on its business of governing the country. Again, we accept without any question the principle of compulsory insurance of motor vehicles for very obvious reasons. So, when it comes to the question of the State's actual security and existence, no one in his right mind should question the necessity of compulsory national service. It has been said that "Civilisation is in itself an admission that the interests of the individual must be subordinate to `those of the community." We cannot wait for a national disaster to occur before compelling the citizens to take their share in the duty of defence. If it were so, then it would be like trying to organise a fire brigade after a fire had actually started. We cannot leave democracy and progress at the mercy of indifference and irresponsibility. We must realise that in the modern world, even the best of social conditions can easily be upset in a day or two unless the country in which they exist is able to defend itself. Those of you who have studied the history of South America know that in ancient Peru the peonle had realised the condition of socialism. But we know how easily a few armed invaders under the Spanish conquerors over-ran the country and over-threw their socialism at a touch. Mind you, the Peruvians outnumbered the Spaniards by at least a thousand to one, but the Spaniards were armed and know how to use their arms, while the Peruvians had no arms to speak about, or at best they merely had an army in name. The fate of the Peruvians suffices to show that even a perfect social and industrial system, if not efficiently organised and defended, may go down easily before an armed and trained invader. Again, Sir, I can just imagine that a very small minority of our people will make a hue and cry against national service, saying that it is undemocratic. Let me ask them, is there anything undemocratic in the proposal that every citizen, to whatever class of the community he may belong, and irrespective of race, should have the same liability to serve the State under exactly similar conditions? In fact, I would say that this is the very essence of true democracy. Every young able-bodied man should be proud to take his place as a member of the thousands of fellow citizens in defence of his country and bear his share of the country's burdens. This proposition will certainly meet with the absolute approval and wholehearted support of all loyal citizens. The practical side of national service, that is, the drill parades, the training in the various aspects of self-defence and discipline, are in themselves good for the character building of every individual. This is only by the way, for the cardinal principle in national service is that it is the duty of every citizen to submit to whatever sacrifice (if you can call it `sacrifice') he may be called upon to make. As a matter of fact, the provisions in the Bill, the so-called sacrifice which the individual citizens are asked to make, are little enough compared with those of the advanced countries of the world. I am sure the young able-bodied citizens of our country will not consider it a sacrifice when they are called upon to serve the country under the provisions of this Bill. The very great majority of them will certainly accept their responsibility and consider it a privilege to be able to take an honourable part in the defence of their country. The old out-dated idea that we are sojourners in the land of our adoption can no longer prevail. For if we consider our welfare and prosperity, indeed our very existence, and if we are a reasonable and thoughtful people, it must be considered an obligation and indeed a privilege for everyone who is able to learn to defend the country in case of a national emergency. The solution, for the continued existence of our democratic institutions, indeed our very freedom and liberty, rests in armed strength and not in unarmed weakness. 6.29 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, may I, first of all, express my thanks and appreciation to Members of the House who have made so many useful contributions in the course of this debate. I think I am in general agreement with them as regards the necessity for taking the measures that we have to. Some Members have raised a number of points and have brought to my attention some problems which they think might arise in the course of the implementation of the Ordinance, and these points deserve comment from me. First, the Member for Telok Blangah has asked whether, if in future persons in military service are victimised in some way or other because they cannot do overtime as a result of military training, some safeguards cannot be found to protect their interests. The answer is, of course, in two years' time when these national servicemen, i.e, the full-time soldiers, go into the reserve and get employed under this Scheme of Direction of Employment, there will be no inducement for the employer to discriminate against the reservists, because if he does so and the reservist leaves his employment, what he will get as replacement is another reservist. The Member for Bukit Merah has brought up a theme very close to my heart, that is the singing of military songs by our soldiers. In fact, some months ago, I asked the professional officers to produce a song-book, but because they were trained in the British tradition, they could not see why an army should have a song-book. However, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Culture is producing a song-book for the Vigilante Corps. There are about 100 songs one third in the national language, one-third in Chinese and one-third in English. So the Vigilante Corps will have a song-book before long, and I think, when the soldiers see that, they will insist that their professional officers produce a song-book which will be as inspiring. The Member for Bukit Merah objects to the practice of blowing a trumpet In the Infantry Regiments to announce meal-times. I myself cannot see anything wrong with it. If you do not have a trumpet, then you must have gongs or sirens or you let off fireworks. I do not know what the point is, whether meal-times should not be announced or should be announced with the use of some other instrument. Mr Lim Guan Hoo rose ---

I think the Member for Bukit Merah wants to make a point of clarification. Dr Goh Keng Swee resumed his seat.

(In Mandarin): I am not opposed to the blowing of a trumpet. But I would like to know whether the blowing of a trumpet or a bugle without military songs will be appropriate in the situation.

Are you going to have solos or accompanied bugle playing?

We will see to it that the trumpets and bugles are properly tuned! The Member for Punggol has raised a number of important points. First, with regard to clause 5, he asks, "Why should the Minister and not the President issue the notice in the Gazette requiring people to register?" This, of course, is a routine administrative matter and it is not the usual practice to saddle the President with administrative measures of this kind. He asks, "Why not bring in youths from the ages of 18 to 25 into the national service?" And in this, he is supported by the Member for Anson. The answer is that the exercise will be bogged down by the sheer numbers involved. In each age group, you roughly have anything between 19,000 and 25,000, and if you extend it to say eight years, you may have to deal with something like 120,000 persons. We have neither the staffing, training nor physical resources to cater for national service on that scale, nor is it necessary really to do so. The payment of allowances for the Vigilante Corps is supported by the Members for Punggol, Havelock, Joo Chiat and Aljunied I am still of the opinion that service in the Vigilante Corps is voluntary and it should be made voluntary. I will try to make arrangements for free bus travel for those who have to attend training classes. The Member for Farrer Park has some curious notions about what sort of people would be required to join the full-time army. He thinks it will be the less intelligent and not the more brainy type. I can assure him that those joining the army will not only have muscles but will also have brains. So I think the fear that he has expressed that the personnel in Government service will be less and less intelligent is groundless. The Member for Joo Chiat has put forward a novel proposition that, instead of asking the youths to do four different kinds of service, they should all do the same service for two years and all part-time service. This is not practical, because if you do this, then you will not have an army because an army must be manned by full-time personnel. One way of getting everybody to do the same thing would be to get everybody to do full-time military training for two years, as it is being done in several countries like Switzerland, Sweden, Israel and others. But we have worked out the cost of this exercise and it is something that the Republic just cannot afford. In ten years' time, this kind of thing is guaranteed to make us completely bankrupt. The Member for Paya Lebar has made a very useful suggestion and that is that if in future non-citizens apply for citizenship, they should be required to do military service. I think this is a very valuable suggestion which the Government will bear in mind. The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for National Development is doubtful whether four registration centres would be enough and he thinks that all community centres should be mobilised into service. The point is that during the 16 days in which young men will be registered, there will be only 600 a day, and to deal with such a number a day, four registration centres would be sufficient provided that boys of 18 turn up on the scheduled dates. If, of course, they all turn up on one particular day, then the whole exercise would be busted. That can happen whether you have four centres or more than four centres. The Member for Tiong Bahru suggests that women should participate in national service. I must ask him to remember that the national service we have here is compulsory and not voluntary. Anybody who is asked to join the full-time army and does not do so goes to gaol, and I do not think we have reached the stage where we will tell women, "Unless you do this, that or the other, you will spend six months in gaol." [Laughter] This is not a laughing matter at all. The Member for Bukit Timah makes a plea for families who may have two or three members called up. I do not see how this can happen unless, of course, they are twins and the particular parents are unusually prolific. Of course, in the law itself, there is allowance to exempt or defer national service on the ground of hardship where hardship can be proved. The Member for Bukit Timah and the Member for Ulu Pandan make a plea on behalf of students who are now studying in universities and ask that their service be deferred. I will lay them a bet of 100 to one that there is no student in Nanyang University or the University of Singapore who is liable to national service because this concerns only people aged 18 and those in the universities are at least 19, 20 years old or more. The Member for Ulu Pandan wants to retain voluntary participation in the Vigilante Corps and the People's Defence Force, and I think he has a valid point. We will, of course, try to take in people of other age groups who want to join up. But in the first phase of national service, I think the whole administration will be very hard put to it just to cope with the 18,000 or so who will have to do their national service this year. So when the machinery has settled down and we have more resources by way of instructors, barracks and classrooms, we will bear his suggestion in mind. The Member for Serangoon Gardens expresses the hope that we will not forget the P.D.F. - those who have volunteered so magnificently in the last year and a half and at some sacrifice. I assure him that we have the highest esteem for these volunteers and that their interest will be protected in every way possible. As regards uniforms, I absolutely accept his proposal that uniforms should be the same for all units, with, of course, differences in formation signs. The Member for Serangoon Gardens also asks whether section 21A covers the present P.D.F. Section 21A does not cover the present P.D.F. - that is, the obligation of the employer to grant leave to those on the national reserve to enable them to do their annual training. So the answer is `No'. But my Ministry' is thinking of amending the Ordinance to give members of the P.D.F. - that is, the volunteer members - the same kind of cover and protection. Finally, the Member for River Valley has asked me to deal firmly with evasion. I can give him an assurance that this is very much in my mind.

Question put, and agreed to. Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House. The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. -[Dr Goh Keng Swee] Bill considered in Committee.

6.43 p.m. Clauses 1 to 4 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill. 6.45 p.m. Clause 5 -

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, In page 2, line 22, to leave out the bracket, and In page 2, line 23, to leave out the bracket. These are drafting amendments. Amendments agreed to. Clause 5, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 6 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 7 -

There is a clerical amendment, In page 3, line 2, to leave out "expresion" and insert "expression". That will be done. Clause 7 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clauses 8 to 14 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 15 -

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, In page 9, line 34, to leave out "one weekend" and insert "up to two weeks' ". In page 9, line 35, to leave out "a month", and In page 9, line 35, at end, to insert a comma. Mr Speaker, Sir, the first amendment to this clause is considered necessary because, after some experience now with the training in the P.D.F., it is found that week-end training is not really the answer in terms of efficiency and economy. During the week-end, considerable time is wasted in travelling to and from camping sites and training areas, and comparatively little time is spent on actual training. A continuous period of in-camp training during the first six months would, therefore, he much more effective from the training point of view and would also enable recruits to gain an insight into camp life at an early stage of their training. The second amendment is considered necessary because of the first amendment, and the third amendment is merely a matter of drafting. Amendments agreed to. Clause 15, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clauses 16 to 19 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 20 -

Sir, I beg to move, In page 11, line 18, to leave out "trading" and insert "training". This is purely a typographical amendment. Amendment agreed to. Clause 20, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 21 - Question proposed, "That clause 21 stand part of the Bill."

Mr Speaker, Sir, my attention has been drawn to paragraph (g) of clause 21, which is to allow for the serving of notice to a person displaying the notice "at some public place". What is intended here is to display a notice of all undelivered notices served on persons at community centres nearest to the address of the person on whom the notice is meant to be served. It is a regrettable fact that in Singapore the postal service does not reach a considerable proportion of residents. In the rural areas, for instance, there is a large number of attap huts whose numbers are either unofficial or, if they are official, they do not run serially. There have been cases where the same set of numbers appear along the same road at different places. In the slums of Chinatown, many families may share the same address and when the postman delivers a letter to this address, it is by no means certain that the addressee will get the letter or the notice. In serving a notice to national servicemen or persons liable to national service, every attempt will be made to reach them personally, either by post or by personal messenger. The method of informing people of their national service liability provided for in paragraph (g) of clause 21 will be used only as a last resort.

Question put, and agreed to. Clause 21 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clauses 22 and 23 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Bill reported with amendments; read a Third time and passed.

6.56 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, subject to your consent and the general assent of the House, under Standing Order 98 I beg to move, That notwithstanding the provisions of Standing Order 1 (5) , the Moment of Interruption at this day's sitting be 7.15 p.m. instead of 8.00 p.m., and notwithstanding the provisions of Standing Order 1 (3) , the time appointed for the termination of the sitting be 7.45 p.m. instead of 8.30 p.m.

I give my assent. Do I have the general assent of Members to accept this motion? Hon. Members indicated assent.

Question put, and agreed to. Resolved, That notwithstanding the provisions of Standing Order 1 (5) , the Moment of interruption of this day's sitting be 7.15 p.m. instead of 8.00 p.m., and notwithstanding the provisions of Standing Order 1 (3) , the time appointed for the termination of the sitting he 7.45 p.m. instead of 8.30 p.m.

6.58 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move the motion standing in my name, That this House takes note of the Report of the Constitutional Commission, 1966, presented to this House as Command Paper No. 29 of 1966, and endorses the Government's views thereon as set out in the Statement by the Minister for Law and National Development made at the sitting of this House on 21st December, 1966. Mr Speaker, in my Statement made in this House on the 21st December, 1966, I set out Government's views on the recommendations of the Commission, and I do not propose at this stage to say anything further. I do hope that most Members of this House will speak on this motion and let their views be known. In particular, I hope that Ministers will also take the Floor. Sir, I beg to move. Question proposed.

7.00 p.m.

(In Mandarin): Sir, the Report of the Constitutional Commission, 1966, can be described as a very valuable and far-sighted historic document ever presented to this House since independence. Most of the recommendations contained in the Report have been accepted by the Government and are intended to be written into our future Constitution. The majority of the constructive recommendations will undoubtedly become the basis of the new Constitution of our independent country, and this Constitution will become an example, we hope, to independent countries in this part of the world. I should say that the Constitutional Commission have lived up to the expectations of all the people. They have recognised our present situation and have recommended the constitutional provisions which take into account our ideal for a multi-racial, multi-religious, and multi-cultural society, and have provided safeguards to be entrenched in the Constitution. This will provide for the peace and security and for the maintenance of law in this society and ensure the perpetuation of our independent Republic. Compared with other countries, ours is one that is standing on firm ground and our Government is one that is working for the benefit and in the best interest of the people, leading the country on to the correct path towards a better and brighter future. Sir, I would not like to touch upon every aspect of this Report. I will merely touch upon several important points in the recommendations, namely, the setting up of the Council of State, the Ombudsman, and provisions to be entrenched in the Constitution. Firstly, the Constitutional Commission, after considering all factors, have suggested for inclusion in the Constitution provisions for the setting up of an advisory body called the Council of State comprising 21 members to guard against the passage of any discriminatory legislation affecting the interests of any minorities with a view also to ensuring that, in the present situation where the House has no effective Opposition, the Council of State can provide some supervision over Government legislation. In other words, this Council of State may be able to exercise the duties that an Opposition Party should exercise in this House. This Council of State lies somewhere between Parliament and an Upper House. In our country, this institution will be something like the House of Lords of the British Parliament. As far as I understand, the British House of Lords is a characteristic monarchic institution in that it is merely an aristocratic Council for the purpose of emplacing people who have contributed to that country and providing them with a means of livelihood in their old age. The House of Lords actually has not much power or effect over the passing of laws. So there has been controversy over the need of the House of Lords. Some people have proposed its abolition, but without avail. But the present situation obtaining in our country is different. Because of the inefficiency of the Opposition and their boycott of this House, a situation is created where we should have somebody to take their part, hence the Council of State. As to the merits and demerits of this Council of State, I will touch on several points. We find that: (1) The composition of this Council of State, according to the Report, should be of citizens who have contributed to public service, and have distinguished themselves in their own walks of life. We have general agreement on this point. Inevitably there can be diverse views in the Council, and if their views differ from the views of the people, we doubt whether the views held by the members of the Council can be representative of the views of the people. (2) The number of members in the Council is 21. With such a large number of members, it will be very difficult to arrive at unanimous agreement in any matter. I feel that if such a situation happens, then this House will be faced with various diverse opinions. (3) The Government will incur additional expenditure by setting up this Council. For instance, if every Councillor were to draw $500 allowance every month, the Government would have to spend more than $100,000 every year. Whether this is worthwhile or proper will have to be considered. (4) The Constitutional Commission, in considering the setting up of this Council, took into account the present situation in the House where there is no Opposition. When there is an Opposition in this House, what would be the position of this Council of State? This might be an interim measure recommended by the Commission. But nobody can guarantee that there will never be an Opposition in this House. So we should consider this point and see whether it is appropriate to have such an institution. The next point I would touch upon is the system of Ombudsman. The tasks of this Ombudsman are, namely, to supervise the administration of various administrative institutions and deal with complaints against them. In principle, this system is laudable because the Ombudsman can supervise the various administrative organs and make them more effective and efficient.

7.09 p.m. This system has been in practice in Sweden for more than 100 years. In the British Commonwealth, Britain has only recently considered the adoption of this system. In 1962 New Zealand made use of this system. So far this system is still in an experimental stage there and the result is still not known. Britain adopted this system by an Act in 1966. But so far it has still not put it into practice. Other Commonwealth countries like Australia, India and Canada, whose history of independence has been longer than ours, have not adopted this system. Singapore has been independent for not more than two years. It would be appropriate if we were to describe it as a baby. For a baby to learn every act of a grown-up is not logical. Therefore, the Government can only accept this suggestion in principle. This is the correct attitude. Let us look at the results of the countries which are implementing this system before we decide to adopt it. Let us see during the next five or ten years what contribution this system can make in other countries. If it is practicable, then we can consider whether the same results can be achieved in our country. This is another point that merits our consideration, not to say that our environment and our situation and position are entirely different from those obtaining in New Zealand and other countries. Though at present we do not have the Ombudsman, yet we have the Central Complaints Bureau. People can lodge their complaints about administrative faults with this Central Complaints Bureau with a view to redressing their grievances, if they could not get their remedy at the courts. This Bureau would be something like an Ombudsman. The Director of the Central Complaints Bureau has powers and facilities similar to those provided for the Ombudsman, except the power to call for evidence and witnesses. When necessary, he can suggest to the Prime Minister to adopt certain measures. In the fifth chapter of the Report, three methods are suggested in relation to the entrenchment of certain provisions in the Constitution. Firstly, a Bill altering the Constitution should not be passed unless it is expressly stated therein that it is introduced with a view to making such amendments only. Secondly, the Bill amending the Constitution should, in the final voting, have received at least a two-thirds majority of the elected Members of Parliament before it can be passed. Thirdly, any provisions amending the Constitution should be presented and approved by the majority of those who are qualified to vote, both inside and outside the House. The Government has adopted the second method, which is the most appropriate in our present situation. 7.15 p.m.

Order. Moment of Interruption. Mr Ho, this is a convenient point in your speech to adjourn. Mr Barker, will you move the adjournment?

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That this House do now adjourn. Question proposed.

7.16 p.m.

(In Malay): Mr Speaker, the present Government should be commended for its efforts to raise the standard of living of our multi-racial, multi-cultural and multi-religious people and to give more prosperity and happiness, be they in social activities or development projects. We can see for ourselves that many schools have been built to cater for the increasing number of the country's school-going children; factories have been set up to provide more employment to our school-leavers; old and dilapidated houses have given way to modern multi-storey flats in order to solve the housing problems faced by our people. At the same time, drains have been constructed, whilst the smaller ones have been widened to alleviate flooding and prevent stagnant waters from becoming places for mosquito breeding. Many new roads have been constructed and small ones widened to cope with the increased volume of traffic in our Republic. The projects carried out by Government in urban areas so far have been successful and are gaining momentum. Every State guest from abroad and tourists alike who call at Singapore are truely amazed by the various Government projects. It is even more so for those who have been here previously so that they can compare the state of affairs obtaining then and now. But Government projects in Kampong Kembangan Constituency, which is a suburban area, is a matter of regret to me. I have stated earlier that Government's effort to uplift the living standards of the people is praiseworthy, regardless of whether they live in the urban or rural areas, so that the standard of living of the people in the rural areas will be at par with that of the people in the city. On the contrary, the livelihood of the people in the kampongs, specially those in Kampong Kembangan, leaves much to be desired. Kampong Kembangan Constituency is a low-lying area and is easily flooded when it rains. There is no need to wait for the rain to fall throughout the whole day; it suffices if there is a heavy downpour for just one or two hours, and Kampong Kembangan will be flooded. Mr Speaker, Sir, I have raised the matter in this Chamber in December 1965. I quote from Hansard, Volume 24, No. 14, column 823: '....when the rain falls for a short while, the Kampong Kembangan area is flooded and animals and plants are destroyed. Now is the best time for the Minister for Law and National Development to visit Kampong Kembangan Constituency, because it is now the rainy season, and he will be able to see for himself the condition of the drains in this area.' Mr Speaker, the earth roads become uneven and are impassable to traffic. The Minister of State on one occasion visited Kampong Kembangan to declare the official opening of National Language Month. He was travelling in a big Jaguar car as though he was travelling in a sampan. When the sun shines, the laterite roads become dusty and the houses, clothing and food are covered with dust. This matter has also been raised by me in December 1965. I quote from Hansard, Vol. 24, No. 14, column 825: `Now I would like to talk about the roads in Kampong Kembangan which are very bad. You can say that 90 per cent of the roads there are earth roads. When it rains, the roads become muddy...'. Mr Speaker, the drains become breeding grounds for mosquitoes. The water is stagnant, and during the hot weather rubbish is dumped into the drains. As Kampong Kembangan is a low-lying area, it follows that the projects required to raise the living standard of the people there would be proportionately higher. But, unfortunately, the funds provided for Kampong Kembangan arc not enough. For this year, the provision for Kampong Kembangan amounts to $60,000 only. Applications have been made repeatedly and during the Prime Minister's tour of the Kampong Kembangan Constituency. Up to now the drains and roads have not been made up yet. The Urban and Rural Services Committee have, on so many occasions, visited the constituency; questions were raised in this House. Nevertheless, the efforts carried out were practically nil. Mr Speaker, Sir, this House has been informed why the roads could not be made up, because the land on both sides of the roads to be made up belongs to private owners. For this reason, the roads were made up under section 19, L.G.I.O., which requires the landowners to pay the cost of making up the roads. On the contrary, there are many roads in Jalan Alsagoff which have been made up according to kampong standards. Even more strange, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for National Development has said - I quote from Hansard, Volume 25, column 114: `However, as the frontages are not yet well developed, these roads have been given low priority and may not be made up until 1968.' To cite an example, Mr Speaker, Woo Mun Chew Road and many other roads in Siglap, where the laying of sewers has just been completed, have already been made up; whereas in Kampong Kembangan the laying of sewers was completed two years ago and the roads until today have not been made up. Mr Speaker, it is obvious that there is discrimination here. The people in the kampong do not get proper or adequate treatment as compared to people who live in the built-up areas. There are numerous earth drains which are full of grass and unattended to and water is unable to flow. When I referred the matter to the authorities concerned, the District Office passed it on to the P.W.D. which in turn passed the buck to the Work Brigade, and in the end nothing was done. For example, the large drain at Jalan Ang Teng from Jalan Pagak right up to Jalan Taugeh and finally to Geylang River. I referred the problem to the proper authorities in 1963 for action to be taken to help the residents against the flood menace. When it rains, the vegetable gardens and poultry are ruined by the floods because the water in these drains cannot flow smoothly. A large number of the residents in this area depend for their livelihood on vegetable gardening and poultry rearing. Mr Speaker, the Member for Bukit Merah, who previously resided here, will corroborate what I have said. He has experience of how the residents here are suffering from this big problem. I have already taken up the matter with the responsible authorities. I made a site inspection with the Work Brigade Engineer and later on with a P.W.D. Engineer. I also had occasion to accompany the Secretary, U.R.S.C. But sad to say, the problem has not yet been tackled up to today. Here I fail to see equal treatment to the haves and to the have-nots being practised in the attempt to raise the living standard of the kampong people to the same level as that of the people in the urban areas, about which the Government has been trumpeting so loudly. 7.27 p.m.

(In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, regarding the problems raised by the Member for Kampong Kembangan, as representatives from the rural areas we have the same feeling. For example, during the floods last month many places in the kampong areas were flooded. Many vegetable gardens were flooded; poultry died and losses were incurred. The Urban anti Rural Services Committee should pay more attention to these problems and should visit the rural areas. Low-lying areas must be protected from floods. There should be an overall scheme to alleviate the flood situation so that people in the rural areas would not be faced with the menace of floods, because they would incur losses as a result of flooding. On the other hand, I believe that many rural toads have not been properly made up. They are in a state of disrepair. I do not say that the Government is discriminating against the rural areas. We know that it has treated the rural areas and the urban areas on the same footing and it is trying its best to improve the living conditions of the rural areas. However, because this is the heritage of colonialism, there is a wide gap between the rural areas and the urban areas in living standards. I hope the Urban and Rural Services Committee will provide more funds to the rural areas for their projects. For example, in the Jurong area only $91,000 has been allotted. Such a tiny sum of money cannot be used to develop that area. Therefore, as a Member from the rural area I have the same feeling. I hope the Urban and Rural Services Committee will increase the funds for projects in the rural areas to enable them to carry out their construction. Another point is that construction work in the rural areas should be speedily carried out. For example, last October I asked the authorities concerned to repair a toad. But after five months nothing has been done and no reply at all has been given. There is a delay in carrying out construction work in the rural areas. I hope the Minister or the Parliamentary Secretary will pay more attention to the projects which are to be carried out in the rural areas. 7.30 p.m.

(In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I share the sentiments expressed by the Member for Kampong Kembangan, because my constituency is also a rural area and I know very well the situation that is generally common in all the rural areas. Fortunately, the Chairman of the Urban and Rural Services Committee is here to listen to what I have to say and do something about it. I do not say that the Government is discriminatory in its treatment of the urban and rural areas, but there are many things which have to be improved and need carrying out in the rural areas. There are not enough funds to carry out the projects. For instance, the supply of electricity, water and light is not provided in some rural areas because of a lack of funds. Also certain rural roads have been neglected by the Government ever since it came to power. The idea of electing a representative in this House is that he should do something constructive for his constituency. We will be approaching 1968 soon when Members of Parliament will have to stand for election again. The present is a testing period for us. It is, therefore, necessary for us to see that the supply of water, electricity and gas is facilitated.

Order. I generally try to give the Minister or Parliamentary Secretary 12 minutes to reply, although there is no fixed rule about it. I, therefore, propose to ask the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for National Development to reply now. 7.32 p.m.

Thank you, Mr Speaker, Sir. There is no doubt that during the last six or seven years, very many development projects have been carried out in Singapore, as anyone can see. In addition to the building of schools, factories and multi-storey flats, electricity and water supplies have been extended to kampong areas, roads have been made up in the kampongs, and street lights have been installed in the kampongs. All these projects have been carried out for the benefit of the kampong people. For projects carried out by the Urban and Rural Services Committee, a total sum of. $22 million had already been spent from 1961 to 1966. Out of this amount, $1 million was spent on Kampong Kembangan as compared with $0.66 million spent on the neighbouring constituency, Geylang Serai. From this figure, it can be seen that Kampong Kembangan Constituency was not neglected, An hon. Member: What about the other constituencies?

Sir, Kampong Kembangan Constituency and Geylang Serai Constituency are below sea level and, therefore, flooding occurs when it rains for a long time. I think there are two methods of alleviating the floods in these areas. The first method is to fill up both these areas, to make them higher than sea level, and the second method is to pump out the flood water from these areas into the sea. However, these two methods are very expensive and virtually impracticable as they would entail the wholesale shifting of houses to allow the work to be done. One method of alleviating the flood is to destroy and clear overgrown vegetation from drains so that storm-waters can flow freely without obstruction. This work is usually carried out by the Work Brigade which, unfortunately, has been reduced in size to some 500 members and they have some other important work to attend to. But I suggest to the Member for Kampong Kembangan that the people in this area can do a lot by self-help and community work --- Some hon. Members: Hear, hear!

--- in the spirit of gotong royong. I will quote one instance. Recently in Choa Chu Kang, the residents of Ama Keng did a very good job of repairing Ama Keng Road (8th m.s. to 9th m.s.). Sir, Rome was not built in one day. [Interruption] Improvement works in Singapore, in like manner, cannot be completed within a short period. It will take a number of years before all improvement works in Singapore can be completed. A few Members representing rural constituencies have complained that the funds allocated to the constituencies are insufficient. Sir, the allocation of funds to each constituency was worked out by a Committee of experts --- An hon. Member: Not so expert!

--- and the funds were allocated on the basis of the size of constituency, of population, and so on.

Order. The Parliamentary Secretary listened to the two previous speakers on this matter in silence, and I think they and their friends should reciprocate. Mr Ho.

So if Members representing rural constituencies feel that the funds allocated to them are insufficient, I would suggest to them to make out a case to the Minister for Finance. If he agrees, my Committee is willing to provide more amenities for the people living in the rural con stituencies. In any case, funds allocated to constituencies have been decided and it is up to hon. Members to make recommendations to the Government on which projects should be carried out first. As soon as the Government receives such a list of priorities, I can assure them that all the projects recommended by them will be carried out. An hon. Member: But the funds are insufficient!

(In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, we are not directing our complaints at the Chairman of the U.R.S.C. We know very well that the Committee has its own difficulties because the funds allocated for the rural areas are insufficient. Our intention is to paint a picture of the general situation in the rural areas for the information of the Chairman of the U.R.S.C., so that he will be able to find some way of resolving the problem. I only hope that this Committee will be able to improve the conditions in rural areas.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I just want to take up one or two points on what the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Law and National Development has said just now. How is the allocation of funds to constituencies arrived at? I believe there is a scheme whereby such allocation of funds is to be extended over a period of, say, six years. Therefore, if, for example, Kampong Kembangan were to be allocated $90,000 this year --- An hon. Member: $60,000.

--- or $60,000 to be more correct, then in 1968, 1969 and 1970, Kampong Kembangan will still get a sum similar to that allocated for this year. I am not trying to support the Parliamentary Secretary, but I am just trying to clarify one point. As it stands over a period of years, I am sure that not only the Constituency of Kampong Kembangan but also the outlying areas wilt ultimately benefit. As was said, "Rome was not built in one day." I am sure that all Members will have beaming faces in this House when, after a period of five years, they can stand up and say, "Well, I have done a good job because over this period of years, big rural development projects have been carried out systematically in my constituency."

On a point of clarification. I think the Parliamentary Secretary has not answered the Member for Kampong Kembangan on the question of delayed implementation of the projects that have been agreed upon by the Committee.

I think the Parliamentary Secretary has said that he will look into it.

I think some Members of this House are directing their complaints to the wrong source. It is not the Chairman of the U.R.S.C. who is responsible. It is the Minister for Finance. Certain funds are allocated every year and they are divided on three basic principles. One, whether the area is rural or urban, or whether it is semi-urban like Tanglin. Two, how many people live in that district? Three, how big is this district? Is it just one square mile like Kreta Ayer or --- An hon. Member: Tanjong Pagar.

No, Tanjong Pagar is more than one square mile. Or is it seven square miles like Tanglin? The bigger your area, the more money you get. The more people you have, the more money you get. If you are in the urban area, you do not need much help. If you are in the rural area, you need more help. So with this fixed sum of money, it is not the Chairman of the U.R.S.C. but this committee of experts --- 7.45 p.m.

Order. The time appointed, pursuant to an earlier resolution of the House for the termination of this sitting, has arrived. Mr Speaker adjourned the House without Question put, pursuant to the Standing Order. Adjourned accordingly at Fifteen minutes to Eight o'clock p.m.