Hansard, 1970-07-22

Under the provisions of clause 2 (d) of Article 30 of the Constitution of Singapore, I have granted permission to the following Members to be or to remain absent from sittings of Parliament (or any committee of Parliament to which they have been appointed) for the periods stated: Mr Jek Yeun Thong (Queenstown), Minister for Culture - from 2nd to 15th July, 1970. Mr Lee Khoon Choy (Hong Lim), Minister of State, Prime Minister's Office - from 7th July to 31st December, 1970. Tuan Haji Ya'acob Bin Mohamed (Kampong Ubi), Minister of State, Prime Minister's Office - from 7th July to 31st December, 1970. Mr Lee Kuan Yew (Tanjong Pagar), Prime Minister on 22nd July, 1970. Dr Goh Keng Swee (Kreta Ayer), Minister for Finance - from 25th to 31st July, 1970. YEOH GHIM SENG Speaker, Parliament of Singapore

The following Bills were assented to by the President of the Republic of Singapore on the dates stated: 27th June, 1970: (i) Post Office Savings Bank (Amendment) Bill; (ii) Merchant Shipping (Amendment) Bill; and (iii) Second-hand Dealers (Amendment) Bill. 2nd July, 1970: Supplementary Supply (No. 2) Bill. 11th July, 1970 (i) Enlistment Bill; (ii) Prohibition on Smoking in Certain Places Bill. YEOH GHIM SENG Speaker, Parliament of Singapore

I have to inform hon. Members that, under the provisions of Standing Order No. 94 (Vacancies in Select Committees), I did on the 27th June, 1970, nominate the following Members to fill vacancies in Select Committees: (1) Mr Hon Sui Sen (Member for Havelock) to be a Member of the Estimates Committee in the place of Mr Lim Soo Peng. (2) Mr Low Guan Onn (Member for River Valley) to be a Member of the Estimates Committee in the place of Mr Lim Cheng Lock. (3) Mr P. Selvadurai (Member for Bukit Panjang) to be a Member of the Standing Orders Committee in the place of Mr Lim Cheng Lock. (4) Mr L. P. Rodrigo (Member for Serangoon Gardens) to be a Member of the House Committee in the place of Madam Chan Choy Siong. (5) Mr Yeo Choo Kok (Member for Delta) to be a Member of the Public Petitions Committee in the place of Madam Chan Choy Siong.

asked the Minister for Finance whether he has received reports that marijuana is obtainable at some roadside coffee-stalls and other places in the Republic; and what measures are being taken to put an end to the smuggling, peddling and use of the drug.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the Police is aware that marijuana (or ganja as it is known locally) is being peddled at some sarabat and eating stalls in certain areas, such as Geylang Serai, Joo Chiat, Tanjong Pagar, Bukit Timah, Wayang Satu. Measures to prevent the peddling, usage and smuggling of this drug have been intensified. The Police is responsible for the suppression of internal trafficking and consumption of drugs, while the Customs Department concentrates on international trafficking and smuggling. In 1969, 62 persons were arrested for possessing ganja: 96 persons were arrested during the first six months of this year. The Harbour Division of the Customs Department, during the first half of this year, made several large seizures of ganja (cannabis sativa) from coastal vessels. On shore, Police and Customs squads have also stepped up the frequency of raids on known and suspected places where pushers and smugglers congregate. Seizures of ganja for the first six months of this year amounted to 192.9 pounds as compared to 61.9 pounds for the same period last year. A couple of years back, cannabis plants were found to be cultivated even on the island itself, but land patrols by Customs have effectively eradicated these illicit farms. The Primary Production Department has also co-operated by educating local farmers to the danger of cultivating this plant through rural newspapers and other publicity campaigns. The success achieved by the Customs and the Primary Production Departments is reflected in the fact that whilst 548 cannabis plants were seized during the first six months of 1969, only one plant was seized for the first six months of this year. Constant vigilance is also maintained at the Causeway and Airport to prevent the entry of this deleterious drug. Recently, a Seminar on Narcotics Control was held in Singapore under U.N, sponsorship. The Seminar recognised that lack of information on the dangers of drug abuse increased the risk of habituation. To counter this, plans are under consideration for the dissemination of information on the dangers of drug-taking.

asked the Minister for Education (a) what is the number of in-service training courses conducted by his Ministry for teachers in the four language streams since the beginning of this year; and (b) what is the outcome of the proposed bonus scheme for teachers who undergo the in-service training courses.

Mr Speaker, Sir, since the beginning of this year, 35 in-service training courses for teachers in the four language streams have been conducted. It is planned to conduct another 17 in the course of this year. The bonus scheme had not been finalised when the Member of Parliament for Telok Blangah raised that question in the last session of Parliament. My Ministry is now ready to implement the bonus scheme which will replace the incremental benefit scheme. Courses will be conducted from time to time on a variety of subjects designed to increase the quality and efficiency of qualified teachers in Government and Government-aided schools in the four language streams. All such courses shall lead to an examination and the award of a certificate. On successful completion of such approved courses, the teachers will be given a bonus. To ensure that the greatest benefit is derived from the bonus scheme, teachers are selected for the approved courses under a certain criterion. In selecting candidates, consideration will be given to the relevance of the subject matter of the course to the candidate's teaching and extra-curricular activities, his qualifications and special interests, and the recommendations of his superior officers. Under the bonus scheme to be implemented, a teacher will be granted $150 on successful completion of an approved in-service course and thereafter an annual bonus of $150 for not more than three years provided the teacher teaches the subject of the course for not less than 15 periods a week throughout the year. The annual bonus will not be granted for more than one subject at any one time. In addition to approved courses under the bonus scheme, other courses outside the scheme will also be conducted. Courses which lead to a basic qualification, such as the in-service course of teacher-training and other upgrading courses for emplacement on a higher salary, will not normally be considered as approved courses under the bonus scheme. Although the incremental benefit scheme will be replaced by the bonus scheme, teachers already in receipt of incremental credits will continue to receive them.

Mr Speaker, Sir, can the Parliamentary Secretary elucidate to the House the rationale behind stopping the bonus scheme after three years, although the teacher concerned may continue to teach the subject in which he qualified?

Sir, this is a bonus scheme and a bonus is terminable.

The Parliamentary Secretary says that a bonus will be paid for the first year, second year and third year. Why not pay for the fourth and fifth year? Why stop at the third year? I know a bonus can be terminated. It can be terminated in the first year.

Sir, conditions change and the bonus has to be terminated somewhere. We have worked out that a bonus of three years is sufficient as an incentive for teachers to go for in-service training.

Sir, what is the rationale for stopping the bonus at the third year and what is the criterion for arriving at this decision?

Sir, it has been so worked out that it is comparable to the incremental credits which a teacher would derive under the former scheme.

asked the Minister for Communications whether there are any plans to provide bus services within the Kallang Basin Industrial Estate; and if he realises that such services will be appreciated by workers, especially the female workers, employed in the factories in the Estate.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the Singapore Traction Company now runs seven services serving the area bordering Kallang Basin Industrial Estate. The Omnibus Services Licensing Authority will request the S.T.C, to run services through the Estate itself. At present, the bridge over Kallang River and a stretch of Bendemeer Road are under construction. It is understood that the bridge should be completed by January next year. By then, the Kallang Basin Industrial Estate will be better served by buses.

Sir, is it possible to divert buses now serving Serangoon and Boon Keng Roads into the Estate within this year?

Sir, the Omnibus Services Licensing Authority will look into the matter.

Sir, does the Minister for Communications support my proposal that the S.T.C, buses should run into the Estate during the course of this year?

I think it is a jolly good idea.

asked the Minister for Communications (a) if he is aware that of late the standard of telephone services in the city area has generally deteriorated; it is increasingly more difficult to get through to a number at the first attempt and there appears to be an increasing number of erroneous calls being put through; and what steps are being taken by the Singapore Telephone Board to improve upon the situation; and (b) what steps are being taken to shorten the waiting period for new applications for telephones which in certain areas can be as long as six months.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the complaints over telephone services raised by the Member for Jalan Kayu may be explained as follows: The increasing difficulty in getting through to a telephone number at the first attempt is possible during peak periods, especially between the hours of 10.30 a.m, and 12 noon and again between 2.30 and 4 p.m. If a line is engaged, naturally the second caller cannot get through until the first conversation is over. Yet another reason is the capacity of the automatic exchange. The present demand for telephone facilities has far exceeded planning forecasts. Although the Singapore Telephone Board received the World Bank's approval in December 1969 (only six months ago) of a loan of $33 million (US$11 million) for its $163 million Development Plan for six years (1970-75) with a planned target of 14 per cent per annum rate of growth, this has now been found to be inadequate and the revised 1971 Development Budget which was originally fixed at $29.4 million has just been raised by 30 per cent to $38.3 million. In respect of the second complaint that there "appears to be an increasing number of erroneous calls being put through", as we are operating an automatic telephone exchange, such errors can largely be caused by the person who dials the telephone. Therefore, it is the human error rather than the fault of the automatic exchange. It is true that some new applications for telephones have to wait for months before their requirements can be met. Sometimes the Singapore Telephone Board will not even be able to meet the request for telephones, because the applicant happens to live in an area which is rather inaccessible and where it would be just uneconomic to provide such a service. It would cost $30,000 just to fix one line for that particular person. However, the S.T.B, does make every effort to reduce the waiting time for applicants. Members of this House will be pleased to note that whereas in June last year, there were as many as 3,140 waiters or 3.7 per cent of total working direct exchange lines, the position as at June this year was only 1,850 or 1.8 per cent of direct exchange lines. Therefore, there has been a marked improvement with waiters being reduced by one-half over that of last year.

Mr Speaker, Sir, firstly, it appears to me that the planning forecast of the Board was quite wrong, in view of the substantial adjustments that have to be made. Can the Minister inform the House what steps are being taken to ensure a more accurate forecast in future years? Secondly, the Minister has attributed all the erroneous calls to so-called human errors. I am just wondering whether they could be due possibly to poor maintenance of the exchange rather than to human errors.

We should not be too critical of the planning forecast of the Singapore Telephone Board. In the past, their Five-Year Plan had a target of 12 per cent rate of growth, and the actual achievement turned out to be 14 per cent. So they put up the next Five-Year Plan on the basis of 14 per cent rate of growth per annum, and the actual result came to 16 per cent. So it goes on. I think the credit for all this should be attributed to the political and economic stability of Singapore. There has been tremendous industrial progress, and therefore the demand for telephones has exceeded anticipation. We have to continue to try to keep pace with progress up to a point. If we ask the S.T.B, to forecast the annual growth rate at 20 per cent, and the result turns out to be just 16 per cent, then we are going to overdevelop one aspect of the economic sector, the money for which could very well be used for other sectors. I have said that the faults are not all due to human error. But most of them are. It is true that poor maintenance has something to do with it. I did not say that it was not entirely a maintenance fault.

asked the Minister for Defence if he will consider establishing either a police station or police post at Jalan Kayu in the Jalan Kayu Constituency.

Mr Speaker, Sir, Jalan Kayu Constituency is served by patrols deployed from Yio Chu Kang Police Station and the Division Headquarters Station at Paya Lebar. Jalan Kayu and the village are within the boundaries of Yio Chu Kang Police Station, which is situated at 9- m.s. Yio Chu Kang Road, about one and a half miles away. In view of the proximity of Yio Chu Kang Police Station to the village, it is not considered necessary or economically wise to open another police station or a police post in Jalan Kayu at the moment. The siting of police stations and posts depends on the overall development in any area. If the development of the area in future makes it necessary to replace the present Yio Chu Kang Police Station, consideration will be given to establishing a station or post in Jalan Kayu.

asked the Minister for Defence (a) what is the total number of cases of robbery and theft in the Delta Constituency from 1st January, 1970, up to the latest convenient date; (b) whether he will consider increasing police patrols in the vicinity of the Alexandra Road Market where most of the crimes were committed; and (c) whether the abolition of the Havelock Road Police Station has diminished police vigilance in the area.

Mr Speaker, Sir, for the first six months of this year a total of 163 cases of robbery and theft in the Delta Constituency were reported to the Police. In comparison with other crime prone areas in Singapore, the crime rate in the Delta Constituency is the second highest. The highest is in Toa Payoh. During the same period, 44, or 27 per cent, of the cases of robbery and theft reported in the Delta Constituency occurred in the vicinity of Alexandra Road Market. The Queenstown Police Station will continue to provide mobile and foot patrols to police the whole area. In addition, detectives from the Criminal Investigation Department are employed to supplement the divisional police in their work. Mr Speaker, Sir, although the Havelock Road Police Station was demolished by 1st September, 1969, police vigilance in the Havelock Road area has not diminished. In fact, police patrols have recently been increased for crime prevention work in view of the redevelopment of this area.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I wonder whether the Minister can tell the House why there is such a sharp increase in the number of crimes in the Delta Constituency.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I do not know whether the Member himself can tell the House why there is such a sharp increase in crime. Taken as a whole, the increase is not that high. I think there is an overall increase because of an increase in the population. Probably a sociologist will be able to tell the Member for Delta exactly why there is an increase in crime.

(In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, the authorities have carried out a crime prevention campaign, and an exhibition was staged in the hope that crime will be reduced and prevented. I would like to know from the Minister whether the crime rate has decreased after the staging of such a campaign.

From reports gathered, the crime prevention campaign has been quite a success. A lot of people have seen the display and the kind of preventive work that can be done. It is too early for me to say whether there has been an appreciable decrease in crime as a result of this campaign. If people take to heart the lessons that can be learnt from this campaign, I am sure there will be a decrease in crime.

asked the Minister for Defence if he will consider strengthening the Police force in Jurong Town in view of the increasing number of criminal activities there.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the Jurong Town area is served by a Police sub-station at Taman Jurong. In addition, troops from the Reserve Unit patrol the area each night from 10 p.m, till 6 a.m, the following day. Criminal activities in the area have increased with the increasing population, and proposals to increase the police manpower to provide adequate security for the Taman Jurong area have been submitted in the estimate proposals for 1971-72. In the meantime, the Police force in the area has been directed to be even more vigilant in the performance of their duties.

(In Mandarin): Is the Minister prepared to set up a police station in Jurong Town?

Mr Speaker, Sir, there is no necessity yet, but we will start first by providing more police personnel for the substation at Taman Jurong. Later on, when Jurong further develops, there might be a case for another police station there, but at the moment there is no proposal to build a large police station in Jurong.

asked the Minister for Law and National Development (a) if the Chinese temples in Kallang Basin, which have been or are likely to be affected by development or clearance action of the Housing and Development Board, will be relocated in Kallang Basin; and (b) when alternative sites will be offered.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the Housing and Development Board has set aside a site for a temple in Kallang Basin for all the Chinese temples affected by development or clearance projects in Kallang Basin. This offer is similar to those made in Toa Payoh, Queenstown and Bukit Ho Swee, where all the owners of Chinese temples in each locality joined forces to develop one permanent temple at the site offered by the Board. The Board will make the offer of this site to the temple owners when they get together and form a single body.

Will the land be sold to the temples and, if so, at what price?

The land will be sold at market prices.

Will the prices be subject to bargaining?

They are always subject to bargaining. We are reasonable.

asked the Minister for Law and National Development (a) when construction of dwelling flats in the former Balestier Estate along Lorong Limau will begin and when they will be completed for occupation; (b) whether those flats will be offered first to residents in Kallang Constituency, who have been or are likely to be affected by the Government's development programmes, and also to Kallang residents who are staying in slum-like areas; and (c) what amenities will be provided to the tenants of those flats.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the question is in three parts and I propose to answer accordingly. (a) Piling work for the flats in the former Balestier Estate will commence in two months' time and about 2,000 flats are expected to be completed by the end of 1971. Another 3,000 flats are expected to be completed by late 1972 or early 1973. (b) These flats will be offered to both the public and the clearance cases. Residents in the Kallang Constituency affected by the clearance programme will be given priority, but not those residents who are not so affected. (c) In Balestier Estate, a market and shopping centre will be provided for the residents, together with car parks and children's playgrounds. Four acres of land will be set aside for outdoor recreational amenities, like basket-ball, badminton and sepak raga.

Will the Housing and Development Board tenants who are now staying in slum-like overcrowded one-room flats in the Kallang Basin Estate be given preference in transferring to bigger flats in Balestier Estate, and will they continue to stay in the Kallang Constituency?

They will not be given priority because there are other slum-like areas in other constituencies which deserve as much priority as the slum dwellers of Kallang. But should any residents of Kallang be affected by some development project and are cleared accordingly, then they will, of course, be given priority as the clearance cases are given priority in other constituencies.

Mr Speaker, Sir, can the Minister explain why the people who were affected by clearance action in other areas outside Kallang were allocated flats in Kallang? And why the people in Kallang who were affected by clearance action were given flats outside Kallang, because there were no flats available in Kallang at the time clearance action was taken by the Housing and Development Board? What is the wisdom of that policy?

The answer is probably this. The clearance cases in other constituencies were given priority because they were more special cases. But, as far as is possible, we try to accommodate people where they want to live, and preferably in the area or locality from which they have been evicted. People in Singapore are reluctant to move from, say, Katong to Bukit Timah, or from Geylang Serai to Sembawang. This is because they have got used to the place. But, as far as is possible, we accommodate them where they would like to go.

Mr Speaker, Sir, my problem is similar to that of the Member for Kallang.

Can you ask your supplementary question?

Yes. This is related to the question of priority for the -

Can you please frame your supplementary question, rather than make a speech?

Sir, the question is this. Should the Minister not consider giving first priority to those people living in slum-like flats at $20 a month, with no private toilet, in Kallang as well as Whampoa and other areas? Some of these people were moved into these slum-like flats from resettlement areas, and they were told at that time that they would be relocated in better housing should it be available.

I think we are all getting confused! The question I was asked by the Member for Kallang was whether people in his constituency would be given priority. The answer was yes, if they were cleared by the Housing and Development Board or affected by housing development. But if they are not affected cases, in other words, if they are not evicted by the Resettlement Department of the Housing and Development Board, then they do not deserve the same degree of priority as clearance cases. But we are just as interested in getting rid of slums as both the Members are or appear to be.

asked the Minister for Law and National Development why the traffic control lights and pedestrian crossing which had been newly installed at High Street have been removed; and what expenditure was incurred in the installation and removal.

Mr Speaker, Sir, traffic control lights for the crossing of pedestrians were installed at High Street following a number of complaints received during the Pedestrian Safety Campaign early this year. The experiment was not a success and caused confusion to motorists and pedestrians, as a result of which the control lights were removed. About $450 was incurred in their installation and removal.

(In Mandarin): From the answer given by the Minister, we know that the installation and dismantling of the traffic lights, though it cost only $450, was undoubtedly a waste. Can the Minister say that from now on, before the authorities concerned set up similar traffic lights, even on an experimental basis, sufficient consideration should first be given?

I cannot agree more with the Member that sufficient consideration should be given before traffic lights are installed. The sum incurred in this case was small - we were fortunate in that respect. But I agree with the Member that it was rather foolish to erect traffic lights close to a junction which already has traffic lights.

asked the Minister for Law and National Development (a) how many overhead bridges there are in the Republic; (b) on how many of them has advertising space been let out, and the nature of the advertisements; and (c) what is the annual income derived from those advertisements.

Mr Speaker, Sir, there are 24 overhead pedestrian bridges in the Republic; three more bridges are under construction; and tenders have been called for the construction of another three. Ten of these overhead pedestrian bridges have been let out for advertisements, and the advertisements displayed are in respect of goods generally, medicines, and cigarettes. The annual income received from these advertisements was $54,110 in 1968 and $67,062 in 1969.

(In Mandarin): My first supplementary question is this. Regarding the advertisements of cigarettes on these overhead bridges, cannot the Minister try to cancel them in order to discourage cigarette smoking? My next question is on the tenders for the construction of another three overhead bridges. Can the Minister inform the House where they will be built?

Mr Speaker, Sir, if we cancel the contracts for the advertisements of these cigarettes, we will be liable for breach of contract. These are annual contracts, and when they expire at the end of one year I assure the Member for Jurong that we will follow Radio and Television Singapore and not renew advertisements for cigarettes. As for the six bridges, the three under active construction now are one at New Bridge Road, near the People's Park; another one at New Bridge Road, near Hong Lim Park; and the third at Tiong Bahru Road, near Redhill Close. The two overhead bridges which are already at New Bridge Road are, in fact, constructed by the People's Park Complex developers. Tenders have been called for the construction of three more overhead bridges at Bukit Timah Road; one near Swiss Cottage School, the other near Coronation Road, and the third at Linden Drive. I think the Member will agree with me that the traffic along Bukit Timah and Dunearn Roads on the main highway to Johore is indeed very heavy; hence three more overhead bridges.

asked the Minister for Health what is the total number of beds available for mentally defective children in the ward situated behind the Woodbridge Hospital as against the number of children waiting to be admitted; and what steps are being or will be taken to expand the facilities available at that ward.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the total number of beds in the Mental Defective Unit at Woodbridge Hospital is 45. The number of children on the waiting list stands at 350. Steps are not being taken to expand the facilities to accommodate more of this category of children. We feel that this is an area where voluntary organisations can play their part by setting up homes for the mentally defective children. There is at present a Mental Defective Children's Home at 9 3/4 m.s. Tampines Road which was set up by the Singapore Association for Retarded Children in February 1969, with the help of the Ministry of Health. The home has a capacity for approximately 50 children. A sub-committee of the Association runs the home and it is composed of members of women's organisations, businessmen, doctors, almoners and nursing personnel. There are at present about 44 inmates in the homes.

3.11 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise to speak on the subject of the reorganisation of the motor transport service of Singapore consequent upon the presentation of the White Paper to Parliament yesterday. Hon. Members of this House will recall that on the 31st of March this year, the Prime Minister officially launched an all-out anti-pollution campaign for Singapore. Besides focusing attention on the need for the early eradication of smoky exhausts from motor vehicles, he also commented on some important aspects of road transport which needed improvement, namely. Firstly, that the 11 existing bus companies should be amalgamated into fewer but larger companies, and the necessity to streamline present bus routes for better bus services. Secondly, since the employment situation has improved considerably and there are now many job opportunities available, pirate taxis would have to be phased out. Thirdly, that the diesel tax on private cars would have to be raised. Lastly, that taxi licences now limited to 3,800 would be increased to 5,000, and so on. It was thus a matter of time before Government's intentions on these subjects would be spelt out in greater detail. Soon after assuming the portfolio of the Ministry of Communications two years ago, I came to the conclusion that something drastic would have to be done to overhaul and to improve the public passenger transport service of Singapore. To this end, I appointed a 15-member Transport Advisory Board in August 1968, and its first term of reference was `To study ways and means how to improve the present public transport service (bus, taxi, etc.)'. Much valuable work has been accomplished by the Transport Advisory Board over the last two years, and up to date it has submitted two interim reports. Most of its recommendations have been accepted and implemented or in process of implementation. Although the Transport Advisory Board has not been able to come to any definite conclusions regarding the most important aspect of public transport, namely, bus services, enough material and information are available to my Ministry for it to draw up a blue-print, as it were, of a bold three-year reorganisation plan for the motor transport service of Singapore. In the wake of an all-out anti-pollution drive, this is indeed the opportune time, not for dilly-dallying but for decision-making. Hence the White Paper which is now in the hands of Members. In tabling the White Paper, may I be permitted to explain, in brief, the guiding principles under which it was drawn up? (a) First and foremost, it would have to be a simple yet workable plan and capable of immediate implementation. (b) That although Government does not propose to nationalise the existing 11 bus companies, it will not hesitate to exercise its powers to direct and control the way in which bus companies and taxis are expected to provide a reasonably satisfactory standard of service for a public utility for which the public is paying no less than $120 million in fares per annum. (c) Any proper reorganisation of the public passenger transport service must require a decisive and firm resolve to phase out the illegal `pirate' taxis and the abolishment of the School (SCH) taxis and the deadline has been fixed for 1st July, 1971, or 11 months from now. As this decision will have wide social and economic repercussions affecting the livelihood of a few thousand, I wish to assure Members of this House that great care and thought have been given to this matter so that hardship, if any, will be reduced to the barest minimum possible. Our plan proposes a two-way approach towards the resolution of this tenacious problem: (i) By creating not less than 6,500 job opportunities over the next three years under the plan (for details see para. 7.7 of White Paper): Job Opportunities 1st year of plan 4,150 2nd year of plan 1,300 3rd year of plan 1,050 ----- Total 6,500 ===== Should the present `pirate' taxi drivers be reluctant to change their occupation as drivers, there is an honourable way out for them to earn a decent livelihood and to become respectable members of the community by fitting themselves into the many jobs that will be made available under this reorganisation plan. (ii) Once Government has decided to crack down on the illegal activities of `pirate' taxis and having given them more than reasonable notice of nearly one year to start a new chapter in their lives, to be consonant with our "Republic's aim of building a law-abiding, disciplined, tightly knit and organised society for Singapore", a series of stem measures will be taken against such `pirate' taxi operators, to be enumerated later, which will make it clear that continuance of such activities will no longer be tolerated nor worth while. What then are the main targets to be achieved under this plan (for details, see para. 13 of White Paper)? I shall, however, enumerate the more important objectives as follows: (a) Anti-pollution campaign (i) We shall first tackle the smoky exhausts of 20,000 diesel vehicles which represent just over 10 per cent of the total registered motor vehicle population of today. (ii) Next we shall institute an age limit for public service vehicles (both diesel and petrol)-

Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise to ask whether an opportunity will be given to Members to discuss this White Paper in greater detail than is possible today, considering the short time given to Members to peruse it. Does the Minister not feel that since much time has gone into the composition of this White Paper, it should deserve correspondingly careful scrutiny? I also remember that the Minister did almost promise that there would be a debate on this White Paper.

Mr Speaker, Sir, it will indeed be a great pleasure to have a debate in this House on this rather important aspect of transport, and notice of a motion will be given to the Clerk of Parliament for the next sitting.

3.33 p.m.

"for making Supplementary Provision for the Public Service for the financial year 1st April, 1970, to 31st March, 1971", recommendation of President signified; presented by the Minister for Finance (Dr Goh Keng Swee); read the First time, to be read a Second time on the next available sitting of Parliament, and to be printed.

"to provide for the licensing and regulation of the business of banking and to repeal the Banking Ordinance, 1958, of Malaysia (M. Ord. 62 of 1958) and the Banking (Amendment and Extension) Act, 1965, of Malaysia (M. Act 17 of 1965)", recommendation of President signified; presented by Dr Goh Keng Swee; read the First time, to be read a Second time on the next available sitting of Parliament, and to be printed.

"to establish a corporation to be known as the Monetary Authority of Singapore and to provide for the transfer to the corporation of certain functions and assets of the Government and for matters incidental thereto and connected therewith", recommendation of President signified; presented by Dr Goh Keng Swee; read the First time, to be read a Second time on the next available sitting of Parliament, and to be printed.

"to amend the Trustees Act, 1967 (No. 17 of 1967)", presented by the Minister for Law and National Development (Mr E. W. Barker); read the First time, to be read a Second time on the next available sitting of Parliament, and to be printed.

"to amend the Land Titles Ordinance, 1956 (No. 21 of 1956)", recommendation of President signified; presented by Mr E. W. Barker; read the First time, to be read a Second time on the next available sitting of Parliament, and to be printed.

"to amend the Constitution of Singapore", presented by Mr E. W. Barker; read the First time, to be read a Second time on the next available sitting of Parliament, and to be printed.

"to amend the Environmental Public Health Act, 1968 (No. 32 of 1968)", recommendation of President signified; presented by the Minister for Health (Mr Chua Sian Chin); read the First time, to be read a Second time on the next available sitting of Parliament, and to be printed.

Resolved, "That, notwithstanding the Standing Orders, the Second Supplementary Estimates of Expenditure and the First Supplementary Development Estimates of Expenditure for the financial year 1st April, 1970, to 31st March, 1971, be taken today."-[Dr Goh Keng Swee].

3.38 p.m. Order read for consideration in Committee of Supply [Allotted Day].

Second Supplementary Estimates of Expenditure for the financial year 1st April, 1970, to 31st March, 1971, contained in Paper Cmd. 19 of 1970. The summary is on page 3 of the Paper. Mr Tang.

Mr Speaker, Sir, may I have your permission to draw the attention of Members to a printing error in page one of the Second Supplementary Estimates wherein lines 15 and 16 have inadvertently been transposed?

No notice of amendment has been received in respect of these Supplementary Estimates. The sum of $570,730 for Head 0803 ordered to stand part of the Second Supplementary Estimates of Expenditure for 1970-7 I. The sum of $102,090 for Head 1101 ordered to stand part of the Second Supplementary Estimates of Expenditure for 1970-71. The sum of $40,000 for Head 1103 ordered to stand part of the Second Supplementary Estimates of Expenditure for 1970-71.

Question, "That the sum of $712,820 shall be supplied to the Government under the heads of expenditure for the public services shown in the Second Supplementary Estimates of Expenditure for the financial year 1st April, 1970, to 31st March, 1971, contained in Paper Cmd. 19 of 1970." put, and agreed to. Resolution to be reported.

First Supplementary Development Estimates of Expenditure for the financial year 1st April, 1970, to 31st March, 1971, contained in Paper Cmd. 20 of 1970. The summary is on page 2 of the Paper. No notice of amendment has been received in respect of these Supplementary Estimates. The sum of $350,000 for Head 55 ordered to stand part of the First Supplementary Development Estimates of Expenditure for 1970-71. The sum of $580,000 for Head 96 ordered to stand part of the First Supplementary Development Estimates of Expenditure for 1970-71.

Question, "That the sum of $930.000 shall be supplied to the Government under the heads of expenditure for the public services shown in the First Supplementary Development Estimates of Expenditure for the financial year 1st April. 1970, to 31st March, 1971, contained in Paper Cmd. 20 of 1970," put, and agreed to. Resolution to be reported. Thereupon Mr Speaker left the Chair of the Committee and took the Chair of the House.

Mr Speaker. Sir, I beg to report that the Committee of Supply have come to certain resolutions. Resolutions reported - "That the sum of $712,820 shall be supplied to the Government under the heads of expenditure for the public services shown in the Second Supplementary Estimates of Expenditure for the financial year 1st April, 1970, to 31st March, 1971, contained in Paper Cmd. 19 of 1970." "That the sum of $930,000 shall be supplied to the Government under the heads of expenditure for the public services shown in the First Supplementary Development Estimates of Expenditure for the financial year 1st April, 1970, to 31st March, 1971, contained in Paper Cmd. 20 of 1970."

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That Parliament doth agree with the Committee on the said resolutions."

Question put, and agreed to. Revolutions accordingly agreed to.

Order for Second Reading read. 3.45 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir,I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." The Government has received two studies on the modernisation of the existing National Museum. In brief, the conclusion is that the Natural History Division of the National Museum should be converted to a Life Sciences Division which will display the functions of the cell; how genetics lead to the existence of species, methods of reproduction, locomotion and control of behaviour by the brain. The other proposal is that there should also be a division which will show applications of scientific principles in engineering and technology. There will be in this division a science arcade given to a series of small rooms which will cover exhibits relating to specific aspects of science, for example, the atom, sound, radar, geophysical exploration which is very relevant in Southeast Asia today. There will also be an Industrial Technology Hall dealing with the techniques made use of generally in industry. Thirdly, there will be a Communications and Transport Hall which will show the technologies used in modern communication science and transport, and will link this to the importance of Singapore as a communications and transport centre. These two divisions will constitute the Science Centre. It will be an autonomous statutory body responsible to the Ministry of Science and Technology. The Science Centre will be managed by a single body, and this body will have access to the public in the collection of funds. It is estimated that there will be 340,000 visitors annually to the Science Centre. It is believed that the scope and organisation proposed for the Science Centre is such that it can form a new institution with an immediate useful function and considerable potential. It is a challenging concept. The strongest claim for proceeding with the Science Centre lies in the ability of such a centre to supplement science and technical education at a time when this is one of Singapore's greatest needs. The centre will certainly be the first and only one of its kind in the region. It can well attract considerable attention from visitors coming from other nearby Asian countries as well as serving the needs of Singapore. Sir, I beg to move. Question proposed. 3.49 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to voice my wholehearted support of the Bill. The Science Centre, as we have just heard, will be an autonomous statutory body. It is good to note that whilst the Science Centre Board will be ultimately responsible to the Minister for Science and Technology, it will yet have discretion over the acquisition and disposal of funds, and have adequate administrative control over its officers and employees so that it will be in a position to direct the implementation of its objectives. The setting up of the Board has a particularly special logic. The Science Centre, we have heard, will have two components generally, namely, life sciences and technology. In the real business of living, these two aspects are, I think, inextricably intertwined. One cannot produce technologists without orientating such people to the objectives of technology, namely, to make life much better for the people. At the same time, trying to interest our people in life sciences in vacuo is, I think, a most difficult task. Understanding of the relationship between man and his environment, a perception of the ecological problem, can best be inculcated by referring to the effects of technology on man. Technology has not been an unmitigated boon. Advances in science have resulted in pollution, in noise, anti-conservation, in traffic jams, in industrial hazards, mental ill-health, and so on. It is only when we bring home to our people a sense of the vital relationship between technology and our down-to-earth living that we can ensure a better life for our people as well as help produce technicians and technologists who will contribute to this gracious life. The setting up of this Science Centre will help, I hope, to combat our ignorance of the effects in the long run of the exploitation of nature, as well as encourage our people towards such an understanding of science as will enable our society to advance to more sophisticated levels of industry. I think we must view this Bill as laying the foundation for the establishment of the new Science Centre. This Bill will enable the Board, when it is set up, to proceed apace with the negotiation for acquisition of exhibits, training of staff, planning for the construction of the centre itself, and so on. The centre will eventually take over the National Museum, at least the exhibits there which relate to the life sciences. May I suggest that the current site of the National Museum with its historical architectural features can serve as a centre for the exhibition of such materials as can attest to the various cultural backgrounds that make up the multi-faceted life that we enjoy in Singapore. 3.54 p.m.

The idea of a Science Centre is a worthy one. I only hope that it will not turn out to be expensive. I notice that no estimates of financial expenditure are provided. While we are fully confident that our Ministers are not extravagant people, as a matter of principle and a precedent for future Ministers who may not be so trustworthy, this House may want to insist, wherever possible, on the provision of financial estimates for proposed projects. As an economist I am not used to signing blank cheques. However, on this occasion I willingly do so. 3.55 p.m.

(In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to congratulate the Minister on introducing the Science Centre Bill. This shows that our Government is interested in advancing the technological knowledge of our country. Our country is small, and therefore we cannot expect to compete with other advanced countries in this respect. We are not able to build an atomic reactor. At the same time we cannot imagine that we will be able to assemble a satellite to survey space, because this project will entail a lot of expenditure and human resources. Nevertheless, I would like to congratulate the Minister on his far-sightedness and effort in modernising our country. To have modernisation, we must have technology. Mr Speaker, Sir, on the face of it, this Bill will not arouse the interest of the people because it concerns science and technology. It seems to have nothing to do with the workaday life of the people. However, for the nation, this is a very important Bill. This is because it will help promote technology and science in our country. The main purpose of this Bill is to set up a Science Centre. I am aware that the centre will entail a lot of expenditure. This Bill also provides that public donations will be exempted from income tax. This is a very enlightened measure. I would like to raise a few questions and hope the Minister will clarify them. Firstly, what benefit will the centre bring to the country? Secondly, where will the centre be located and what will the Government spend on the building and equipment of the centre? Thirdly, what kind of research will be carried out, and with what methods? 3.57 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the Science Centre Bill, which the Minister has explained to us, will lead to the establishment and maintenance of a Science Centre which will exhibit objects related to life sciences as well as science and technology. The Explanatory Note states that the function of the existing National Museum as a natural museum will be taken over by the Science Centre Board. However, the National Museum also has exhibits which depict the growth of civilisation in Southeast Asia and the development of modern Singapore. I wish to enquire of the Minister what will happen to these exhibits, and where can Singaporeans see them in the future. It will be a pity if, in our laudable efforts to promote the dissemination of knowledge in science and technology, we lose sight of the larger human canvas against which our industrial achievements ought to be seen 3.58 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, several Members have made inquiries concerning the running expenses of the Science Centre, and raised questions on the future of the anthropological exhibits which are at present located in the National Museum. I would like to add that the members of the National Museum Board have recommended that the Science Centre be located at a new site. I have no doubt that when the Science Centre Board has been appointed, it will be actively engaged in searching for a new location for the Science Centre. I am hoping that the anthropological exhibits in the National Museum will be permitted to remain there, and that they, together with paintings and other artefacts, can form an art gallery for the future. The Ministry of Culture has been responsible for raising funds for an art gallery. At present, although we are not quite certain what progress has been achieved in its fund-raising campaigns, I have no doubt that the Ministry of Culture will be only too happy to acquire the present building, which is now the National Museum, so that it can house the art gallery and whatever ancient antiques that we may collect from time to time.

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 Toh Chin Chye]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed.

Order for Second Reading read. 4.05 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move. "That the Bill be now read a Second time." In the past, the appointment of the Director of Audit was provided for in section 101 (1) of the Singapore Constitution Order-in-Council, 1958. This Order-in-Council was repealed and replaced by the Singapore Constitution, 1963, when Singapore became part of the Federation of Malaysia. No provision in the Constitution, however, was made for the appointment of the Director of Audit, because the Audit function was then a Federal responsibility. After separation, a similar provision as that in section 101 (1) of the 1958 Order-in-Council should have been enshrined ill the Constitution, but this was overlooked. The Audit Act, 1966, has provisions relating to the emoluments and removal from office of the Director of Audit, but not for appointment. This Bill now seeks to regularise the position by making specific provision in the Audit Act for the appointment of the Auditor-General by the President in accordance with the advice of the Prime Minister, in consultation with the Chairman of the Public Service Commission. Opportunity has also been taken to change the designation of the Director of Audit to Auditor-General to keep in line with the usage in independent Commonwealth countries. Sir, I beg to move.

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. - [Mr Tang See Chim]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed.

Order for Second Reading read. 4.09 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir,I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." The Singapore Society of Accountants Ordinance was passed in 1963 to register and regulate the conduct of all accountants and to maintain professional and ethical standards in the profession. This Ordinance gave, for the first time, recognition to locally-trained accountants and accorded them professional status. The Society had a membership of 226 when it was first constituted. By the end of 1969, the membership increased to 708. Based on the experience in operating under the Ordinance over the last six years, the Society had made recommendations for amendments to the Ordinance, which recommendations have been accepted by the Government. In brief, Mr Speaker, Sir, this Bill seeks to amend the Ordinance to provide for the following: (a) an increase in the number of elected Council members from eight to 16; (b) Council members to serve for a term of two years, with half the number retiring each year; (c) an increase in the number to form a quorum for Council meetings from seven to 12 members; (d) to enable the Accountant-General to nominate an alternate to attend Council meetings; (e) to replace the representative of the Singapore Polytechnic on the Council by a representative of the University of Singapore. The Council, as at present constituted, consists of eight elected members (four from Public Accountants and four from Registered Accountants) and three statutory councillors. The proposed amendment is to increase the number of elected members from eight to 16 in order to give better representation, as the membership of the Society has grown more than three times since 1963. Hitherto, Council members retire at the end of one year. For the purpose of continuity, provision is now made to require Council members to serve for a term of two years, with half retiring each year. With the enlargement of the number of elected Council members, the quorum for Council meetings should accordingly be increased from the existing seven to the proposed 12 members. Now that the Department of Accountancy has been transferred from the Singapore Polytechnic to the University of Singapore, the representative of the Singapore Polytechnic on the Council should, therefore, be replaced by a representative of the University of Singapore. Sir, I beg to move.

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. - [Mr Tang See Chim]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed.

Order for Second Reading read. 4.15 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir,I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." This Bill seeks to amend the Economic Expansion Incentives Act of 1967. The Act itself was intended to meet the situation prevailing in the years immediately preceding 1967, when the economic future of Singapore was clouded in some uncertainty as a result of our expulsion from Malaysia. More than two years have passed since the passage of the Act and these two years have seen some improvement, a great deal of which was the result of the operation of the Act itself. The time therefore has come to take a fresh look at the situation, more especially so as several observers from aboard, including the International Monetary Fund and a mission sent by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, have commented on the generosity of our tax incentives. I will deal with the main changes which are provided for by this amending Bill and leave out minor and technical matters. The principal effect of the Bill, in so far as it affects intending investors, is a reduction in the period of tax incentives for export enterprises from 15 years to eight years. This will apply to the general run of business, but in exceptional circumstances as defined in the Bill, the 15-year period will still be available. These are for very large enterprises with a capital investment of $ I billion or more or those with a capital investment of $150 million, of which more than half is owned by permanent residents of the Republic. As regards the 5-year tax relief provided for pioneer industries, this incentive is henceforth available only to large enterprises with a fixed capital investment of not less than $1 million. Smaller enterprises may apply for export incentives, but if they produce only for the domestic market they will get nothing as it is not the policy of the Government to give Pioneer Certificates to manufacturers who produce for the domestic market, whatever their size. There are also amendments regarding depreciation allowances. Hitherto, these can be carried forward to the post-pioneer period at accelerated rates, which in effect means an extension of the pioneer period beyond five years to six years or even seven years. Of course, those who have been granted tax concessions under the 1967 Act will continue to enjoy them. The intention of the Government to make changes in our tax incentive laws has been known for some time both to local industrialists and industries abroad. This has been somewhat helpful to our investment promotion efforts. In the last four or five months, there have been a series of negotiations between the Government and a number .of large well-known international firms who wanted to take advantage of the 15-year tax incentive while the going was still good. I am happy to announce to Members that most of these negotiations have been successfully concluded, the last one at 4 p.m, yesterday. As a result, we shall see some very large manufacturing operations established in Singapore using advanced technology and employing large numbers of skilled workers, technicians and engineers. Among the larger and more important of these investors are General Electric of the United States of America, Philips of Holland and Rollei-Werke of Germany, producers of the famous Rolleiflex cameras. Each of these companies will establish enterprises in Singapore which will employ in their plants between 3,500 and 5,000 workers by 1975. The value of the aggregate output of these plants by 1975 is expected to exceed $600 million. The range of products manufactured is very wide and includes consumer electrical supplies, home appliances, radios, tape recorders, production machinery, tools and dyes, cameras, lenses and optical equipment. These are production operations and not mere assembly. A training programme has already been started to produce the skilled craftsmen and technicians who are needed in these new enterprises. They are being trained both in Singapore and abroad. I am sure that Members will want me to express our appreciation to those who were responsible for getting these very large enterprises introduced in Singapore. The persons concerned are the very dedicated officers of the Economic Development Board, who have put in long and sustained hours of work both in Singapore and in promotion offices in Europe and America. Getting these large firms to agree to set up these big projects in Singapore does not mean that everything is over bar the shouting. In fact, the real work begins as from now. We have to ensure that large numbers of skilled workmen, technicians and engineers are made available in the quantity required and up to the standard of excellence which these companies have been led to believe we can achieve. If we fail to produce these workers with the requisite skills, diligence and ability, then the whole foundation of our industrialisation programme would be undermined. This requires a major effort not only by the Ministry of Finance, whose work is really done by now, and the Economic Development Board and other agencies, but it will need sustained effort by the Technical Education Department of the Ministry of Education, the Polytechnic, the University of Singapore, Nanyang University, the National Trades Union Congress - indeed the whole community. Sir, I beg to move. Question proposed 4.22 p.m.

Mr Speaker. Sir, I am happy to see this Bill. It has features that should encourage more joint ventures, greater size of industries and, most important of all, export-orientation. Joint ventures are particularly significant to an economy like ours, because when tax exemption is given, at least some of the profits accrue to our Gross National Product. There is a very real danger that where an enterprise is solely foreign-owned and is tax-exempt, the contribution to our Gross National Product during the pioneer period may be negligible, if we take into account the real cost of providing the economic infrastructure. However, the Bill gives encouragement to joint ventures only of enterprises worth at least $150 million. It seems to me to be desirable to have a graduated scale between the minimum qualification of $1 million for pioneer status and the $150 million qualification for special depreciation allowances and export-tax benefits of 15 years in order to encourage those industries that are joint ventures but which range in between $1 million and $150 million. In addition, we may want to build in a feature to encourage management and technical training to local people. Perhaps an index of the proportion of payroll which is paid to local personnel could be used in determining the amount of pioneer, depreciation and export-tax benefits, again on a graduated scale. It may be noted that salaries paid to non-local staff may add to our Gross Domestic Product but not to our Gross National Product which is the more accurate measure of national economic welfare. As for raising the qualifying capital expenditure for an expanding enterprise from $1 million to over $10 million, I think it may be desirable again to have a graduated scale, with so much exemption given for so many million dollars worth of additional capital expenditure. It is not clear to me why, if we allow pioneer benefits with $1 million capital expenditure initially, we should require reinvestment of $10 million in order to provide continuing benefits. Mr Speaker, Sir, the principle of the Bill is well considered and I support it. 4.25 p.m.

(In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, the Bill is in relation to the economic expansion incentives and relief from income tax. The Minister has talked at length in this House on various aspects relating to the status of pioneer industries, tax exemption and other matters. According to him, the Bill can help our economy to progress further. However, I have several questions which I would like him to clarify. First, if the amendment Bill is passed, will it have any adverse effect on those industries with a smaller capital? For instance, as a result of this Bill, investors with a smaller capital will not invest here. Second, what are the reasons behind the introduction of this amendment Bill? Third, how much revenue can our country get every year after the Bill is passed?

The Member for Whampoa has made what, to me, appears to be quite a valid point. It is only a question of whether this is the right moment to apply the policy he recommends. For instance, he is recommending a clear distinction in treatment between the wholly foreign-owned enterprises and those in which local capital is allowed participation. I am wholly in sympathy with this policy. The only question is whether we should introduce it now or wait until our industrial base is so firmly established that we can afford to risk some adverse comment which is bound to arise in the investing countries. When the time comes, when we are more self-sufficient in technology and know-how, and possibly even in markets, this policy will not only make sense but can be introduced with less risk than is the position today. As regards giving preference for employment of local management personnel, may I say that the demand for management personnel is so much in excess of supply that, far from encouraging foreign investors to employ local personnel, I have often had to urge them to bring their own personnel and not to disrupt the tight market situation now existing. In fact, it has been necessary for me to enter into a gentleman's agreement with some of the larger American and British companies not to pinch each other's executive staff. Here again if the supply and demand position changes, we can have a try at it, but it is likely that the demand for good executives of ability and high engineering skills will remain in short supply for a very long time. The Member for Whampoa asked why $10 million for expansion when there is only $1 million for a pioneer firm. The rationale behind it is that if a pioneer firm has been running for some time and has had experience, it has got good value for its money. And if it really wants more concessions, then the size of the increment should be much greater than is the case with a new venture. We thought that $10 million was a convenient figure, but any other figure will do. The Member for Sembawang asked whether there would be any adverse effects on smaller industries. I assure him that there will be no adverse effects. Smaller industries will not be persecuted. They will still continue to flourish, one hopes. The Member also asked why we introduced this amending Bill. Perhaps I did not make it very clear in my Second Reading speech. The point is that the original Act has been too generous. We gave people 15 years' lax exemption, whereas we think now that with eight years' tax exemption we will get them coming in. Similarly, there is no reason why we should give pioneer status to very small companies as we are doing now. It is a lot of work and quite often these small companies do not profit anyway. So the pioneer status is quite meaningless to them. The Member for Sembawang also wants to know how much more revenue we will collect from this. I really do not know. There is no way of making this calculation because it all depends on how many new firms come in and what profits they make. The only thing that I know is that we will collect more revenue under this amending Bill than under the old one.

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; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed.

Order for Second Reading read. 4.34 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill he now read a Second time." A national serviceman who joins Government service after having served a period of full-time national service, is now granted salary increments, on appointment, commensurate with the time he has spent in such full-time national service. The various statutory boards have also followed Government's example. This is to ensure that someone who is called up for full-time national service and later joins the service of Government or one of the statutory boards does not lose out to his contemporary who is not called up for full-time national service. This Bill, however, proposes to take this one stage further. A youth who undergoes full-time national service will also be rewarded by having such service included as pensionable service under the Pensions Ordinance, 1956, if he is appointed to and subsequently retires from Government service in pensionable circumstances. At present, the Pensions Ordinance only allows for service in a civil capacity to be included for pension purposes. The Bill, in seeking to amend the Ordinance, provides for the President to make regulations for this purpose. The period of full-time national service could be put in at any time, whether before or after the officer's appointment to Government service. This, Mr Speaker, Sir, is only fair recognition of the service in the cause of our country which our national servicemen put in. No one in his right senses would grudge this to our national servicemen. Clause 3 of the Bill provides that where an officer is retired in the public interest under paragraph (e) or in special circumstances after having completed 15 years' service under paragraph (j) of subsection (2) to section 7 of the Ordinance, he will not draw a pension till he has attained the age of 50. This is to ensure that an officer who retires prematurely does not in the long run benefit more than the officer who serves his full career in the public service. For instance, an officer who is retired at the age of 35 years in the public interest would, if he joined the service at 24 years of age and is drawing a salary of $1,000 a month at the time of retirement, normally be eligible for a monthly pension of about $200 plus a gratuity of $10,000. If this is paid to him from the time of his retirement at 35 up to the age of 70, which is a reasonable life expectancy, he would draw a total of $102,000 over the 35 years he is in receipt of a pension. Moreover, he would be in a position to find other employment after retirement and would benefit from the Central Provident Fund or other superannuation scheme in addition to the salary he would receive from such employment. This surely is an anomalous situation where an officer who is retired or retires prematurely benefits more than one who gives his whole working life to the public service with loyalty and dedication and retires at the normal retirement age. Provision is, however, being made for payment of gratuity to the dependants of an officer who retires prematurely and who does not survive to 50 years. An officer who retires prematurely and who is mentally or physically incapacitated to such an extent that he is unable to continue in any employment before he has attained the age of 50 sears may also be paid his pension from the date of such incapacitation. The Bill also seeks to provide that a police officer below the rank of Assistant Superintendent in any Auxiliary Police Force, as may be specified by the President by notification in the Gazette, may be retired and paid a pension on reaching the age of 45. This is to bring the retirement age in the present and any future Auxiliary Police Force in line with that in the regular Police Force. Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move. Question proposed. 4.40 p.m.

(In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, with the changes in our circumstances and situation, the loop-holes in our laws which are not in keeping with our society should be plugged. It is wise for the Government to introduce this amendment Bill. This Bill treats the period of national service as pensionable service for national servicemen who join Government service. In other words, our youths who have completed national service and who join the public service will have their period of national service taken into consideration when their pensions are computed on retirement. Their full-time national service is regarded as effective public service. Furthermore, national servicemen who join the public service are granted salary increments commensurate with the period they have spent in full-time national service. But I do not know whether the statutory boards and private enterprise have also implemented this scheme. What is the outcome of the negotiations between the National Trades Union Congress and private enterprise to ensure that our youths who have completed their national service will benefit from this scheme? Mr Speaker. Sir, this scheme also applies to the statutory boards. But I do not know whether national servicemen who join the public service and the statutory boards are exempted from having to serve a three-year probationary period. If they have to, then it is in conflict with the principle that national service is deemed to be public service. This will put them at a disadvantage when they compete with other people who have not undergone national service in promotion exercises. Singapore is not a weak country. It is a country which implements measures when these are necessary. It is a country which places emphasis on the responsibility of its people and it is a country located in a strategic position. In order to survive and prosper, it is necessary to follow a non-aligned foreign policy and, at the same time, build up its defences. This shows that the measures which have been taken are wise and are receiving the support of the people. However, Mr Speaker, Sir, to a young man who has undergone national service, it is proper for the Government to legislate to safeguard his interest and to regard his two-year full-time national service as part of his public service. I fully support this Bill. I hope the Minister will also pay attention to our youths' prospects for further studies in order to ensure that national service can be a perfect system. 4.45 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I wish to speak on the second part of the Bill dealing with public officers having to retire prematurely and their entitlement to pension benefits. I do agree with the rationale behind this Bill that an officer who retires prematurely should only be entitled to the drawing of pension on reaching the age of 50 years. However, I feel that this particular feature of the Bill has not taken into consideration the fact that a public officer can opt for a full pension, a three-quarters pension and a quarter pension with gratuity. What I want to know is, if an officer retires prematurely and he is not able to receive the monthly pension until he reaches the age of 50 years, will he be entitled to receive his gratuity immediately? I hope that the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Finance will give a "yes" answer to my query, simply because I think that there will be no rationale behind the move to prevent an officer from receiving his gratuity payment immediately. The reason is this: I will just give an illustration. If an officer retires prematurely on good grounds, at the age of 40 years, and he is given immediate pension benefits, meaning that every month he gets his pension allowance, then he definitely has an added advantage over another serving officer who has got to serve till the normal retirement age. It gives him an extra ten years to draw that extra money. Therefore, if this Bill seeks to stop that loop-hole, I think the rationale is sound. This will not make those dedicated and loyal officers who serve up to the normal retirement age feel that they have been unfairly treated, and that those who leave the service prematurely get an added monetary benefit. But the amount of gratuity will not change once it is computed -whether he receives it at the age of 40 years or 50 years. He is entitled to it. Therefore, I would imagine that while, or, the one hand, there is a rationale for stopping an officer from getting his pension allowance immediately on his premature retirement, I see no rationale at all for stopping him from getting his gratuity. However, I hope that my fears are unfounded and that the Parliamentary Secretary will give a "yes" answer to my query. 4.47 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, let me reply to the Member for Moulmein first. I am afraid I will have to disappoint him. My answer is "No". If the Member can accept the rationale that an officer who retires prematurely should not get his pension until he reaches the age of 50 years, the same rationale surely should apply to the exercising of the option to have a gratuity and a reduced pension. Surely, he is not saying that $10,000 today is the same as $10,000 in 20 years' time.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I would just like to inform the Parliamentary Secretary that the moment a person joins the public service, before he even thinks of retiring prematurely or in normal circumstances, he will have to opt at the outset whether he wants a full pension or a three-quarters pension and the rest to be computed in the form of a gratuity. The choice is made, and if that statement is disputed, then either I have been in the wrong Government service in the past, or the Parliamentary Secretary is not aware of the service conditions.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I stand to be corrected, but I do not think the Member is right when he says that an officer has to exercise his option at the very beginning of his career in the civil service. He exercises it at the end of his career. Six months before he retires, he has to give notice, and in exceptional circumstances, the President can waive that six months' notice.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I do not want to carry on this diatribe with the Parliamentary Secretary. I think he has to check that fact first because I know it from my own experience. As a former teacher, I was required to opt for full or reduced pension at the outset, unless, of course, the Ministry of Education made the mistake of asking me to make the option - that probably is possible -but I doubt that; in spite of their inefficiency, they are not likely to make a mistake like this because this is under the direction of the Treasury. As one who happened to be a civil servant in the past I am quite certain that this is the practice. An officer is not allowed to carry on for 10 or 20 years of his career, and finally make that option six months before his retirement. In fact, at the very outset, when he makes the option, it is very clearly stated that it is irrevocable.

Mr Speaker, Sir, may I quote from clause 15 (1) of the Pensions Regulations which reads as follows: `An officer to whom a pension is granted under the Ordinance may, at his option exercisable as hereinafter provided, be paid, in lieu of such pension, a pension at the rate of three-fourths or any greater fraction of such pension together with a gratuity equal to such number of times the amount of the reduction so made in the pension as is specified in paragraph (6) of this regulation.' Clause 15 (2) reads: `The option shall be exercisable, and if it has already been exercised, may be revoked, not later than the day immediately preceding the date of such officer's retirement: Provided that if the officer does not exercise the option prior to the day preceding the date of his retirement, the President may, if it appears to him in all the circumstances equitable so to do, allow the officer to exercise the option at any time between the date and the actual date of award of a pension to him.' Does the Member understand that?

Mr Speaker, Sir, I will continue this controversy with the Parliamentary Secretary after this session, but the point I made earlier was not whether the option is exercisable at the beginning or at the end of the officer's career. The point I wanted to make was this. In the illustration I gave earlier, the officer retires at the age of 40 years. Then from 40 up to 50, which should be his normal retirement age, he gets ten years extra of pension allowance. Therefore, this gives an added advantage to an officer who leaves the service much earlier than one who serves faithfully until the normal retirement age. Therefore you stop it, and I say there is a rationale for this. But how does this compare with gratuity? Because whether you give him gratuity at the age of 40, 45, or 50, it is the same amount. The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Finance just now mentioned one point, that is, that the value of money today and its value in ten years' time is not the same. My point is, do you think that it is fair that an officer, after having served a number of years and you allow him to retire with all the retirement benefits, should not be given the amount of money that is due to him in the form of a gratuity when the money value is much more than what it will be ten years hence? You are not giving him the added advantage hut that which is rightly his. I do not think it is right for the Government to prevent him from immediately getting what is due to him as a gratuity. But if the Government does not allow him to get a pension immediately on his premature retirement, it is merely saying that his normal pension benefits only start when he has attained the age of 50 years. Therefore, the Government is not giving him ten years extra of pension benefits. But whether the Government gives him the gratuity before that or after that, the amount is still the same. That is my point, Mr Speaker, Sir.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I really cannot see the logic of the argument of the Member for Moulmein. On the one hand, he is not quarrelling about the rationale of not paying a pension until the officer reaches 50 years of age. On the other hand, he says we must pay him a gratuity now because the amount paid today is the same as the amount paid 20 years hence. Is that the Member's argument? If so, I will borrow $100,000 from him now and pay him back $100,000 in ten years' time without any interest. If that is his argument, he should have no objection at all to lending me the money. In fact, the whole point is that $100,000 today is not the same as $100,000 in ten years' time, it grows. This is because if you put $100,000 into a bank drawing eight per cent interest per annum, then every year you will be receiving $8,000 in interest. And in ten years' time, the amount will double itself.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to clarify my point. I do not want to enter into a controversy over the value of money increasing or diminishing in years to come. My point is this. The Government has no moral right to use somebody else's money to make money. Similarly, it cannot say, "Today, we will not pay in full the M.P.s' allowances, or the Ministers' salaries or the Government servants' salaries. Instead we will pay them the balance of the money at the end of so many years." The Government's point of view is quite different, because it thinks it will earn interest on it. Making money is a good thing, but the point is, has the Government the moral right to take somebody's money that is due to him and earn interest on it? I think not only is the Government keen but the officer is also keen to get interest earned from the money put into the bank. But the point is, who has the moral right to the money? If the Government is thinking in terms of paying him the interest, I think that is quite fair, because it is saving the money for him. If he is entitled to $10,000 gratuity, then the figure of $10,000 is the same due to him no matter when he is given the gratuity. That is what I meant when I said it is the same amount. But whether the purchasing power of money has diminished or not is a separate matter. This is the money that is automatically due to him. You pay him gratuity after he has earned it. How can you keep his money and deny him not only the opportunity to earn interest on it, but you also deny him the chance probably to buy a house, or the opportunity to make use of the money profitably. I think the Government has no moral right to take that opportunity away from the officer concerned.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I just cannot understand the logic of the argument of the Member. He seems to be tying himself up in knots. If he quarrels about the granting of pension as from the age of 50, all right, that is possibly a question of difference of opinion. But he does not quarrel about that at all. He quarrels about the fact that we are not giving officers a gratuity on retirement day, irrespective of whether the officer reaches 50 years of age or not. The Member sees it from only one point of view. But there is also the other point of view. He is like a horse wearing blinkers, Sir! [Interruption]

Order.

The whole point is that it is an anomaly if an officer who prematurely retires should get pension from the day of his retirement, while his colleague in the civil service, having given full, loyal and dedicated service to the nation, should receive less than this officer who has not done that well and prematurely retires. Surely if that argument applies to pensions, it also applies to gratuities. Any businessman, banker, or economist can tell you this: $100,000 today definitely has a higher value than $100,000 in 10 or 20 years' time. If for example, an officer retires before 50 and gets a quarter of his pension, computed as gratuity, then us colleagues, who remain in the service and continue to give faithful service to the nation, are at a disadvantage. Then, at what time are we going to give gratuities to those dedicated civil servants who remain in the service? At the very time they join the service? Surely this is not right. That is why I say that the Member for Moulmein is tying himself up in knots. He just cannot understand the logic of my argument. He agrees with one line of it. It is a parallel argument, Sir. He agrees with one line of the argument, and yet he says that the parallel argument is not true. He goes off at a tangent.

He is making a mistake.

The same argument, therefore, applies to pensions or gratuities. Those who retire prematurely will be given the option to exercise whether or not to have a reduced pension and gratuity. But both the reduced pension and gratuity will not be payable until the officer reaches the age of 50 years, or sooner if he is incapacitated. Mr Speaker, Sir, I think I have sufficiently answered the Member for Moulmein. Actually I need hardly answer the Member for Kampong Kapor, as the only point he raised was the increment in salaries. This is already in force in Government departments as well as in statutory boards. The Government, however, cannot force this upon the private sector. But the Government is doing its part, and we hope the private sector will follow its example and treat our national servicemen fairly and squarely. The Member for Kampong Kapor also talked about the probationary period. Surely, Mr Speaker, Sir, this has nothing to do with pensions. I think it is only fair that if everybody who joins the civil service is required to undergo a probationary period, then the same condition should also apply to national servicemen, even after completion of their national service, because in any case they do not lose out at all. This means that everybody goes on probation for a certain period. If we make it an exception for national servicemen, they would have an advantage. Whether or not that is desirable is not for me to say. The point is that it is better that everybody should be given the same opportunity.

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. -[Mr Tang See Chim]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed.

Resolved, "That Parliament do now adjourn to a date to be fixed."-[Mr Barker]. Adjourned accordingly at Seven minutes past Five o'clock p.m. to a date to be fixed.