Mr Speaker, Sir, in rising to associate myself with my most esteemed colleagues, the hon. Members from the Back-bench and the hon. Member for Kim Keat, in expressing appreciation to the President for his most distinct Address to Parliament on the 21st instant, may I spend some moments elaborating on some of Singapore's problems. Answers will have to be obtained and soon to fulfil the long term interests of the people. We seem to have started 1975, and a little later the year of the Rabbit, pretty well indeed. Provided there is a continuing resilient population and work force, and a continuous drive for productivity, quality and reliability from all quarters, we should see more improvement in the months to come, barring any unfortunate global crisis. But, Mr Speaker, Sir, what are we doing about the deficiencies in our Education system which needs immediate attention to fulfil long term goals? I hope that the Education Act will correct the situation. The object of education, as I see it, is to develop future citizens capable of earning money and fulfilling their jobs in an atmosphere of opportunity, dignity and justice. In the main, Education is to get students to understand why they must be clever enough to do specific jobs, and to give them factual knowledge to enable them to do these jobs. In fact, our formal education plays a significant role in preparing the young for their future roles in the economic processes by inculcating in the young qualities of punctuality, orderliness, regularity, the ability to obey orders and to carry out defined tasks in a set time. Citizens qualified to maintain a good profitable industry assist the economy of their country. They are then rewarded with high purchasing powers and high standards of living. However, the Education system, as it is, neglects to inform the young that the way they utilise their purchasing power could influence the means and speed by which their standard of living improved. It is in the real interest of democracy to create knowledgeable and proficient consumers who are able to influence and improve production, boycott shoddy goods, and help establish the correct balance between supply and demand for goods and services, including cultural and social ones. In our present Education system, we have mere apologies for Consumer Education in the form of "Education for Living" taught in primary schools and "Home Economics" taught to girls in Secondary Schools. Consumer Education is needed without regard to sex both boys and girls are future consumers. We need to be taught in school to ensure an appreciation of how the needs of the community are met, an understanding of the levying and allocation of taxes, and a clearer concept of the national budget. Consumer education if carried out properly in schools will help students evolve their own value systems, develop sound decision-making procedures based on their values, evaluate alternatives in the market place and get the best buys for money, understand their rights and responsibilities as consumers in our society, and fulfil their roles in directing a free enterprise system. Mr Speaker, Sir, undoubtedly the ever-rising toll of accidents in factories, some ending in the maiming and even death of productive workers, more than merits the determination of the Labour Ministry to raise standards of industrial health and safety especially in the more vulnerable areas of building construction, shipbuilding and ship-repairing. The report of the Study Group on accident prevention in ship-building and ship-repairing will also alleviate some of the problems in Industrial Health and Safety. The intended inclusion of Industrial dermatitis and noise-induced deafness to the Second Schedule of the Workmen's Compensation Act as compensable diseases is another step forward and so are the proposed increases in quantum of compensation payable. In addition, intended amendments to the Factories Act to further include more stringent safety measures are commendable. However, as safety is everybody's concern, more stress should be laid on the necessity for further strengthening the tripartite cooperation in this field. In addition, there should be serious consideration by all these three parties, especially by Government, to look deeply into our system of Accident Prevention in order to derive, possibly, a solution that would in actual fact reduce the accident incidence rate and the dangerous occurrences rate. Let us take, for instance, the developments in this field at present taking place in the United States and the United Kingdom which, superficially at least, seem to be pursuing opposite paths. In the United States, under the Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA) the emphasis is on enforcement- thousands of esoteric standards that bewilder and confuse employers. In fact, only 5% of the Federal job safety and health standards account for 80% of tile OSHA citations for violations. Further, more than 40% of all serious violations are due to non-compliance with just 15 job safety and health rules, basic commonsense rules dealing with the obvious. In the United Kingdom, however, there is a move towards less legislation and regulation and greater self-regulation by both management and labour. In Sweden, recent legislation provides for management-labour cooperation in safety and health and for trade unions to become involved in the assessment of safety and health risks to which their members are exposed. In countries as different as Germany and Russia, substantial developments are also taking place. We need to have an in-depth study of our system in order to improve and evolve a new and better system. The need for it is clearly indicated in our accident statistics. In formulating this new and better system, the philosophy must be to ensure that no worker shall suffer impairment or dimunition in health, functional capacity, or life expectancy as a result of his work and working conditions. Especially important must be the development of long-term programmes to establish guidelines for the early detection of health impairment as a result of work hazards. Mr Speaker, Sir, that crime merits punishment and that it is the duty of Government to ensure a safe country for our people apart from the country being conducive for investors, tourists and so on, to visit, is expected. But in Singapore today employment is not such a problem, if one is not unduly fastidious, and even then crime rates are on the increase. This is more than alarming and needs to be urgently checked. However, if we are interested in the long term interests of our people, we cannot only concentrate in building our Police Force to combat crime with the threat of detection and punishment. Government needs to have a comprehensive policy which will enable it to determine the reasons behind these growing crime rates. Once the `whys' have been removed, less of our citizens will turn to crime. This is a positive step towards crime prevention and must be implemented at the earliest possible juncture. The increasing crime rate has a tendency to be tied up with drug abuse. The ever-increasing cost of drugs and the advancement from a lesser to a more potent drug, which costs more, necessitates an ever-increasing supply of funds, legitimate or otherwise. Tile quickest way, unless you are caught, to obtain these funds is to steal. If there is a threat of discovery, petty theft could end in murder. To curb crimes of this nature would mean the developing of a better and more skilfully manned Central Narcotics Bureau. Surveillance work will need to be undertaken to keep an ever watchful eye on suspect drug traffickers with the objective of ultimately arresting and prosecuting them. More confidence will need to be built up with drug abusers caught so as to persuade them to divulge the sources of their drug supplies. This would of course mean attaching CNB officers to fewer culprits to enable the officers to create a better rapport with these abusers in order to obtain the essential information. 3.37 p.m.