Hansard, 1976-03-25

Under the provisions of clause 2(d) of Article 30 of the Constitution of Singapore. I have granted permission to the following Member to be or to remain absent from sittings of Parliament (or any Committee of Parliament to which he has been appointed) for the period stated:- Mr N. Govindasamy (Telok Blangah) - from 27th March to 5th April, 1976. YEOH GHIM SENG Speaker, Parliament of Singapore

Order for Second Reading read.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." The existing Road Traffic Act empowers a Police officer to arrest without warrant and prosecute any person found driving or attempting to drive, or in charge of a motor vehicle, under the influence of alcohol or drug to such an extent as to be incapable of having proper control of the vehicle. However, the existing Road Traffic Act does not require the defendant to submit to a medical examination. In a recent case, a Subordinate Court refused to admit in evidence the statement of a Government medical officer that the driver of a vehicle was, at the time he was brought to the General Hospital, drunk and incapable of having proper control of the vehicle because the defendant's consent was not obtained before he was examined. Clause 2 of the Bill seeks to amend the Road Traffic Act by making it obligatory for any person, arrested under the provisions of the Act mentioned earlier, to provide a specimen of his blood or urine, or both, for a laboratory test if required to do so by a Police officer. This clause also seeks to introduce a presumption that a person with a blood alcohol concentration exceeding 1 10 mg/100 ml is incapable of having proper control of a motor vehicle. The proposed amendment serves as a guide to Police officers and medical practitioners as well as evidence upon which the court can convict any person who is arrested under section 29 or 30 of the Act. The concentration level of 110 mg/100 ml is within the range of the legal limits of blood alcohol concentration adopted by the courts in other countries. Sir, I beg to move. Question proposed.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise to support the Road Traffic (Amendment) Bill. It is timely that we introduce this particular amendment because in -our experience it has been very difficult to certify whether or not a person is intoxicated. Much depends on the individual judgment of the medical practitioner. The physical state of a patient who is involved in a road traffic accident and who has been admitted to a hospital has been variously described in terms of whether he is conscious or unconscious, rational or irrational, or whether he smells of alcohol, or whether he is, sometimes, allegedly claimed to be intoxicated. The fact that we now have a legal provision for a blood level of 110 mg is to me a necessity. This particular amendment makes it compulsory that all these people be subject to a blood test. Sir, I would like to ask the Minister if he had taken into consideration the fact that different people have different tolerance to alcohol and if, in fact, this blood level of 110 mg is a fair level to be placed. Secondly, could he inform this House as to the specific blood levels imposed by other countries, and how do we compare to these other levels. I understand that in the United Kingdom it is in the region of 80 mg. Perhaps he could inform us more about this provision in the other countries of Europe. Could the Minister also inform this House as to the number of persons in the past year or two who were involved in road traffic accidents and were found to be intoxicated at the time of the accident? Further, could the Minister explain in layman's terms what this blood level of 110 mg means. Does it mean consuming two bottles of beer or three bottles of stout or four pegs of whisky? This seems to us to be more meaningful than a blood level of 110 mg.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I would just ask the Minister whether in the implementation of this law there would arise a situation where a blood test is required but it is not available under the circumstances, and in such a situation should the person concerned be unable at the particular time to produce the required urine, would that constitute a justifiable reason under the circumstances?

Mr Speaker, Sir, I appreciate the Member for Kim Seng's support of the Bill. He raised a number of questions. Perhaps I should first answer the last point about the blood level of 110 mg/100 ml in layman's terms. Generally speaking, if a person has consumed three full pegs of hard liquor or three large bottles of beer within a space of one hour, his blood alcohol concentration would be in the region of 110 mg of alcohol in 100 ml of blood. A normal whisky/water or brandy/dry served in restaurants or bars contains half a peg of hard liquor. That would give some idea of the blood alcohol concentration in layman's terms. Our Senior Forensic Pathologist has confirmed that a person with such a concentration of alcohol in his body is not in a fit state to drive a motor vehicle, and his opinion has been supported by many experiments carried out in other countries throughout the world. In ordinary circumstances, a seasoned drinker, even though he may be an experienced driver, will not be able to have proper control of his vehicle with such a level of blood alcohol concentration. Regarding the different legal limits adopted by other countries on blood alcohol concentration, Members would be interested to know that this ranges from a very low 30 mg/100 ml in Bulgaria and Czechoslovakia 50 mg/i 00 ml in Norway and Sweden; 80 mg/100 ml in the United Kingdom and France; and 80-1 50 mg/100 ml in the United States of America. Our limit of 110 mg/i 00 ml is, therefore, a compromised one. On the number of traffic accidents involving drunken driving in the past, unfortunately, I do not have the full details. I only have the figures for 1974 and 1975. In 1974, the number of cases of drunken driving brought to court was 103. In 1975, the number increased to 160. This represents more than a 50% increase over the 1974 figure. The Member for Serangoon Gardens raised the question regarding a defendant who could not produce the required urine at the time of examination. I will leave it to the court to decide and the Member to defend the defendant ably at the trial.

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 Ong Teng Cheong]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed.

Order for Second Reading read. 2.44 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." The Bill seeks to increase the civil jurisdiction of -

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 E.W. Barker]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed.

Order for Second Reading read. 2.47 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." Sir, this Bill is a corollary to the Subordinate Courts (Amendment) Bill, 1976, which has just been read for a Third time. The Probate and Administration (Amendment) Bill seeks to increase the jurisdiction of the District Court to enable it to grant probate and letters of administration in respect of estates which do not exceed $50,000 in value. This provision will again off-load some of the work handled by the High Court. The Bill also seeks to increase the power of the Official Assignee to administer, without letters of administration, the estates of persons who have died leaving property in Singapore, the value of which does not exceed $50,000. Under the existing law, the Official Assignee may only administer the property of such persons without letters of administration if their estates do not exceed $10,000 in value. In view of the increase in the rate of Central Provident Fund contributions, most Singaporeans will be leaving estates exceeding $10,000 in value when they die. This proposal in the Bill will enable the Official Assignee to administer such estates summarily if they do not exceed $50,000 in value. 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 E.W. Barker]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed.

Order for Second Reading read. 2.50 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." Sir, perhaps I should explain to Members what the Maintenance Orders (Reciprocal Enforcement) Act is all about. Should a Member of this House desert his wife and run off to some other country, leaving his wife and children without means, then the wife can apply to a Singapore court for an order for maintenance. But if the errant husband is not in Singapore, one cannot enforce the order. Should he run off with some other woman to another country, then the order which is obtained in Singapore can be sent to that other country for enforcement in that country's court provided, of course, we have reciprocal arrangements with that country. Honourable Members will recall that the Maintenance Orders (Reciprocal Enforcement) Act, 1975, was enacted in July, 1975, to introduce certain changes in the law relating to the enforcement in Singapore of maintenance orders made elsewhere, as well as the enforcement in other countries of maintenance orders made in Singapore. Before the said Act could be brought into force, we sought the views of countries. which had previously entered into existing arrangements with us for reciprocal enforcement of maintenance orders, as to whether they were able to enter into new arrangements based on our new Act. Sir, in the Law Ministers' Conference in Lagos, Nigeria, in 1974, most countries agreed to pass appropriate amendments to their Reciprocal Enforcement Act so that these new arrangements could be made. But up to-date some countries have replied that they are unable to do so as their laws have not been changed. For these countries, therefore, it will be necessary to continue the existing arrangements made on the basis of the existing Maintenance Orders (Reciprocal Enforcement) Act (Chapter 26). The 1975 Act has a provision which seeks to repeal the existing Act. It is, therefore, necessary to defer the repeal of the existing Act until all countries can make arrangements for the reciprocal enforcement of maintenance orders on the basis of the 1 975 Act. Sir, the Bill, therefore, seeks to amend the 1975 Act to include a provision to empower the Minister in charge to appoint different dates for the coming into operation of the different provisions of the Act. This will enable the 1 975 Act to be brought into force except for the provision which seeks to repeal the existing Act. 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 E.W. Barker]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed.

Order for Second Reading read. 2.59 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." Sir, the Commercial and Industrial Security Corporation (Amendment) Bill, 1976, seeks to amend the Commercial and Industrial Security Corporation Act. 1 972, for the following purposes: (1) To regularise Government's contribution towards the retirement benefits payable to an employee of the Corporation for the years of service he has rendered to Government under the former Guard and Escort Unit; (2) To make provisions for the Corporation to adopt certain financial procedures. Sir, the Corporation is required under the law to bear all rights, liabilities and obligations relating to the Guard and Escort Unit immediately before the coming into Operation of the Commercial and Industrial Security Corporation Act, 1 972. However, Government has agreed, in line with the policy governing transferred employees of other statutory boards, to contribute to the retirement benefits to a CISCO employee for his service while serving the Government under the former Guard and Escort Unit of the Singapore Police Force. This arrangement is currently given in a Letter of Undertaking from the Permanent Secretary. Ministry of Finance, to the General Manager. CISCO. It is necessary, now, to make provisions under clause 2 of the Commercial and Industrial Security Corporation (Amendment) Bill, 1976, to regularise this payment by Government. The present Act also lacks detailed provisions to deal with the appointment of auditors, powers and duties of the auditors, keeping of financial records and submission of financial statements to Parliament. With the concurrence of the Auditor-General and consistent with the policy applicable to statutory institutions, it is now proposed to add a new schedule to the Act. This is to require the Corporation to adopt certain financial procedures to provide for the appointment of an auditor to audit the accounts of the Corporation and for other matters connected therewith. 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 Chua Sian Chin]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed.

Order for Second Reading read. 3.04 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." Under the existing provision of the Parliamentary Pensions Act, a Backbencher, who previously held the office of Prime Minister or a Cabinet Minister for a period of not less than three years and has completed nine years' reckonable service and has attained the age of 45 years or upon his attaining this age, shall be granted a pension calculated on his ministerial pay and the allowance received by him in respect of his service as a Member of Parliament. It is proposed in this Bill to exclude the M P allowance in such a computation as the Backbencher concerned, whilst having ceased to hold the office of Prime Minister or Cabinet Minister, is still a Member of Parliament and therefore should not have the element of the MP allowance calculated in his pension. Section 5 (2) of the Act is therefore being amended to provide for pension to be computed only on the basis of his ministerial pay. When he finally ceases to be a Member of Parliament, section 4 (3) of the Act as it stands will enable his pension to be re-computed, taking into account his allowance as a Member of Parliament. 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 Hon Sui Sen]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed.

3.07 p.m.

Sir, I beg to move,the motion* standing in my name as it appears on the Order Paper. * The motion reads as follows: That this Parliament, in accordance with section 4 of the Foreshores Act (Chapter 270), approves the reclamation by Government of approximately 15 hectares of foreshore and seabed at Pulau Renggit (Pulau Renggis), as shown coloured pink on the plan marked "LAND OFFICE RECLAMATION PLAN NO. 1/76" which is deposited in the Land Office, Singapore. Sir, the Sentosa Development Corporation (SDC) will be developing Pulau Renggit or Pulau Renggis as a recreational resort for the public. For the purposes of this development, the SDC proposes to reclaim approximately 15 hectares of the foreshore and seabed at Pulau Renggit as shown coloured pink on the plan marked as "LAND OFFICE RECLAMATION PLAN NO. 1/76", a copy of which is displayed in the Library of this House for the information of hon. Members. Sir, this reclamation which will be undertaken by the Port of Singapore Authority on behalf of the SDC as agent of the Government is expected to be completed in two years' time at an estimated cost of $5« million inclusive of the foreshore protection. Fill for the reclamation will be obtained from the Sisters' shore. On completion of the reclamation, the reclaimed land will be proclaimed as State land and will be alienated to the SDC on terms and conditions to be agreed with the Commissioner of Lands, Sir, I beg to move,

Question put, and agreed to. Resolved, That this Parliament, in accordance with section 4 of the Foreshores Act (Chapter 270), approves the reclamation by Government of approximately 15 hectares of foreshore and seabed at Pulau Renggit (Pulau Renggis), as shown coloured pink on the plan marked "LAND OFFICE RECLAMATION PLAN NO. 1/76" which is deposited in the Land Office. Singapore.

Sir, before I move the Adjournment motion, today has been a rather short sitting but in the last two weeks we have had longer sittings. May I express on behalf of Members of this House our thanks for the patience you have shown in dealing with various Members who spoke in more than one language.

Thank you.

Sir, I beg to move, That Parliament do now adjourn to a date to be fixed.

Question put, and agreed to. Resolved, That Parliament do now adjourn to a date to be fixed. Adjourned accordingly at Ten minutes past Three o'clock p.m. to a date to be fixed.