Hansard, 1977-02-16

asked the Minister for National Development and Communications when the tracks at Jalan Perisai will be made up.

Mr Speaker, Sir, work on metalling of the tracks at Jalan Perisai has commenced and is expected to be completed in April 1977.

asked the Minister for National Development and Communications whether he can give an assurance that pig farmers who have been resettled will be able to continue their pig farming activity for a period beyond 15 years as many of them have been resettled on more than one occasion and heavy capital is involved in the setting up of pig farms.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the pig farmers have been resettled in Punggol because it is a non-water catchment area where pig waste does not create the same serious pollution problems as in a water catchment area. The Government has so far developed 507 hectares (1,252 acres) of land in Punggol at considerable expense for pig farming as part of our policy to be self-sufficient in protein food. Also 30-year leases are given to large commercial pig farms. Therefore, as far as I can see, pig farming is likely to continue there for the next 15 years.

Mr Speaker, Sir, in that case, I must thank the Senior Minister of State for his kind comments. Sir, would he not agree with me that the farmers will be there for more than 15 years?

Mr Speaker, Sir, I have categorically stated that pig farming is likely to continue there for the next 15 years. The very fact that we have given leases of 30 years, we can even speculate that it is very likely that pig farming will be there for 15 to 30 years.

asked the Minister for National Development and Communications if it is planned to expand the Punggol veterinary extension centre to meet the increasing demand for veterinary services with the rapid expansion of the pig farming industry in Punggol.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the answer is yes. In fact, a new 2-storey addition to the existing veterinary centre costing $409,000 with a built-up area of 702 sq. m. is under construction and will be completed by the end of this year. This new building will have a laboratory complex, a post-mortem room, offices, a library and a meeting room. Three veterinary surgeons and other supporting staff will be posted to the Centre to provide more efficient diagnostic, treatment and advisory services to the farms.

Resolved, `That, notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph (3) of Standing Order No. 4, at its rising today Parliament do stand adjourned to Monday. 21st February, 1977" - [Mr E. W. Barker].

Order read for Resumption of Debate on Question [14th February, 1977], `That the following Address in reply to the Speech of the President be agreed to:- "We, the Parliament of the Republic of Singapore. express our thanks to the President for the Speech which he delivered on behalf of the Government at the opening of the First Session of this Parliament.".'. - [Dr Chiang Hai Ding]. Question again proposed. 2.37 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I had originally intended to take advantage of the Standing Orders to table an amendment to the Motion standing in the name of the hon. Member for Ulu Pandan in expressing our thanks to the President for his speech. Several Members have, in fact, indicated that they expected another diabolical manifestation of what other Members might describe as the negative part of my nature. Notwithstanding the lifting of the Whip, and the assurance given by the Leader of the House, I am still inhibited by the fear that being a Member on the Government Bench, an amendment might well be regarded as a gesture of disrespect to the President. Further, having listened to the gentlemanly and eloquent delivery of the speech by the hon. Member for Ulu Pandan, I have come to the conclusion that any amendment to the Motion will certainly be repugnant. I decided, therefore, that the Motion should remain as it is, at least for the sake of etiquette, and I shall try, though not without involuntary restraint, to be less pungent in my remarks at this Sitting. Without formally moving the amendment, I think that the Motion should more appropriately read as follows: `We, the Parliament of the Republic of Singapore. express our thanks to the President for the Speech which he delivered on behalf of the Government at the opening of the First Session of this Parliament, but regret to note the absence of any mention on the deficiency of the Government in the understanding of the problems of the people in the process of implementing its policies' Seriously speaking, Mr Speaker, Sir, few can dispute the high ideals expressed in the Addenda, some of which are so colourfully dressed with so many jargons, except to marvel a little in disbelief in some of the many intangibles and inadequacies so innocently confessed through the statements in both the Addenda to the Ministry of Education and the Ministry of Culture. Sir, I recall that some years ago, the Deputy Prime Minister, in a speech that typified his in-depth knowledge in the potentials and prejudices of our people, went to great lengths to define the characteristics of what he called "Westernised Oriental Gentlemen", or WOGs as the Deputy Prime Minister endeared these people with that abbreviation. That speech was both enriching and invigorating. Indeed, it provoked serious mind-searching. I would have been quite satisfied with my comprehension of that speech if I had stopped just there. However, in giving his observations a little further probing, I discovered that the Government is not totally free from the symptoms of such decried qualities. Allow me to recapture just two previous instances which, I hope, will suffice to demonstrate the lack of understanding on the part of the Government in both the culture and traditions, which values the Ministries of Education and Culture so doggedly promised in the Addenda to inculcate in our young. Some years ago, as a result of complaints of noise pollution, the Government imposed a partial ban on cracker-firing. The letting off of fire crackers was made an offence except in places designated as permitted areas, such as State-owned - I emphasise State-owned - open land and community centre compounds. Many Members are aware in my discussions with them, in the Members' Room, that I was quite vocal against this kind of a half-line action. I then held the view, and I still hold the view now, that the partial ban was doomed to failure. If the firing of crackers was regarded as obnoxious - indeed it proved to be unconducive to our well-being, apart from being an annual money-wasting folly, then the ban should have been total. This "half-way-house" policy succeeded only to expose the Government's ignorance in our culture and its complete lack of understanding of the meaning and significance of cracker firing. It was, and still is, believed - total ban now notwithstanding, that the ear-shattering explosions promise a whole host of things, from scaring away evil spirits to bringing good luck and fortune to the family and the household, not to forget that noise-making has been part and parcel of the local mode of celebrations. In fact, Sir, in funerals we happen to make the most noise. No one, therefore, would spend money to bring good luck to Government-owned designated places. Fortunately, these superstitious exercises remained as superstition, for otherwise, those who took advantage of that `leeway' would have succeeded in bringing good fortune to the designated places, perhaps even raised the land value which, of course, must consequently be put up for tender under the Urban Renewal Schemes. So this `leeway' proved to be neither here nor there. Eventually, as a result of a nasty accident, a total ban was slammed. The nett result of that short-lived concession was a 100% disagreement from the populace. For those who favoured total banning, the frightening sound of crackers could still be heard; and for those who refused to warm up the designated places, they were utterly frustrated. So much for one example of Government understanding of our culture and tradition. Mr Speaker, Sir, I speak without inhibition now, and as the Minister for Health is not here, it is not my intention to dispute the success of family planning in Singapore. On the contrary, I am confident that we will achieve our target even more effectively, now that the programme has been reinforced, I hope, with new vigor and approach by the present Minister for Health. There was a time, Members will remember, when there was great hullabaloo in this House on the subject. Hon. Members will recall the day when the House was entertained to some very amusing definitions as to what an ideal family should be. Briefly, we were told that a one-child family would be too lonely for the poor child; two would of course be most ideal; three would be a luxury; four would be unpardonably anti social, and five, God forbid, criminal. The population problem, in Singapore's context, is a problem not unrelated to Asian values. If a Western solution is the only feasible solution to this Asian problem, so be it. It has got to be done, and so it must be done. I do not think that our people would quarrel with the concept, or even with the incentives or disincentives. But the explanation, propaganda, publicity and exhortations must necessarily be Asian. There are equally convincing axioms in Asian teachings and philosophies to get our people around to adopt family planning without resorting to threats and name-calling. Here again is what I suspect to be another WOG thinking. Recent examples of WOGs at work in Government policies are abundant, but it may be a relief for our Ministers in the Front Bench to note that they are not alone in the pursuit of this title. In fact, only yesterday, they were mirrored in the appeal by one such latest exponent. This time, however, the title award must go to none other than the hon. Member for Telok Blangah, who so seriously advocated, of course, with detectable traces here and there of imperfect imitation of the Dale Carnegie style, for the implementation of Daylight Saving Time. Sir, I am no geographer, neither am I a pilot. But I do know that Singapore is approximately situated at Lat. 1 degree 21 minutes from the equator, and if it pleases the hon. Member for Telok Blangah. I might add that we are north of the equator, where the sun rises every morning at about 6 am, and sets every evening around 6.45 to 7.00 p.m. Daylight saving certainly is useful to countries further to the north of the equator, such as the United Kingdom. (The hon. Member for Telok Blangah might even tell us that he knows exactly the latitude of London.) I was a poor geography student and I did not quite get myself round to the coordinates of longitudes and latitudes. Sir, the episode does not end here. A colleague in this House, who happens to be on the other side of the House, suggested to me out of kindness that an alternative might well be to advance the working hours by one hour. Sir, in fact, last evening, we were trying to extend the time up to 6 o'clock and I was thinking that we ought to be home for dinner at not to forget, that would be after two hours of recreation. Sir, that was a suggestion with the hope that it would not upset everybody or confusing the geographers or the pilots. I received the suggestion with some reservation, as I am conscious of my official position in the Ministry of Labour, under which portfolio the question of working hours sometimes constitutes a rather unpleasant subject in negotiations. I will therefore leave it to this kind Gentleman on the other side of the House to muster sufficient courage to appease the hon. Member for Telok Blangah with that proposal. But to be fair to that Member, Sir, I did caution him that in the event he decides to risk his reputation in offering this counter proposal seriously, his arguments had better be of such high standard so that he may not, at the end of the exchange of the conversation, emerge as being one who is bemoaned of lacking in eloquence and found wanting in wisdom. Sir, I must apologise to the House for wasting your time by dwelling too lengthily and ironically on the question of saving time by wasting your time. Allow me now to acquaint you with a game which I shall call `cancelling-out' for the time being until we find a better name. The players in this game involve two parties, namely, the Ministry of Education and of course, its worthy opponent - the Ministry of Culture. [Laughter] Let us not laugh and dismiss this game too lightly, because in the end, we, the spectators, will turn out to be the real losers. Briefly, the game is very simple. The principle is: Whatever you can do, I can cancel. Accordingly, whatever the Ministry of Education does, the Ministry of Culture promptly cancels out with an equally, and sometimes more effective counter-action. This process is then repeated with the procedure reversed. Let me first weigh the stake which we stand to lose so that we can watch the game with more vested interests. If this rather stupid game does not stop, I fear that the more successful the Ministries of Education and Culture in their efforts to -

Mr Speaker, Sir, on a point of clarification. I just wish to question the Member for Kampong Chai Chee. He was the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Culture. We would like to know which side he is speaking for and whether he was cancelling out the Ministry of Education,

Sir, I left the Ministry of Culture about five years ago. When I left the Ministry, it was in a happier state, Sir, I am quite confident in saying that at that time the cancelling-out exercise was never mooted and it was a very much happier Ministry. After I left, I cannot vouch whether this Ministry is indeed the same as before. Apparently it is not, Sin, because now the cancelling-out exercise is so blatant and I shall relate more later, I had expected the hon. Minister for Health to take me on family planning. I was caught.

Mr Speaker, Sir, now that I am here I will be very happy to listen to the Member for Kampong Chai Chee on his remarks on family planning. I can enlighten him. I can also send him to my Family Planning Population Board for advice, if necessary.

I am sorry. Sir, the hon. Minister missed the boat, as I' have mentioned it earlier. Lest he gets anxious, those remarks were complimentary. I think I should know better, Sir, if you know what I mean. Allow me to go on, Sir. As I was saying, if this rather stupid game does not stop, I fear that the more successful the Ministries of Education and Culture in their efforts to "imbibe the tried and tested Asian cultural and moral values", the more they are successful, the more resentment we will have to face. There will be more antiestablishment sentiments, not so much due to the lack of understanding of our national problems on the part of the people, but due to our own default in not understanding them. Really, Sir, the questions that we should ask ourselves are: Just what are these values and traditions that are so vital to our survival as a nation? And how are we going to achieve these great objectives set out for us? No attempt has been made in the Addenda to list out what those values, culture and traditions are. Even if the Ministries did try, there must be so many contradictions rendering the exercise a wholly frustrating one. This might well be a case of the 10, in this game two blind men trying to decide what an elephant looked like. So, Mr Speaker, Sir, their handicap left us with nothing but disorientated compasses with which we are to take part in this cultural treasure-hunt. The most profitable approach in this confusion, I presume, is by taking stock of what has been going on and take a count on the scoreboards of these two players. Perhaps we should begin with a conclusion already at hand. This approach certainly appears odd, rather unprofessional, even unenlightened and unorthodox to begin studying a problem. The conclusion is: discourage all traditional operas, or wayangs as they are known, at least make it difficult for their stagings, because this will be the best way to `encourage' one aspect of cultural heritage which our people are endowed with - by killing it. The Ministry of Culture, of course, pledged: `to organise a wide range of activities to promote a better appreciation of our cultural heritage. This will provide our young with the necessary cultural ballast against the erosion of traditional norms and values.' Just what are these norms and how wide is this wide range of activities? Music, or Art for Everyone, lyrics competitions? How are these activities able to provide the cultural ballast? An answer, if possible, would be welcome. If not, then may I venture to provide one: All these utterances have been repeated year after year in this House. The result: rampant drug abuse, still no cultural ballast in sight. To define the meaning of "traditional", the Ministry preceded by stating that: `It is Government policy to develop Singapore's rich cultural heritage derived from the Malay, Chinese, Indian and western civilisations' So, Western civilisation enjoys the confidence of the Ministry of Culture and becomes acceptable as part of our tradition. Interestingly, the Ministry of Education has different ideas. It stated in its Addendum: '...they will be taught not to adopt the life styles and values of the West that are alien and pernicious to Singapore society.' I hope that this is genuinely the case of the right hand not knowing what the left hand is doing, because if indeed one hand knows exactly what the other hand does, then this mutually cancelling-out exercise must give rise to doubts as to the seriousness and sincerity of the Government in our cultural policy. Let us now take a look at a few more scores in this game that has been going on for too long a time. The schools encourage our young to be thrifty and this is challenged by the television which advises them to buy, or pester their parents to buy what they or their parents do not need. The school says you must save money and open a POSB account, and the same TV teases you and the parents by suggesting why wait for such a long time to get so little money, buy Toto and your problems will be solved. The school reminds our children that there is no substitute for hard work, do not try to get rich quick. But the TV says, "Decidedly wrong! The Big Sweep is the alternative". In fact, the advertisements for Toto and the Big Sweep sounded so convincing that few people regard it foolish not to throw away a good portion of their salary so as not to be left out as non-starters. The Ministry of Education regards Western life styles and values as alien and pernicious to Singapore. The TV, however, offers effective anti-thesis to this proposition, one of which is through the sometimes less than tasteful advertisement for new jeans. They say new generation jeans but they do not tell you the period between two generations. Is it six months or one year? So you buy new jeans. Again, the Ministry of Education takes great pains in including in its curricula subjects such as music appreciation, even resuscitate Civics under the cover of Education for Living, and finally the annual gigantic Youth Festival. But the TV holds steadfast to their ground. TV programmes have been equally successful in forcing down our throat poorly produced so called local cultural shows, stuffed with crazy, frequently `electrifying' dances. Electrifying indeed they are - if only we can find out why those healthy and able-bodied young men and women struggle in agony resembling electric shocks or anything but what the Education Ministry thinks of cultural dances. Sir, we now come to the interesting part. Refusing to be sidelined in this cancelling-out ingenuity, the Ministry of Education also shoots into its own goal. To encourage thrift, for example again, they change text books even more frequently than they change their Ministers. In its zeal to recover its tarnished image, the Ministry of Education boldly stated in its Addendum: `The education system has been revised to improve its effectiveness. Consequently the enormous wastage II underline) in terms of pupils not benefiting from the system and having to leave school prematurely will be drastically reduced' Is this an ideal, or is it not, as it sounded in the addendum, a statement amounting to an indictment of all the previous efforts of the so many Ministers for Education? Enormous wastage will be drastically reduced. That means in the past there must have been enormous wastage. The success of our education can best be reflected in what one hon. Member described to me as the `Goondu' TV shows, at which generous prizes were given away to hide embarrassment. In this series, simple questions were asked of the participants and invariably, astounding, if not outraging answers were promptly proffered. Blessed is the poor goondu who finds the right answer to the question on how many Ministers for Education there were in the last 17 years! The mischiefs of WOGs unfortunately, are only one of the shots in a double barrel gun. The Housing and Development Board rightfully claims the right to trigger off the second shot. This time it is not WOG, but Santa Claus is at fault. Building decent houses for the people is the responsibility of the Board and it was for this need that the Board was established in 1960. Whilst it is true that the Board has done much in what its Chief Executive is paid for, success has carried them away to the extent that they, and only they, are the saviours of Singapore. The Board is the philanthropist for whom hon. Members in this House must labour in return for its kindness! Hon. Members are not capable to advise the Board, still less influence its policy. We have been assigned a task only to explain its actions and, worse still, to justify its misdoing. Sir, we stand on the platform. They do not. So we have to justify their misdoings. This, I am sure, Mr Speaker, Sir, is not a complaint only personal to myself. The hon. Member for Changi spoke on his part of the woes in this House yesterday, and I am sure other Members will also certainly have their share of woes too. No mention is made in the Ministry of National Development Addendum under the subject on "Housing and Public Projects" as to how the HDB proposes to alleviate the plight of the one-roomers. Other housing estates may not be that bad, but if you go to Manila Street you will find that you have communal kitchens. Then you will know what it is. Many years ago, I cautioned in this House that the one-room units would degenerate into slums over a short period of time. No heed was paid to Parliamentary discussion. To the HDB, we appear to them as nothing more than a debating society. Let me remind whoever lives under that illusion that we in this House survive because of his or their works, will certainly be very grossly mistaken. Again, Sir,I cautioned about the high plot ratio commercial development at the city centre, which inevitably must generate a high volume of traffic, particularly the Shenton Way and the Golden Shoe area. Today, we have the CBD restriction and the Area Licensing as our jackpot. It would have been a different matter if public applicants from the traditional slum areas were to apply for HDB accommodation, but the one-roomers are, hon. Members will agree, if I were to describe this short-sighted design of first generation flats as Government Planned Modernised Slum. Has not the HDB an obligation to do something for these poor folks? Despite repeated appeals by Members of Parliament, the HDB has been completely oblivious to the problem. From recent statements, we have been assured that action will be taken to resettle these one-roomers into larger units, but the whole process would take three to four years. Is this not an admission that the HDB has not been responding to appeals by MPs until recently? Various proposals were offered. One involved the conversion of these one-room units into larger two-room units by combining them; another was to demolish a number of blocks to make way for green areas and playing fields - this is a deficiency in planning now requiring rectification. It may be worthwhile for HDB to take note of Members' views, if they accept that Parliament, not their drawing office, is the supreme body in this Republic. I must state that in this matter, we shall not succumb to their whims and fancies. There is no need for us to look far for inspirations to this conversion programme. These one-room units can easily be retained and converted for a variety of uses, to name only a few: (1) Homes for the Aged - The design of these units is ideal for conversion into dormitories for the aged so that they can live as part of the community in a HDB estate, without having to suffer the feeling of being treated as castaways in some remote homes. In all probability, some of these units might actually be so converted, because I have great confidence, very rare confidence though, in the HDB's ability in quickly responding to the recent calls for the care of the aged made by so many Ministers. One up for the HDB on this. (2) A less rewarding proposition for the HDB. For areas urgently in need of community centres and lacking in suitable sites a conversion may be the most expeditious solution, although the superstructure may present some technical problems but these are not insurmountable. (3) Conversion of some of these units to provide for alternative accommodations for civic organisations affected by development schemes or urban renewal protects. One must not forget that our civic organisations, whilst handicapped by old fashioned management methods, have proved themselves to be useful and effective in serving the community in the past. I have no doubt that given help, they will continue to be so in the future. Through their mutual assistance, such as scholarship for their members' children, they have been able to partially, maybe negligibly, relieve the State of the heavy burden on education and social services. It is only too unfortunate that nobody thought it useful or necessary to make fuller studies into the more positive aspects of their works. The Resettlement Department is the most controversial unit in this glamorous HDB outfit. This Department is even more hard-pressed to perform the dual functions of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde. A not very helpful Dr Jekyll but certainly a monstrous Mr Hyde. I will tell you why. The Dr Jekyll role is portrayed through the hypocritical claim of help given to those affected by redevelopment. The common claim is that those affected and entitled to resettlement benefits, are reminded that they enjoy concessionary rents, etc. Let me say that these concessions are no concessions at all. They are entitlements. These people are entitled to these so-called goodies because they have been uprooted from their steady livelihood, having to plunge into uncertainties in the new environment and to re-establish themselves once again. It is only over and above all these `concessions' that the HDB can then justifiably claim to offer concessions. Mr Hyde's role is understandably less humane. Permanent residents are not entitled to rehousing nor business premises. I agree that permanent residents should not be entertained when applying for HDB accommodation under the normal public application, but in the case of resettlement, it is highly immoral that they be deprived of alternative housing or place of business. After all, the HDB requires them to quit, otherwise they are quite contented with the status quo, and pose no burden on the HDB, knowing that they do not qualify for HDB accommodation which I understand about 95 to 100 thousand of citizen families are on the waiting list. May I conclude, Mr Speaker, Sir, with a grand example of how hypocritical one can be. Here, may I call to mention the recent good deeds of our MPs, so publicised in the newspapers, notably our Ministers, going round their constituencies offering gifts to the old folks so that it has been so gallantly claimed that the less fortunate people may also enjoy the forthcoming new year. This is an annual affair and I salute those who do so much and so consistently over all these years. In resettlement action, however, being old and worse still, alone, is a sin and consequently an obstruction as far as the HDB is concerned. A single, old aged citizen, I emphasize old aged citizen, will not be able to secure an alternative accommodation on his own. He is compelled to go round the affected neighbourhood to look for another equally unfortunately, lonely, old soul so that if they both agree, they may jointly be allocated a one-room unit. But if he happens to be the only such outcast, (the term is what I suspect the HDB regards him as such. It is not my term, Sir) then he is left to fend for his twilight years in the streets.

In the slums!

In the slums. Would you be able to accommodate them? I know where to send animals to now - to community centres. But I do not know where to send the old people to, I know I can send animals to the Telok Blangah community centre if it has a menagerie. But old people are not animals. They are human beings. They are senior citizens and here they have to fend for themselves in the streets. Even if this poor old man or woman has a son, who unfortunately is not staying with him or with her for one reason or another, but keeps on discharging his filial responsibility of maintaining his father's or mother's livelihood, the old fellow is not allowed to bring in his son or daughter to form a family unit for rehousing, but he must necessarily seek to put up with a total stranger, if he finds one, that is. So much for our double-standard show or care and sympathy for our senior citizens. May I, Sir, just quote one last example? Many years ago, in reply, to a question by the hon. Member for Punggol, the former Minister for Finance said that claiming income tax relief for aged parents -

For maintenance.

- for maintenance of aged parents was regarded as mercenary because it is the filial responsibility of the young to look after the old. Asian society values again, Sir,I would have been quite satisfied with the former Minister for Finance.Unfortunately, our present Minister for Finance has found the formula. Asian values and filial piety can now be quantified; first, by $500 and now by $750. So this is our responsibility to look after the aged. Mr Speaker, Sir, may I say how much I appreciate your patience in allowing me to take the Floor. To you, Sir, I render my respect, not so much for the authority of the Chair, to which I always submit, but for your age and wisdom in your person that commands your position. 3.19 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, in rising to support the Motion of thanks to the President, moved by the hon. Member for Ulu Pandan, I am also expressing the sentiments of the community leaders and constituents in Potong Pasir, who so overwhelmingly voted for the People's Action Party at the recent election. I would also like to take this opportunity to extend to you, Sir, my congratulations for being re-elected Speaker. The unanimity of the House in your re-election is a clear reflection of the excellent manner in which you have always conducted the affairs of the House. Our meeting, Sir, in this Fourth Parliament is undoubtedly an occasion of gratitude for the total victory of the People's Action Party at the polls and of satisfaction that our policies have once again been endorsed by the electorate. Our happiness, however, has been diminished by the tragic loss of the Member for Radin Mas, who in the summer of his life, has left vacant his seat in the House. His voice, as I remember, resounded vigorously in and out of Parliament, many a time, for the cause of his constituents and the workers of Singapore. As an hon. Member and a trade unionist, he worked unselfishly and unstintingly to improve the standard of living and quality of life of those under his charge, despite the fact that his tired and sick body could no longer take the pressures necessitated by his dedicated life. He spent the evening before he died - he passed away in the small hours of the morning - in his constituency, giving away Chinese New Year ang pows to those in less fortunate circumstances, I will miss him much, in and out of the House, as I am sure many will. Mr Speaker, Sir, since the opening of the Third Parliament in October 1972, international developments have had serious repercussions on Singapore, and today Singapore and the Southeast Asian region are facing a whole range of new problems. In 1972, the President's Speech and Addenda indicated optimism, with expectations of continued economic growth and better lives for our citizens. We were then enjoying a mini-boom and the Ministry of Finance, indicating continued economic growth, was able to assure us that there was no need for any major increases in taxation or revenue collection. However, that prediction and euphoria did not last long. We were overtaken by circumstances beyond our control by inflation, increases in the price of oil and international economic depression, resulting in lower economic growth, the threat of unemployment and social insecurity. In spite of the fact that the world in general has been able to cast off the shackles of stagflation and the future looks brighter than it did two years ago, new problems, that may rock the very foundations of democratic societies in this region, are foreseeable, and we have to be firm in our resolve to resist and repel attempts to undermine and destroy our independence, our way of life and our security. Since the communist victory in Indochina, the democratic governments of neighbouring countries have been threatened overtly and covertly by external aggression and internal insurgencies, and with physical and moral support to communist terrorists within. We in Singapore have to be ever vigilant; there must be no let-up in our internal security measures. We must not be misled by the peace and tranquillity enjoyed by all in Singapore, which has only been made possible by the firm measures taken during the past years. We are only a few miles away from the hot-bed of terrorist activities and our people must be warned and constantly reminded of the speed with which the communists can mount acts of terrorism against us as they have done in the neighbouring states of Thailand and Malaysia. We must be on our guard at all times and never be lulled into a false sense of security. Otherwise, all that we have worked for, all that our citizens have striven for, all that they have built over the last 17 years will be destroyed by a communist take-over. We have only to take note of what has happened in Cambodia after the communist take-over and the recent acts of violence on the Thai border, to realise the sort of treatment that will be meted out to our people if we are not vigilant and allow communist infiltration. I am, therefore, grateful to the prominence and emphasis given to the need of security in the Presidential Address. Sir, in sharp contrast to the optimistic tenor of the President's Speech in 1972, we have now been warned to prepare for a slower growth rate and have been advised to adjust our spending habits accordingly both as a Government and as individuals. The Government's decision to economise in governmental expenditure became noticeable during the past year. It is a matter of regret, however, that Singaporeans have not learnt to similarly restrain their spending habits. In fact, one could say that spending habits are still indifferent and reckless, tending towards adoption of Western contemporary life styles, which do no good to our citizens and our country. Indulgence in wasteful spending can be clearly seen in the market places, shopping complexes, restaurants and so on. Only last Sunday, one of our local newspapers exposed the gullibility of Singaporeans who, because of a desire to be up-to-date and fashion-conscious, have succumbed to advertising expertise and high-pressure salesmanship, and beguiled into purchasing locally-made jeans and jackets, which are exported, labelled with a foreign trade mark, re-exported to Singapore and sold at prices about five to six times the original cost of production in our Singapore factories. Our own mass media, especially our television, has in no small measure contributed to this unnecessary spending and wasteful habits among our citizens. We seem to be succumbing to the phenomenon common in developing countries, where the imported product acquires snob value, mainly because it costs more and partly because people wish to ape the life in the West, in the mistaken belief that the West are the trendsetters of fashion with a sophisticated way of life. It is evident that Singaporeans, falling prey to high-pressure salesmanship and advertising, are squandering their hard-earned money by indulging in wasteful habits. If we are not careful and our people not warned, we could be completely misled and cheated. I read recently an account of the exploits of two enterprising young businessmen who decided to take advantage of the American consumers gullibility. Realising that they could sell anything to Americans, if the goods were packaged well and attractively, they made a fortune by selling 450 gms of plain earth for $25.

00. They sold them as potting soil for plants, in chic little bags. In this game of exploiting the gullibility of consumers, I must reiterate that our RTS is where the shoe pinches. Our commercial television service appears to be guided only by the amount of revenue that advertisements bring in and is not concerned with the type of advertisements. This matter. I must add, has been mentioned in this House before and seems to have fallen on deaf ears. For example, although the Government has introduced a ban on tobacco and cigarette advertisements and discourages smoking, our television commercial service quite happily advertises cigarette lighters, which is a product ancillary to smoking. And, of course, there are other misleading advertisements, very skilfully portraying unnecessary products, such as expensive imported apparel, etc., with jingles to promote their sales. Sir, the Addendum on the Ministry of Finance indicates that: `Singaporeans can enjoy an increasingly higher standard of living because we can pay for our needs in food, housing, education and health and for more and better goods and services` This is an encouraging assurance which will be welcomed by all. The increase in our GDP, which makes possible a higher standard of living and a better life, represents the sum total of the output of all in our Republic. The largest contributor to our GDP is the industrial sector and we should therefore not forget that the productivity of the industrial sector represents ultimately the productivity of the workers. It should also be remembered as we enjoy the fruits of our industry, that our industrial progress, has, because of certain omissions taken an undue toll of human suffering in mangled limbs and lives. Remedial action is called for immediately. Sir, Singapore developed an industrial economy during the past 17 years. In the process, new forms of machinery, new forms of production, new forms of construction have been introduced in our Republic. They have brought with them attendant hazards for the workers - the man who operates the machines, the man who services and repairs the ships, the man who works on high-rise buildings and so on. For example, about 15 years ago, there were hardly any high-rise buildings. Construction was then quite simple. Wooden scaffoldings were adequate for construction work. Steel girders seldom had to be hauled up to high places. Today, we have 30- to 40- storey buildings springing up all over the Island and wooden scaffolding is quite inadequate. Metal scaffoldings are necessary as steel girders have to be hauled to very high places. The whole concept of construction has changed and brought with it dangers to the workforce. But it is most regrettable that very little has been done to retrain our workers who were used to the former methods of construction to cope with the new situation. Old habits die hard and this has resulted in a number of serious accidents and deaths. There has clearly been an omission on somebody's part to retrain our workers for the new situations. Similarly, Mr Speaker, Sir, Government legislation has been very slow in catering for the new developments. It is not as if the Ministries concerned were unaware of the hazards facing workmen in the building trade as a result of high-rise development. They must have observed the patterns in countries with high-rise buildings before us. Similarly, in factories the workers are faced with a whole range of threats to life and limb from industrial machines. The safety measures required in the factories can easily be adapted to our needs by observing what goes on in the factories abroad. But, insufficient has been done and our workers are paying the penalty. One can hardly blame workers on ships to appreciate the dangers of gas in the ships' holds and of the fires that can be generated from a spark from their shoes, when the dangers have not been explained Our workers are simple-minded people who concentrate on the job and on productivity, and it is up to the employers and the Government to ensure that they are given protection from the dangers of modern industry and chemistry. It will be recalled that with the British pullout, because it posed a major problem, it received serious attention, and among other things, training schemes were devised to retrain those who lost their jobs, to fit them for other work, But because industrialisation has gone on quietly and steadily in Singapore, the re-training of our workers, to enable them to cope with new methods of production, with new forms of machinery, has received scant attention. Safety measures have similarly not attracted sufficient scrutiny. In 1975, the total percentage increase in the number of accidents over 1974 was an alarming 18.8%. Although for the same period the number of fatalities dropped, the position is still not under control. The 1976 statistics is still to be made available by the Ministry of Labour, but as I understand, there is still a marked increase in the total number of accidents last year. In the United States in 1959, the long-term trend of declining accident rates was reversed with an increase in industrial activity, influx of new workers and a more rapid introduction of new processes and activities. Legislation was immediately updated and comprehensively provides for measures for the prevention of industrial accidents. In Singapore, however, although there was generally little increase in industrial activity, in the influx of new workers, etc, the percentage of accidents, as I have said earlier, has increased tremendously. However, Mr Speaker, Sir, attitudes have yet to be changed. Employers show little interest in implementing safe working methods, self-regulatory systems, and in providing satisfactory safety apparel and a safe working environment, with machines regularly maintained and guarded. Workers also lack safety consciousness, sometimes disobey safety rules and regulations and fail to put on personal protective equipment while on the job. In addition, the enforcement machinery lacks adequate strength in numbers, discipline and dedication. Inspections at factories and pressure vessels seldom result in severe action being taken for contraventions of legislation. Similarly, seldom are effective recommendations made to alleviate common ailments such as poor house-keeping and misuse or lack of safety appliances which could quite easily result in accidents. Sir, one of the important techniques of accident prevention is the analysis of accidents to determine their underlying causes so that positive action can be taken to prevent recurrence. The American Standards Association provides a procedure for selecting, classifying and summarising the fundamental factors in accidents. The Annual Report of the Ministry of Labour lacks vision in its statistical data and leaves little room for employers and workers to pin-point the areas that need greatest vigilance. In addition, it must to some extent handicap the Factory Inspectorate in its enforcement and accident prevention duties. Before judgment can be made about the magnitude of the occupational disability problem, aggregate data on the number of injuries and deaths must be standardised. To draw comparisons between industries and plants or even between departments in a plant or factory, such standardised data would be of tremendous positive value in preventive action. Standardised accident frequency and severity rates therefore should be a part of the responsibility of statutory Safety Committees. Sir, registered with the Social Welfare Department are more than 10,000 handicapped or disabled persons. By modest estimates, there could be as many that are not registered. Their disablement is congenital or as a result of the toll taken by industrialisation. Of those registered, more than 4,000 are in the employable age-range. A quota scheme for the employment of disabled persons is necessary. The scheme has to be strictly enforced if it is to be successful and employers should be required to make quarterly returns indicating the percentage of disabled persons employed. Dis-incentives could perhaps be introduced to ensure compliance with the quota scheme. Sir, those that are not employable should be given realistic public assistance, This would also include the aged. It is right not to encourage misuse of public assistance by increasing its quantum to such an extent as to make it attractive enough for citizens to cease supporting their aged or disabled. Incentives introduced to ensure such support could be introduced. But where such incentives cannot benefit those who support the aged and disabled, the quantum of public assistance must be realistic, Humane treatment by civil servants of those receiving public assistance is essential. I had occasion to take up a case of a bed-ridden paralytic Constituent who lived with his unemployed, old and sick wife. Each month, she had to travel a good five miles from Jalan Potong Pasir to collect her husband's allowance from the Social Welfare Department. This meant a one-mile trudge to the bus-stop from the kampong, an unnecessary waste of bus-fare, a long wait at the Social Welfare Department and the tiresome journey back home. All the while, her helpless husband lay on his back without her care, awaiting her return. Most certainly, the authorities concerned could quite easily have saved her the strain and cost by making available at her house the public assistance due to them. To make matters worse, when she was admitted to hospital for an operation, the cost of hospitalisation was deducted from the public assistance allowance leaving them a mere $20 to survive for the month. This inhuman practice turns assistance into cruelty. There surely must be many other such cases which merit immediate attention. Sir, the real incentive to labour organisation is the control of the work environment, stemming from the realisation that control over the conditions of employment can be achieved only by workers who become organised and who act collectively. Hence, trade unions are the essential instrument for the achievement of collective freedom, which is itself the prerequisite for the protection and the advancement of the individual worker. Throughout their history trade unions have had to battle against powerful enemies, not the least of which has been the law. The law seems to favour employers, and as such, the advantage they take against trade unions leaves much to be desired. Employers have even lowered salary and fringe benefits to workers the moment they are organised in order to hit back at trade unions, If there is to be a continuation of co-operation among Government, unions and employers to ensure a united contribution to economic growth by the promotion of a stable and peaceful industrial relations climate, immediate steps must be taken to ensure that employers do not act arbitrarily. Sir, job-hopping is not a symptomatic cure sought by workers. It is also not a frivolity they are fond of indulging in. Let us look at the reasons for job-hopping before we consider penalising job-hoppers by reducing their share of the NWC wage increase recommended. If the reasons for job-hopping are justified, I do not understand why these workers should be penalised. Sir, the first reason that comes to mind for workers who job-hop in Singapore is distance from home to place of work. With the rapid building of HDB flats and many workers wanting to live in them, the tendency for them to move house is almost certain. In addition, many of our workers are young and earn small wages. They usually live with their parents. With greater number of people moving into HDB flats due to resettlement and the need for them to improve their living conditions, they will have to move away from their former abodes which in most cases are close to their working places. In addition, when they marry, they normally make their own home, which means movement of both husband and wife from their former abodes. The next reason is almost always due to inadequate wages. One cannot penalise a worker who goes for another job that pays more. After all, he is willing to give his best and why should he not receive his worth? This situation will always exist in order that a competitive labour market can function to the benefit of both workers and employers. Many of our workers who are not choosy and who realise that a bird in hand is worth more than two in the bush, accept jobs that they were neither educated for nor trained for. After such time, when a suitable job, commensurate with his training comes along, should he not be at liberty to change jobs? There are many other legitimate reasons for changing jobs, such as an unreasonable and tyrannical employer who makes life miserable for employees. Such circumstances do not warrant the penalty of a loss in NWC wage increase recommendations, I must therefore stress that Government should take heed not to upset the labour market by applying constraints on the individual's freedom to choose his own employment and employer. After all, does not the employer have the right to hire and fire? So why should not the worker also have the right to opt in or opt out? An hon. Member: Hear, hear! 3.47 p.m.

(In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I support the Motion of the Member for Ulu Pandan. In the President's speech, mention has been made that Singaporeans should formulate their own way of life. This is of particular interest to me. Over the last decade, we have been groping our way about for a solution. Today we can say that we have found a way out. Just like what the English proverb says: Where there is a will, there is a way. After some effort, we have found a way out to a better future. It is to learn and absorb Western science and technology in toto. By doing so, our life has bettered that some 10 years ago. For instance, 10 years ago we built many one-room units of flats to accommodate thousands of people. At that time, this sort of flats was considered good. But today these flats do not appear to be good enough. During the last general elections this type of flats had been given an airing of views, Our candidates made a promise in the general elections saying, "All. right, we will modify these one-room flats." The Government has to improve them by converting two such units into one bigger unit. Otherwise people will not want to stay in such one-room flats. On the other hand, the Government has to build four-room, five-room and even six-room flats. As the people like to live in them, the Government is even prepared to build luxurious flats and apartments as condominiums, costing hundreds of thousands of dollars in order to satisfy their needs, This is obviously in keeping with our economic progress and the success in our family planning. While the number of members in a family has become smaller, the living area of a flat has become larger. In the newspapers and in magazines, interior decorators have designed the layout of a flat for a family of four. Besides designing separate bedrooms for the parents and the children, they have also provided a bathroom in each bedroom, or next to the hall a balcony is added. The rooms will be well ventilated and bright, and flowers and birds have been added to turn the flat into a paradise. So now the urge to work hard in order to make more money so as to raise the standard of living has become the norm as well as a factor for progress in this pragmatic society. If we had discarded the principles of "reward according to merit" and "distribution according to labour", our construction programme would not have progressed so fast. In our present more and more westernised family structure, usually only two generations live together separate from the grandparents, just as what our textbooks have now taught our pupils. We find that the children are taught that every morning when they get up they must say "good morning" to daddy and to mummy, but these textbooks do not include "good morning" to grandfather and to grandmother. To the majority of us, we have parents and children living together at the same time. The only difference is that under the western influence parents stay at one place whereas we ourselves and our children live at another place. So this has caused a twin social problem relating to two generations. On the one hand, the aged and weak parents have been forsaken by the children and some, when they are faced with difficulty in their livelihood, had to ask the Government to put them into a home for the aged so that they could pass away their twilight years under some shelter, The other problem is the case with young couples with children. If the wife finds that she cannot get a housemaid to help in the household chores, she will resign from her employment to run the house and to teach the children. In this way, the family budget is increased while income is reduced. Nowadays in view of the increasing number of Government flats more and more children would leave their parents to live separately when they are ready to raise their own families, This gap between the two generations resulting in the twin social problem has become acute. In view of this trend in family structure, I would like to ask the question whether Singaporeans should accept in toto western cultural values and concepts. To me, personally I think western science and technology is our life-line. We must endeavour to seek these for our own good. On the other hand, we should not allow the individualistic liberalism produced in the very rich West to form part of our culture, because it will only divide our people and weaken our thoughts and split our society so that we become poor, weak and cannot stand on our own. There is the example of Tan Wah Piow who illegally entered England. All along in his way of life and education he has been thinking that the moon in the West is very round, much rounder than the moon in the East. He does not know that the moon in the East is just as round. Thus he is imbued with a dubious concept of values, which makes him think that to be born a foreigner and to die a foreign ghost is very glorious to him. What I want to point out is that after all we are Singaporeans living in this strategic geographical area in Southeast Asia where western and eastern cultures meet, We have our own way of life. While there is certain similarity with the West, there is also some difference from the West. Even when compared with the Chinese, Indian or Indonesian ways of life, there are differences in similarities and there are also similarities in differences. But these are our characteristics. This goes to show that we are ourselves, Singaporeans, masters of ourselves. We are not the play-things of the colonialists. Sir, once more I support the Motion of the Member for Ulu Pandan. 3.58 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of the Motion standing in the name of the hon. Member for Ulu Pandan. The President's speech has re-asserted the Government's position that, other than education, medical treatment and housing, nothing else will be subsidised by the Government. This position has been well understood and largely accepted by the vast majority of Singaporeans, otherwise the present Government would not have been returned to office with the highest percentage of votes cast in the last six general elections. But what many people cannot understand and have cause to grumble about is why they are sometimes made to pay over and above the economic cost of certain commodities. Take, for example, the price of petrol. When oil prices were increased by the OPEC countries in recent years, oil companies in Singapore made two adjustments to the retail prices of petrol. The Government also at the same time increased its duty on petrol correspondingly. Was this not imposing an additional financial burden on the consumers? Another example is the tax surcharge on the consumption of PUB utilities if the total amount exceeds $30 per month. The rates have already been revised by the PUB in line with the additional cost it must incur from increases in the price of oil. People can accept the fact that their consumption of petrol and PUB utilities cannot be subsidised, and they must be prepared to pay for' the periodical increases in the costs of these commodities. But what they find it a little difficult to swallow is having to pay additional taxes over and above the increases in economic costs that they have to pay. My point is that in relation to the commodities such as those I referred to, Singaporeans are not only not subsidised by the Government but are also heavily penalised by the Government for their consumption or use of those commodities. Whatever may have been the reason for the Government to do this, the net effect is that all this additional tax burden is passed on by the manufacturers, businessmen and shopkeepers to the final consumers, most of whom are workers. The President stated in his address that the PAP won in all the 69 constituencies with the highest percentage of votes cast in the six last general elections. He went on to say that this vote of confidence imposes a heavy responsibility on the Ministers to act fairly but firmly, and that the Government will exercise its authority with circumspection and moderation. This is most welcome. As it is, life can never be too easy for the two million-odd Singaporeans because of the political and socio-economic circumstances we are in. We must sometimes have tough policies to see us through if we want to survive, prosper and progress as a nation. There are no easy solutions to the problems and challenges ahead of us. This is what Singaporeans have been told and what Singaporeans have accepted. But sometimes we are asked to swallow pills that are unnecessarily bitter; at least, that is the impression created. People do not expect the pills to be sugar-coated, but neither do they want them to be more bitter than is necessary. Take the case of the recent announcement by the Education Ministry that in 1979, students entering Pre-University classes must have attained certain standards in their first and second languages. I do not know what earthly purpose can this move serve. Is it to achieve our objective of a multi-lingual society? Or is it to raise the academic standards of undergraduates? I really do not know, But what I do know is that this is going to impose an additional and unnecessary strain on the future Pre-University students. By imposing this requirement of proficiency in two languages, how is it going to help our future Pre-University students to succeed better in their special fields of university studies? Does the Government not realise that a simple statement like that from the Education Ministry is already causing such a widespread anxiety among parents with children aspiring for further studies in 1979 and thereafter? The parents are naturally concerned over this recent announcement as it affects their children's chances of securing a place not only in the Pre-University classes but also, eventually, in the Singapore society. Is this acting with circumspection and moderation? It may be too extreme to dismiss it as a rash and an ill-conceived action, but the element of consultation and public debate on the matter is conspicuously missing. The greatest service that the Education authorities can do for education perhaps is not to come out every now and then with some startling new ideas which may cause more harm than good. Instead, the authorities should concentrate on testing every new scheme more carefully and thoroughly over a period of years. Mr Speaker, Sir, there have been several policy decisions in the past where the raison d'etre is sound. But their implementation might sometimes have caused unnecessary hardship to those affected by them. This was largely due to the over-zealousness and the lack of experience of those in charge of implementing the policy decisions. Perhaps it is not just the future policies and actions of Government that should be carried out in moderation and circumspection. The Government should also review its past policies and actions to ascertain, with the benefit of hindsight, whether some of these policies and actions can in fact be carried out with more circumspection and moderation. Take the case of the Area Licensing Scheme. Will the scheme not achieve the same purpose and objectives if cars are allowed to enter the restricted zone at 9.45 a.m. or 10.00 a.m. instead of 10.15 a.m. as at present? Can we not achieve the same degree of success in family planning, if we do not insist that Catholic schools take in children on the basis of priority for those with one of their parents sterilized, as this is causing unhappiness and is a matter of religious conscience for 100,000-odd Catholics in Singapore? Cannot the Government be a little more liberal in granting citizenship to the more deserving, I emphasise, more deserving, cases of blue identity card holders? Whether we like it or not, they are either the sons or daughters, fathers or mothers of our citizens, and they have nowhere else to go. We allow them to stay. We even allow them to be considered as part of the family unit when applying for HDB flats. Giving them the citizenship in many of these cases is not going to impose an additional national burden on the Republic's resources. They are, in fact, part of the national burden that we are now carrying. There are no doubts that, in the issues such as I have mentioned, the Government can easily and profitably review its past policies and actions to take off some of the unnecessary bitterness of the pills we must take for our nation's health and for our individual health. 4.07 p.m. Mr Ong Soo Chuan rose -

Mr Ong. I would like to take the Suspension at 4.15 p.m.

That means I have about eight minutes to go. (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, in his speech delivered on the 8th February at the Opening of the Fourth Parliament. The President has laid out the various Government policies and guidelines to be implemented in the next five years. These policies and guidelines are very pragmatic and practical. In the past we have never had policies and guidelines more realistic, more considerate to the people and more virtue-inspiring as those that have just been presented in this Fourth Parliament. In the book of the Great Learning of ancient Chinese Scholars there is the teaching that great learning lies in understanding the virtues, loving the people and arriving at that which is perfect. It means to say that we must carry out good government, love the people like our own children, and that we must try and do our best to look after the people. This is the way of good government valid universally. As the seas and oceans are made up of water droplets, countries are made up of people, the individuals. The strength of the country lies in the security of the people. Therefore, although state policies are based on national interest as the first premise, they must also be able to take into account the immediate interest of the majority of the people. That is to say, the implementation of state policies must suit the interest of the people in such a way that the people can bear it. That means we have to study and discuss all plans and policies in depth carefully in order to understand the wishes and get the views of the people before implementing the policies, so as to ensure practicability and conformity. In this way, all beneficial policies which are implemented will be accepted by the people. If we can arrive at a state where the people regard the State with respect and importance and the State looks after the people with esteem and care, and there is harmony, unity and cooperation between the State and the people for mutual progress, then it will be the great fortune of both the people and the country. In view of the present international situation which has great repercussions on us and with Mr Carter's assumption of office as the new American President, there is an air of uncertainty in the international scene. The Southeast Asian situation is like-wise not clear. The Middle East problem is not yet solved. The oil crisis is not over yet. The whole world situation is in a state of fluctuation. With such external factors and internal situation before us, we are faced with problems in formulating and implementing Government policies laid down in the speech presented by the President. The way ahead is difficult, The future may not turn out to be what we all expect. However, we have the will and capacity to survive and succeed. We have the experience gained from the past years of independence to help see us through. We have once more been given such a heavy mandate, and so we must do our best not to let our people down. But in circumstances beyond our control, there may be some factors present to prevent us from achieving or what we have set out to achieve. In this case it then becomes our bounden duty to explain and to analyse to the people what the causes are that prevented us from achieving our goal. Civil servants also have to take up the challenge and the responsibility to help the nation solve its problems. They also owe the people a duty to explain what the problems and hardships are. It is only when there is such a general understanding of the situation that the people will be enabled to continue to support the Government. From the experience gained in the last general elections, we can see that we have a higher percentage of support from the lower income groups compared to the earlier elections. This heavy mandate placed on Members of Parliament means that we must be fair and do our best to solve the problems of the people. It is only then that we will not let down the voters who have put us in power. The PAP has always been pragmatic. We are known for not making wild promises. In spite of free things or giveaways promised by the opposition, our voters have the guts and the resolve to discard these wild and empty promises of free things but opted for self-reliance. They have instead voted us in, It is from the people in the lower income group in the less developed parts of Singapore who have given us more votes than ever before. Without their support, we would not have been able to get 72.4%, the highest percentage of the total number of votes ever cast. Since they have put such great trust on us we must also take special care of them, such as building and metalling more roads, installing more street lights and creating more employment opportunities for them. This is the bounden duty of the Government.

Order. I propose to take the Suspension now and will take the Chair again at 5.00 p.m. Sitting accordingly suspended at 4.15 p.m. until 5.00 p.m. Sitting resumed at 5.00 p.m.

Resolved, "That notwithstanding the Standing Orders, this House do adjourn at 6.00 p.m. today," - [Mr E. W. Barker]

Debate resumed. Question again proposed. 5.02 p.m.

(In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, now that the present Government has been re-elected, it should not continue to do what it used to do in the past, that is, to pass or implement many heavy tax measures and levies within the first three years after the elections thus increasing the burden of the people affecting their livelihood. The Government should not, as it did before, continue to increase taxes and tariffs by decrees without any debate in this House, particularly where such tax and tariff increases affect the livelihood of the people. In his speech the President said that Members of this House have "the duty to ensure that all shades of opinion out in the constituencies are vigorously voiced in Parliamentary questions and debates." This is a very categorical and precious guideline which I believe Members of this House will happily accept and implement with all earnestness. Sir, Shyn-Tze, an ancient Chinese philosopher said that: `To know is better than not to know. To see is better than to know. To practise is better than to see. The end of learning is to practise. He who practises is a sage` By this proverb, Sir, we are told that there are many problems in the world which the common people may not understand fully. It is only those who have the experience, who have seen, and who have practised. will they be able to appreciate the problems. I do not want to be a sage nor do I claim to be a sage. Neither do my colleagues in this House. But as representatives of the people we have the duty and responsibility to reflect the views of the people. Particularly so, in this Parliament where all the MPs belong to the same Party and where the Government Whip has been lifted so that we can freely and fully reflect our views in this House. Sir, some people hold the view that as representatives of the people we enjoy high prestige and a good life. But in my humble opinion that is a wrong concept. On the contrary, as representatives of the people, we act as the bridge of communication between the Government on the one hand and the people on the other. The Government has its policies and the people have their difficulties. Our position in between these two forces always makes us feel the pinch and the worse off. As MPs, we do not expect to be rewarded for doing this. We do not expect to be appreciated or thanked for what we do. In my many years of service to the people as a Member of the House, I can say that I understand this truth. If new Members have the attitude of expecting rewards or thanks for doing a service to the people, they will be greatly disappointed. They can also tell the people that it is not easy to be a Member of Parliament. But after the elections they would have a different view to what they had when they were fielded as candidates, because they would have realised that things are not completely within their control. To serve the people, you have to dedicate yourself to the point of making sacrifices and this, I am sure, is the experience they have gained during these past few months. Take the case of the late hon. Member for Radin Mas. He dedicated his services without any expectation of reward or thanks. During his life time the late Member for Radin Mas dedicated himself to the service of the people. Even on the last day of his life he went to his constituency to distribute ang pews to the old and needy people. This is the kind of Member of Parliament who will of course command the respect of his constituents. Now that he is dead, who will look after his family? We have to look up the Parliamentary Pensions Act to see whether our late MP is due for any entitlement under this Act. If there is no provision for such entitlement, I think an amendment Bill should be tabled in this House to ensure that an MP who has rendered his services in the interests of the people will have something provided in the Act for his family in the event of his death, Mr Speaker, Sir, in my career as a Member of Parliament I have gone through different kinds of experience at the elections. In 1963 I tasted defeat. In 1968 and 1972 I had the experience of winning the elections by contest and in 1976 I had another round of experience of the election in which I was returned unopposed. Some people might say that I had won without effort, and the newspapers also said that we got it without effort. Regrettably, even our Petir also said that 16 MPs have been returned without effort. In other words, you got something without any effort. But I would say that 1 5 MPs at least cannot be included in this category. There is only one, perhaps the new MP, who can be said to have won without any effort.

It is not his fault!

(In Mandarin): But the 15 old MPs cannot be classified in this category. We have difficult responsibilities as MPs. In this House, we spend a lot of time debating the policy statement. Before we can do that, we have to study the speech and the addenda, and then to test the ground by finding out the views of the people. We spend so much time and effort to get to the ground in order to reflect their views in this House. The press also labours to carry out speeches. After all these efforts, my question is this: Do civil servants spend as much time to study the Hansard so as to find out how problems should be solved? Or how the views reflected by MPs in this House could be properly dealt with? Do they think that we come here just to make noise and to fill up a beautiful looking Hansard without any follow-up action? Mr Speaker, Sir, in his speech the President referred to the simple truth that to get from each his best, rewards and recognition must go to those who excel in consistently high performance. There is no dispute about this simple truth. Rewards and punishment must be clear and well-defined. It is only then that the people will take the trouble of facing all difficulties and to do what they are supposed to do and be inspired with a forward-looking spirit for excellence. Rewarding according to performance is, in fact, a motivating measure for our national progress. But, Sir, in the promotion and rewarding of civil servants, the people are often given a bad impression that civil servants have been rewarded and promoted not because of their outstanding performance but because of their outstanding merit-seeking cum profit-making. The plans and schemes proposed and submitted by such civil servants are aimed at increasing the revenue and to curry favour with the Minister and be in the good books of the Minister so as to secure a favourable assessment of their performance. In so doing, such civil servants have forgotten or overlooked the political consequences and the chain of social problems that might be caused. In the case of the working class we have the Industrial Arbitration Court to act as the tribunal to judge who is to be properly rewarded for high performance. In the case of the civil service, there is no such tribunal or proper authority to assess the performance or the merits or demerits of civil servants. We have a number of senior civil servants holding different corporate posts. According to the Straits Times of today, we can see that Temasek is the biggest holding company in Southeast Asia with a number of subsidiaries, including SIA, Keppel Shipyard, Sembawang Shipyard, etc, all with Singapore Government participation. Who is the Chairman? SIA Chairman is also the Chairman of this giant holding company, and he continues to be on the board of directors of so many other companies. How do you assess the actual performance of such a person? If you want to know his actual performance, I will deal with it in depth later on. There is a duplication of posts. The directors of the new Temasek Holdings are the directors of the other subsidiary companies under the Temasek group. Who is there to assess their performances with such a duplication of directors. You have the Public Accounts Committee and the Estimates Committee to examine public accounts, but there is no such committee with the rights or power to look into the accounts of such companies. These so-called directors have become directors without contributing a single cent to capital. They are all civil servants who have become directors without having to contribute any capital themselves, They are different from directors of private enterprises. In the case of a private enterprise, if a person wants to be the managing director or the Chairman, he has something at stake or has a vested interest whereas civil servants become directors without any vested interest. They have not contributed any capital. There is nothing at stake. How many such companies have lost their business? There is no report. Who looks into them? Nobody. Are they capable? How do we know whether or not they are capable? What about those companies that have suffered losses? We have the case of the Granite House purchased in London which lost tens of millions of dollars - public money contributed by the hard work and sweat of the people of Singapore. And now we have exonerated the director who had dealings in the Granite House affair and awarded him director-ship to a profit-making company elsewhere - chairman of Temasek Holdings. Who can say that he is capable or not capable? There is no proper accountability in the case of a State-owned company. So you have one civil servant responsible for the failure of one business at one time and now promoted to another capacity in a successful company. He is thus rewarded, but no penalty for the failure of his action. So how can you say "to each according to his worth"? Mr Speaker, Sir, there are civil servants holding several posts. Their plans and schemes for the Government are mostly profit-orientated for their own credit. In his speech, the President also stated that "no major policy or legislation should be passed without the closest scrutiny and passed only after the most thorough debate" in this House. This again are words which we must pay heed to. However, my colleagues in the previous Parliament sittings had also reflected their grievances and levelled criticisms against some IegisIations being rushed through the House in all three Readings without adequate time for study and debate. This has been a very common occurrence. Very often we come to this House after only a glimpse of the Bill itself when it was tabled. Where have we got the time to study the Bill for a thorough debate? In a case like this, Members of Parliament cannot be blamed for not having studied the Bills and other measures. You can blame the Ministers for this. The Minister responsible for the Bill should supervise its drafting by civil servants. If the drafting was done in a hurry, there will always be omissions and flaws in the Bill. Sometimes more haste would result in more delay. There were occasions when Ministers in moving the Bills were not very clear about the legislative principles and spirit therein. So very often amendment Bills had to tabled within a few months after passing the original Bills. This is well within the knowledge and experience of many hon. Members in this House. In some cases even Ministers responsible for such Bills did not know the actual meaning of the Bills because we tell from their answers to the questions raised by Members of Parliament that the Ministers did not really know what they were saying. Mr Speaker, Sir, there are also examples to show that within two or three months of a Bill being passed in this House an Amendment Bill was brought in again to look after a certain interest or deficiencies. All these are illustrations to show that when Bills are passed without a thorough debate or scrutiny, the blame cannot be entirely put on Members of this House. The Ministers have also a certain measure of responsibiltiy for all this. Mr Speaker, Sir, on the reference to the Polytechnic and other tertiary institutions as hotbeds or targets of recruitment for the Communist Party, this is something that we must be vigilant about. We learn from experience that it is only when dissatisfaction exists that it can be made use of as a tool against the Government or the people. According to my understanding, the reasons for dissatisfaction among students of the Polytechnic and other institutions of higher learning are that some students are pessimistic and uncertain about their future employment opportunities and are dissatisfied with the existing conditions. Thus they lend themselves to manipulation. Take Nanyang University, for example. It is still fresh in our memory that from the late 1950s up to the early 1 960s Nanyang University was infiltrated by the communists. Nanyang University was then still under the old system. There was a feeling of dissatisfaction among the students then and the situation was exploited by the communists. The students were made use of for all kinds of agitation. Thus, Nanyang University was in a state of turmoil and unable to make any headway. To remove all the root causes leading to the dissatisfaction, negative prevention is not the basic solution The fundamental solution lies in the removal of the root causes of the dissatisfaction. We must resolve the students' problem of employment opportunities. Students are also dissatisfied with their status quo. We must look for a proper diagnosis before administering medicine. Although the Government has accorded equal treatment to Nanyang University and the University of Singapore, frankly speaking. Nanyang University needs a Vice-Chancellor with drive and some efficient senior executives of high academic standing in order to raise academic standards. It should open its door to students of different races in keeping with our national policy so that Nanyang University may develop to the same level as the University of Singapore. Ideally, where the University of Singapore does not want to conduct certain courses they can be conducted at Nanyang University and vice-versa. There must be cooperation between the two universities and no duplication which will cause wastage. In this way the feeling of dissatisfaction can be eliminated psychologically, wastage of manpower will be avoided and the graduates will also not have a sense of uncertainty about employment outlet. The academic standards of the university will also be improved and its prestige enhanced internationally. Mr Speaker, Sir, for several years I did not have a chance to speak for my constituents. This is the time for all the one hundred flowers to bloom. Now we are also allowed free expression in this House. I would like to say something and do something for my own rural constituency, (In English) This is the first time. I had no chance before. (In Mandarin) In the Nee Soon constituency 80% of the votes came from the rural areas. I am not as fortunate as the other Members of Parliament who have the HLJDC or HDB flat dwellers to support them. My constituents in Nee Soon have not had the opportunity to enjoy public facilities available in other constituencies. They only enjoy limited facilities provided by the Urban and Rural Services Committee. Many of my voters who live in the rural areas are not served by metalled roads. Their houses or villages are not accessible to vehicular traffic. The funds provided by URSC for the development of the constituency are not sufficient, particularly in respect of road development. Up to date. I have received requests in hand which need at least $1 million to develop roads over the next five years. The amount allocated each year is quite limited, and I can anticipate many roads cannot be completed by then. How are we to satisfy the rural voters in their demands? How are we to express our appreciation for the 72.4% votes which had been cast in our favour as an expression of the confidence that they have in us? If this rate of progress is continued, in my own constituency, even if I can carry on for the next ten years - they would not be able to complete the construction of the roads with the meagre sum provided. It is my hope that the Ministry of Finance will allocate more funds for road construction in the rural areas. This is also in keeping with what the Prime Minister had said after the elections - that we must look after the needs of the people in the poorer areas. This is the time for such care to be given. If it is not possible to allocate more funds to the URSC for the development of the rural areas, then perhaps the Minister for National Development could study the question that for any request for more than $100,000 provision for road construction, whether the work -an be done by the PWD direct instead of going through the URSC. In the Nee Soon area, more than half the number of shops have been affected by road development and have to be resettled elsewhere. The remaining shops cannot meet the requirements of the people there, The Government has no plan or intention to build more shops or shopping centres in Nee Soon for replacement, as in the case of Thomson constituency. It is therefore my hope that the Government will be flexible enough in formulating policies and in implementing them, that is to say, where there is vacant private land available by the side of public roads, shops may be allowed to be erected there. Mr Speaker, Sir, in road construction development, there is one thing we cannot accept, that is a wrong assessment of the width of the road. As a result of such wrong assessment by civil servants responsible for the project, more land and shops have been acquired than necessary. This was discovered after construction work had actually begun. As a result the land by the road upon which the shops have been acquired is still in the possession of the Government. Now the shopkeepers or shop-owners have to apply to the Government or to tender for the use of their shop premises and land. This is an example of a lack of proper planning which becomes obvious after the completion of the project. But the people who are affected suffer at the lack of proper planning. So when we talk about rewards for high performance and so on, the civil servants responsible can tell the Minister that they have completed the project and hope to get some promotion which is obtained at the expense of a lot of people as in this case. Furthermore, Sir, in the north-eastern part of Nee Soon constituency, in the Simpang area, certain land has been under acquisition or redesignated for industrial purposes, giving rise to resettlement problems. Of course, the Government has its fixed policy in regard to the compensations that may be given to the farmers. Farmers in this area have been encouraged and influenced by the experimental farm of the Primary Production Department to grow orchids and rear tropical fish as an occupation. The Government does not have a fixed policy on compensation in this respect. So I hope that when resettlement is underway, the Primary Production Department or the Ministry of National Development can think out some suitable measures to help the people affected by resettlement. Sir, I do not want to deal with the hawker problem as other Members have already touched on this matter. But I must emphasise that all the matters that I have brought up should receive the proper attention of the Government, as the Prime Minister has said after the elections that we must give greater attention to the livelihood of the poorer groups of our people or people who had been neglected in the past. 5.35 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise to support the Motion in the name of the Member for Ulu Pandan. One of my friends was complaining the other day that he has to earn $1 in order to spend 50c, as he is in the 50% income tax bracket. He did not seem to realise that he is one of the fortunate few at the top of the income ladder and that in 1975, 141,485 out of 638,432 or 22% of the CPF contributors earned below $200 per month in wages. Many of these workers have families to support. Imagine. Sir, the plight of a widow in her forties, who is illiterate and has three or four children still in school. She qualifies only to be a sweeper or cleaner, earning no more than $200 per month. Out of this amount, $26 goes to the HDB for the cheapest one-room emergency-type flat, $30 or so goes to the PUB; the rest of the paltry wage must sustain a family of four or five. Sir, I am happy, therefore, to read the Addendum on the Prime Minister's Office that Government is committed to help the most needy. May I venture some suggestions? First of all, the Hawkers' Department should be less stingy in issuing hawkers' licences, particularly to widows, old people and people who are unfit for other work. Apparently, there is a 5% provision for hardship cases but, in practice, very few actual hardship cases are granted licences as the rules laid down are too rigid and nobody knows how the 5% rule is really interpreted. My second suggestion is that, when revisions are necessary in respect of health, education and rental charges, we should bear in mind the plight of the low-income people. A $2 charge means nothing to a Permanent Secretary or Deputy Secretary, but it means a lot to the poor. Another suggestion is that the PUB should make a special effort to estimate bills for the poor fairly and accurately. An extra $10 per month in estimated charges is a big blow to a poor person; moreover, the extra estimate may require an increase in the PUB deposit, not to mention the surcharge. I have also noticed that the HDB tends to provide more open spaces and recreational facilities nearer the three-room, four-room and five-room flats, This is certainly true in Balestier Estate. The more pressing needs of the people who live in one-room flats should be given priority. I understand also that the HDB is planning to remodel the old one-room emergency flats to convert them into two-room units. My colleague, the Member for Kampong Chai Chee, referred to this earlier. Although this seems to be an improvement, I am wondering what will happen to the present dwellers. Their present rental of $26 per month will surely be increased. This happened to four blocks of the old emergency flats in Whampoa some three or four years ago. The people were just moved out of these flats and they had to move to more expensive flats as a result. I would therefore urge the HDB to make improvements in ventilation and lighting but without depriving residents of their cheap rental.

No.

The Member for Katong is rather concerned about this. I think he has such flats in his constituency. Well, if they do not have private toilets, then I would say instal the private toilets. But make sure that the HDB does not add on to the rental for the inclusion of the toilets. Furthermore, as I said earlier, more recreational facilities for the poor people can be provided nearby. Sir, I would also like the HDB to reexamine its concept of family income used in its housing rules. A family income of $600 per month earned by the head of household is meaningful, but when the sum is earned by himself and three or four children, what the family has at its disposal depends on the generosity of the children and you cannot expect a young man earning $150 or $200 to contribute more than $20. $30 or at the most $50 per month to the family. A rigid application of the family income rules, therefore, imposes hardship on some people who are forced to buy instead of renting their flats or who are forced in many cases to accept bigger flats than they would wish. Sir, I would also like to suggest that the Ministry of Social Affairs should re-examine the quantum of welfare relief payable to needy and destitute persons. An old person with no children or relatives to support them and who has no savings and is unable to work cannot possibly survive on the $40 or $50 per month given by the Social Welfare Department. For such destitute cases, Sir, there is no question of disincentives for working that higher welfare payments might bring to the able-bodied, The Addendum on the Prime Minister's Office also states that we have achieved a more equal and more just society than it has ever been in the past. I fully agree with the observation, Sir, but I would like to ask why there is no provision of legal aid for criminal cases apart from murder cases. A poor person who is unfortunate enough to be involved in a criminal case and who cannot afford a lawyer is likely to suffer more injustice. I hope hon. Members who are in the legal profession will give some thought to this and perhaps even volunteer their legal services to the poor. Some hon. Members: Yes.

I understand, of course, that poor lawyers have got a living to make but some of them make it rather comfortably. Sir, may I make some further reference to the HDB. Recently, some of the coffee-shop operators in my constituency were summoned for placing tables and chairs for the use of customers in the five-foot way and public concourse areas nearby. I appealed unsuccessfully to the HDB to allow them to do so as the customers clearly prefer the open air. Sir, obstruction can be prevented by careful delineation and the HDB can certainly charge additional rental for a specified number of chairs and tables placed outside the coffee-shop and proprietors can be held responsible for maintaining cleanliness and for keeping noise to a minimum. Sir, in many countries, as in Singapore, side-walk cafes are very popular. I do not see why the HDB should so unreasonably confine coffee-shop operators. The Addendum on the Ministry of National Development states that 55% of our population is already living in HDB flats and that by 1980, two million residents are expected. Sir, I have noticed that the HDB insists on a lot of uniformity, for example, in designs of window grilles and iron-doors. Why cannot the Board allow residents some variety? I suggest that, as the vast majority of our people will eventually live in HDB flats, the housing regulations should be carefully examined to prevent the imposition of unnecessarily drab uniformity. Sir, in the Addendum on the Ministry of the Environment, it is stated that the Ministry intends to move unlicensed hawkers into vacant stalls in existing hawker centres whether they like it or not. From my knowledge of hawker centres. Sir, vacancies persist only in those centres where business is poor. I think, therefore, that it would be unfair to move hawkers forcibly into sites which are likely to result in poor business or even losses. Instead. I would urge the Hawkers' Department and HDB to make careful studies of the sites of proposed new Hawker Centres to ensure that business will be there when they are operational. Population concentrations, easy accessibility and ample parking places are three critical factors, With regard to the proposed increases in hawker licence fees. I would urge for careful study to prevent an escalation of cost-of-living increases to workers. Moreover, not all hawker centres are equally prosperous. Sometime last year I heard that the Hawkers' Department intends to phase out Pasar Malam sites. I think it would be a pity to phase out what has become a colourful feature of our night life. Sir, even in advanced countries, bazaars are popular and colourful events. We should not be over-anxious to establish such an orderly existence that life loses some of its colour, Furthermore, Pasar Malam allows hawkers that extra elbowroom to earn that extra margin that makes life more tolerable. Already the urbanisation and rapid development of Singapore has unsettled lives and removed some traditional means of livelihood. We should therefore make every effort to provide a little leeway for small enterprises. Several Ministries' Addenda referred to the problems of the young, particularly the Ministries of Education, Home Affairs and Social Affairs. I think the emphasis is very necessary. I welcome, in particular, the greater efforts being expended by the Singapore Sports Council. However, I would like to recommend that Constituency Sports Clubs be given more generous funds in order to cater adequately to the needs of the young and to promote mass participation in sports. In Whampoa, for example, I have to look for $1 5,000 this year to finance the enthusiastic plans of my Sports Club. Speaking of the needs of the young, Sir, I should also like to urge the National Library to set up more branches, at least one in every housing estate. Sir, the costs of encouraging healthy pursuits like sports and reading will bring rich dividends like reducing drug addiction and delinquency. The aged also need increasing attention, as the Ministries of Health and Social Affairs remind us. Over the last few days, MPs and Ministers have been handing out ang pows and hampers to the aged. And I am doing so tonight. If I may say so, this is a fine gesture. However, let us also think about how some of these destitute old people are going to survive until the next distribution of ang pows. Government will have to do more for the aged. Unfortunately, this may also in the process encourage the abandonment of the aged by their children and grandchildren who simply pass the buck to the government. Nevertheless we should not allow ourselves to be deterred. At the same time we should make every effort to instil filial piety in our youth. At least two Members, the Members for Marine Parade and Toa Payoh, spoke about the problem of job-hopping among young workers and executives. I agree substantially with both of them that we should refrain from unnecessary and even detrimental action. Job-hopping usually increases when there is more rapid economic growth. Over the last two years there seemed to be fewer complaints about it because our economic growth had slowed down. To some extent, of course, job-hopping reflects the problems of adjustment that result from lack of information about the jobs undertaken. Perhaps we should provide more counselling in schools, colleges and universities to help graduates pick the careers more suited to their temperament and attitudes and so on, instead of penalising them later for hopping from job to job. The Ministry of Labour, in its Addendum, rightly reiterates that our workers must work harder, upgrade their skills and increase their productivity. Despite the efforts of the Labour Ministry and the National Wages Council, productivity is still not sufficiently understood as a concept and as a principle governing our livelihood. Put simply, productivity is the relation between output ,(what is produced) and input (what is used in the production process). Output can be in the form of goods such as cloth, shoes, transistors, watches, etc, or services such as typing, transport, serving in a restaurant, etc. Inputs are the labour expended by workers, machine-time and materials used in the production process. Singapore is crucially dependent on the degree of productivity of all of us who work. Since we have no natural resources, we make use of imported machines and materials and export our goods and services, earning our livelihood in the process. The process is the same, whether we are engaged in entrepot trade, manufacturing or financial and other services. It follows, therefore, that we can better our standards of living only if we become more and more productive or efficient, in other words, only if we can increase our output without increasing our input or if we can increase our output faster than we increase our input. This is meant by increasing our productivity. Hence we can see that if we increase our wages without increasing our productivity we will raise the prices for our exports of goods and services. If foreigners find other countries' goods and services to be cheaper, we shall lose out in export sales. This leads me on to the unfavourable world economic conditions referred to by the Ministry of Finance, Early last year, in this Chamber, I warned that economic recovery in the industrial countries might stall because of insufficient new investments. This has been clearly vindicated by events. The main reason is that the rate of technological innovations appears to have slowed down in the advanced countries, therefore leading to fewer investments. At the same time, the aging population structure in those countries has altered the pattern of demand, necessitating painful and difficult changes in production patterns because in the aftermath of the Second World War there was a big population boom all over the world, even in the advanced countries. This big population boom gave rise to a lot of demand, initially for maternity services, nurseries, kindergartens, schools, colleges, universities, teen-age fashions like 2nd generation jeans and so on and so forth. But since the early sixties, the rate of population growth in the advanced countries had declined very drastically so that the numbers of young people in some cases, have gone down not only as a proportion of population but also in absolute numbers. So those industries catering to the demands of the young suffer excess capacity. At the same time, Sir, there are many more older people proportionately as well as absolutely in the advanced countries, and we are catching up in this respect. In America, I understand about 10% of the population are above the age of 60. This means that they would demand wheel chairs, nursing care and so on and so forth. But they lack the effective demand to buy those goods and services. So it is difficult and painful for the industries there to adjust their production patterns. Therefore, both on the supply side and the demand side, there has been these difficulties. Indeed, Sir, the studies of productivity and profitability in America have shown that both rates have declined since the early sixties. If this is true, then we are in for a period of painful adjustments which monetary and fiscal measures will do little to alleviate, In fact, my own belief is that both these policies will lead to more inflation rather than more employment. In addition, energy prices are expected to rise inexorably for the foreseeable future. Here again, Sir, too many of us allow ourselves to be beguiled by the talk of alternative forms of energy, like solar energy, gasification of coal, thermonuclear energy, and so on and so forth, In actual fact, the alternative forms of energy are still far off in the future. Even Edward Teller, the father of the H-bomb, says that the hydrogen bomb principle as a form of energy will not be commercially practicable until the 21st century. In the meantime the known reserve of oil is being rapidly depleted. We read of new oil fields in the North Sea, in the Arctic, in China, and so on. But these are marginal fields in the sense that the costs of production are very high. What good does it do if it takes $10 per barrel to extract a barrel of oil in the Arctic circle to sell for $1 1 a barrel. In net terms we only realise $1 worth of oil. In other words, it takes energy to recover energy. So one should not be beguiled by the actual numbers which are bandied about. Right now, there is one of the severest winters in America which is highlighting the energy crisis in no uncertain terms, particularly in terms of the gas shortage. I think we should take the warning very seriously indeed here in Singapore. I note that a lot of new office buildings and shopping complexes have got central air-conditioning. Even in this very Chamber, a lot of my colleagues and myself have to put on sweaters and coats. I think we can show a good example by raising the thermostat here in this very Chamber to conserve energy. I would urge that, in designs for new buildings, natural ventilation should be provided for. I have seen some of the buildings which have got no windows whatsoever. If the air-conditioning breaks down, there is just no natural ventilation, It would be very stifling. There is a lot of wastage. A lot of common corridors and so on have got central air-conditioning. Very often they are so cold that when the number of people is not sufficient one just cannot stand the cold or one catches flu in the process.

Order. It is 6.00 p.m. now. Mr Barker.

Can I have another two minutes, Sir?

I am sorry to interrupt, Sir, but the Member for Whompoa can carry on his speech next Monday at 2.30 p.m.

Resolved, "That Parliament do now adjourn." - [Mr Barker] Adjourned accordingly at Six o'clock p.m. to Monday, 21st February, 1977