Hansard, 1986-03-21

asked the Minister for the Environment if his Ministry will consider building more hawker centres to enable those with insufficient capital to start their own business or who have difficulty in getting jobs due to the present economic recession to earn a living as hawkers.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I am replying on behalf of my Minister. The Government started building hawker centres in 1971 for the specific purpose of relocating about 18,000 street hawkers. Hawker licences were also issued to those in financial hardship under the hardship scheme. The programme of resiting street hawkers has largely been completed. Having achieved the social and environmental objectives of providing proper hawker centres for the itinerant street hawkers to operate from, the Government has decided not to build any more hawker centres and to let the private sector cater for such business in future. I wish to remind hon. Members that having a stall in a hawker centre is not an assured means of livelihood as the competition for consumers today has become very keen. In today's context, hawkers operating in hawker centres require business acumen and culinary skills. Those in financial hardship are aware of the risk involved and many do not take up stalls even if they are allocated stalls after having satisfied the means test. For example, over the last five years, only 162 of the 922 cases who qualified or 18% took up stalls. Of the 162 who took up stalls, subsequently 40, or 25%, gave up their stalls within a few months.

Sir, could the Parliamentary Secretary tell the House the number of itinerant hawkers at present? My second question is: will the Hawkers Department consider raising the upper age limit of 60 so that those who are above 60 and are still healthy but jobless can still apply for a hawker licence?

I do not have the exact figures of itinerant hawkers with me, but there are very, very few left. Most of them have been resited in hawker centres and markets and sundry stalls. With regard to the age limit, the proposal is an interesting one. But the important thing really is how fit the person is medically. So if the Member for Delta has any case where he feels that a person of 60 years or more wishes to apply for a hawker licence, we will consider him if he can pass the medical test.

Sir, in his answer just now, he said that hardship is the only criterion for applying for a hawker licence. Will the Senior Parliamentary Secretary consider, in addition to hardship case, culinary skills to be another criterion for applying for a hawker licence?

I think that is a very good idea. Culinary skills are, in fact, a more important criterion than hardship because, more often than not, you find that among those hardship cases who are given licences, most do not make it a success but some do. Sometimes giving them a licence is to do them more harm than good. So if a person has the culinary skill, I think it is worthwhile considering. In fact, now that we have completed our programme of resiting street hawkers into proper hawker centres, it may be about time to reconsider the criteria for issue of hawker licences. That will take some time though.

Mr Speaker, Sir, of the 922 cases, most of whom rejected the stalls offered to them, to what extent was location a factor? We know very well that certain hawker centres are popular. The applicants too know this very well. And very often the vacant stalls that are offered are those in locations which are very unfavourable for business.

Mr Speaker, Sir, again I do not have the exact figures with me so I cannot tell him how many of the 922 cases were rejected because of location. But I think the Member has a point there. We all have the impression that the success of a hawker depends on either the location of the hawker centre or location from his own house. I presume the Member for Whampoa is talking about the location of the hawker centre in respect of clientele. Am I correct? Or location from home?

Clientele.

On clientele. I have been told, Mr Speaker, Sir, that there are hawker centres in Tuas, Punggol Point, even in one of the islands, Pulau Ubin, if I am not mistaken, where Singaporeans flock to for their food. That brings up the point of the Member for Delta where culinary skills do indeed play a part in attracting clientele to the hawker centres, and not totally dependant on location.

Sir, can the Senior Parliamentary Secretary tell us what is the rate of hawkers who give up their stalls for all hawkers, rather than just for the new cases that were granted? Could he give us an approximate figure or percentage of those who are giving up their trade as hawkers?

If the Member for Kebun Baru could frame another question for Oral Answer, I would be too willing to give it to him.

Mr Speaker, Sir, could the Hon. Senior Parliamentary Secretary inform the House that among those who rejected the allocation of stalls, what is the proportion of cooked food stalls to market produce stalls? As I understand it, most of the rejections were for the market produce stalls, while cooked food stalls seem to draw quite a high percentage of acceptance.

Maybe when the Member for Kebun Baru frames his question, we can consider this question together. But off hand, if I can say so, I think the Member for Clementi is correct in saying that there are more people who reject market produce stalls than for cooked food stalls.

Mr Speaker, Sir, would the Hon. Senior Parliamentary Secretary consider upgrading existing hawker centres so that business can be improved, for example, the addition of suitable car parking facilities? Secondly, Sir, in the event that any hawker centre is to be demolished, an alternative of a more suitable site should be provided, such as a site close by or nearby in order to safeguard the livelihood of the stallholders?

Mr Speaker, Sir, am I to presume that all hawker centres have the same date of relocation? I do not think so. I presume the Member is referring to his own hawker centre.

I do have in mind one hawker centre at Jalan Tenteram in my constituency. But this question is of interest to more than just Jalan Tenteram Hawker Centre.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I will ask my officers to look into this idea or opinion, and we will deal with it accordingly.

Mr Speaker, Sir, my question is: what does the Hon. Parliamentary Secretary think of my idea? I am not interested in what his officials think.

Mr Speaker, Sir, when I get the details of the report from my officers, I will give him my opinion.

Mr Speaker, Sir, does the Senior Hon. Parliamentary Secretary not agree with me that the principle of the matter is clear enough for anybody to see and that he can commit himself if he wants to?

Mr Speaker, Sir, I do not know what principle we are talking here. But the important thing is yes, I agree that generally there should be a car park somewhere near a hawker centre. There should be easy access to the hawker centre. But without the details of his question, it is very difficult for me to agree with a general statement of that sort.

Mr Speaker, Sir, would he agree with me that relocation will cause considerable hardship to hawkers who have to be dispersed, relocated in different locations far away from their homes when they already have a comfortable means of livelihood close by so that, when their existing stalls are demolished, it would be in their interest to have an alternative source of livelihood close by their homes?

I presume it is also in the interest of the Member for Whampoa to have these hawkers relocated in his own constituency rather than, for example, move out of their homes. But there is a provision whereby if a hawker moves home and his hawker stall is too far away for him to commute, then he can always ask if we could help, and we do help.

Mr Speaker, Sir, would the Hon. Senior Parliamentary Secretary answer my question specifically, namely, that if an existing hawker centre is to be demolished, provision should be made to allow for another hawker centre to be established?

I think that would come under the province of the Ministry of National Development because they are the ones who do the town planning.

Mr Speaker, Sir, would the Hon. Senior Parliamentary Secretary support, in principle, what I am advocating here, so that we can push the idea with the Ministry for National Development?

It is a good idea. I will support you.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I have two supplementary questions for the Parliamentary Secretary. First, is he in a position to tell us what is the vacancy rate, that is, the percentage of stalls that are vacant in food hawker centres? Secondly, has his Ministry stopped issuing licences for itinerant hawkers? If so, will the Ministry consider issuing licences for itinerant hawkers in at least some special cases?

Mr Speaker, Sir, first question on the vacancy rate. I do not have the exact figures but the vacancy rate can range from, say, 4% in a rather healthy market - when I say "healthy", I mean the amount of business - to about 30% in a rather sluggish one. On the other question, yes, we have stopped issuing licences for itinerant hawkers. By "itinerant", do you mean moving from place to place?

Yes.

I cannot think of any special case where we can give licences to itinerant hawkers.

Sir, will the Senior Parliamentary Secretary consider licences for itinerant hawkers using vans if environment measures can be controlled?

I think there are some delivery vans that bring provisions to homes. Is that what you mean?

That is not what I meant. What I meant was: will you consider allowing people to do itinerant hawking by using vans if environment measures can be controlled?

That is a very general proposition. But I do not really know what the Member means when he says "environmental problems can be controlled." I say that, in general, we discourage street hawking in any form, whether it be in a van, on a bicycle or on two legs.

Sir, does the Senior Parliamentary Secretary recognize that if a person takes, for example, dry goods in a van and moves around from estate to estate, there is really no problem as regards pollution or environmental health?

If pollution and environmental health hazards are the only problems we are worried about, so be it. But there are problems more than just pollution.

What are they?

Traffic congestion, for instance. Basically, if you are talking about a goods delivery van, we do not control those operators. But if the operator of the van carries goods and stops here and there to sell his goods, then we have to control them.

asked the Minister for the Environment whether he will give priority to applicants for hawker licences who have been retrenched and are unable to find new jobs because of old age.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I am afraid that no priority will be given to retrenched persons applying for a hawker licence because not all retrenched persons are in financial hardship. To qualify for a hawker licence, a means test, based on the applicant's financial position, age and the number of dependants he has to support, is imposed. As long as the applicant satisfies the hardship criteria, he can choose from available vacancies in the hawker centres. Over January and February this year, 14 of the 68 approved cases, or 21%, were retrenched persons. However, I must inform the Member for Telok Blangah that since the Government is not building any more hawker centres, vacancies in HDB and MOE hawker centres are very limited indeed.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I am concerned about the failure rate of 25%. Do the Ministry officials offer advice to applicants on the capital cost for setting up a hawker stall, so that they will know what potential risks they are incurring? This is to discourage applicants who have no skills but want to take up a stall.

I would think that these people can probably get better help from their friends or those who are already operating stalls to let them know the cost of starting a hawking business.

Sir, will the Senior Parliamentary Secretary consider converting vacant stalls in a produce market into cooked food stalls?

Yes. In fact, we have already been carrying out conversion exercises. But there are some stalls you can convert and others you cannot.

Dr Koh.

Sir, before I ask Questions 3 and 4, I would like to declare my pecuniary interest in these two questions. Question 3, Sir.

asked the Minister for Finance whether he will consider granting maternity leave to female employees in the civil service and statutory boards who are expecting their third child.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the Government is weighing the implications of granting leave to female officers in the civil service for their third child. An Inter-Ministerial Committee on Population considers it urgent that we review the very low reproduction rates of women with three 'O' levels and above. Because of the high singles rate and the late age of marriage of such women, they have an average reproduction rate of only 1.3 children per woman. This is well below the replacement rate of 2.05 children per woman.

Sir, would the Minister consider granting maternity leave to a woman employee who is expecting a third child but in her second pregnancy? In other words, she had twins in her first pregnancy. Will she be entitled to maternity leave for her second pregnancy?

Mr Speaker, Sir, I am afraid the question is a little complex for me to answer. I will ask my officials to study it.

Sir, the point I am trying to make is that the duration of maternity leave should be related to the number of pregnancies and not to the number of living children. For example, a woman can have triplets in her first pregnancy.

There is no need to explain. What is your supplementary question, Dr Koh?

Would the Minister agree that the duration of maternity leave given to a woman employee should be related to the number of pregnancies? If you give two periods of maternity leave per employee during her term of employment, then it should be related to the number of pregnancies.

Mr Speaker, Sir, as I said earlier, we will study this problem.

asked the Minister for Health whether he will consider allowing expectant mothers to withdraw moneys from Medisave accounts to defray hospital expenses for the delivery of a third or subsequent child.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I will answer on behalf of my Minister. Currently, Medisave accounts may be used in Government hospitals for the hospitalization expenses incurred in third or higher order births for highly educated mothers. The Ministry is currently reviewing this Scheme with the objective of allowing the use of Medisave for high order births on the basis of the affordability of the parents to properly support and raise a large family, rather than on the educational qualification of the mother. This will be in line with Government's policy to help the lower-income group break out of the poverty trap by having smaller families. The review will be completed within the next six months.

May I ask the the Minister for State by what right does his Ministry take it upon itself to consider the affordability of parents to have a third child or more?

Mr Speaker, Sir, population policy is the responsibility of the Government as a whole. The Government has been analysing the procreation figures and the results of the lopsided procreation pattern have been well noted and well publicized. It is in the interest of the nation that this lopsided pattern be corrected and therefore the Medisave policy for higher order births was propounded and implemented as part of the national effort to remedy this lopsided policy. Based on the results to date, the Ministry has found that this policy of allowing Medisave only for the highly educated mothers has not produced the desired results. Therefore, we are in the process of reviewing it in order to broaden the policy but without jeopardizing the chances of people in the lower-income group of getting out of their present poverty trap.

Would the Minister of State concede quite frankly and candidly that this policy, like everything else, is a thoroughly discriminatory measure against the poor and the lower educated?

It is not a discriminatory measure. If a family can afford to bring up their children, provide the children with proper education, proper upbringing -

What about children's allowances? Why do you not give them something?

- to ensure that they will grow up with the proper training, proper education, so that they can contribute meaningfully to the growth of our country, they will be encouraged, in fact, to have larger families.

Sir, in what way does the Minister of State think that, by allowing the release of Medisave funds to defray hospital expenses for the delivery of the third child, this will actually help to correct the pattern of lopsided procreation ? Or does it make it worse?

It will help to correct the pattern if the target group finds that it is a useful benefit. But at the same time, we have to be sure that those in the lower-income group are not enticed by this liberalization into having more children, thereby jeopardizing their own chances of helping the family get out of their present predicament.

asked the Minister for Health, in view of the fact that a Central Provident Fund member can utilize his Medisave account for the payment of medical bills of his parents and grandparents, whether he will consider (i) allowing an elderly person with children and/or grandchildren to withdraw all his moneys from his Medisave account, and (ii) exempting an elderly worker from contributing to his Medisave account even if he has less than $15,000.

Mr Speaker, Sir, a person reaching the age of 55 before the end of this month will only need to retain in his Medisave account a sum of $5,500 or his actual Medisave balance, whichever is the lower. He can withdraw the amount in excess of this $5,500. It has been established that an average person can expect to be hospitalized a total of 59 days from the age of 55 to the time he dies. The bulk of these hospitalization days will be during the last six months of his life. This amount retained in the Medisave account will allow the elderly to look after their own hospitalization needs, and that of their spouse, thereby reducing the financial pressure on their children or grandchildren. A Medisave account holder who continues working after the age of 55 will also continue his Medisave contributions. The amount in excess of the prevailing Medisave limit may be withdrawn once in every three years.

Sir, will the Minister of State consider that if the children are willing to defray the medical costs of their parents or grandparents, will the elderly person be allowed to withdraw all his funds?

Mr Speaker, Sir, where the elderly have the means to support their own hospitalization needs, we should encourage them to do so without burdening their children, without increasing the financial pressure on their children. The amount at the moment retained in the Medisave balance of the elderly, ie, those people above 55 years old, is only $5,500. This will increase to $6,000 from 1st April. This amount, I can assure the House, will be barely adequate to look after his own hospitalization needs as well as that of his wife.

Sir, will the Minister of State not agree that if an elderly person has a house of his own, and when he passes away, the house will be bequeathed to the children or grandchildren? If that is the case, the children or grandchildren will benefit from the death of this elderly person. Is it not right for the elderly person now to enjoy the fruits of his labour while he is alive?

Mr Speaker, Sir, if it is the objective of every parent to leave the minimum to his children when he dies, then I think we would have many of the elderly selling their house by the time they reach 55 years and take up rented accom- modation so that they can enjoy the fruits of their investment.

Does not the Minister of State agree with me that if the children of an elderly person have adequate or more than adequate funds in their Medisave and are willing to use those funds for this elderly person, and furthermore they are ready to give a written undertaking to that effect, then should he not therefore allow the elderly person to withdraw his or her own Medisave funds?

Mr Speaker, Sir, I think it is important for us to get the aim of the Medisave Scheme in the right perspective. The aim of the Medisave Scheme is to ensure that every one has adequate funds to look after primarily his own hospitalization needs and his immediate dependants' needs. If his parents do have the ability, through their own Medisave funds, to look after their hospitalization needs, I think it is important for the parents to continue using their own funds, and relying on the children only when their own Medisave balances are used up. This will ensure that their children will, in turn, have adequate funds of their own because they must inevitably also reach the age of 55.

Mr Speaker, Sir, is it not the greater aim to prevent the dependence upon the people at large, through taxation or increased taxation, to bear the cost of medical bills? But if the children of an elderly person have adequate Medisave funds and they are still relatively young and have future earnings to come and future balances to build up in their Medisave accounts, surely the Minister of State should consider favourably this particular request. And surely also he should consider the fact that while many old people under the present scheme will have adequate money in their Medisave accounts to finance the last few months of their lives here on earth, but at the same time they will be miserable and without food for the last few years of their lives.

Mr Speaker, if the children have more than adequate Medisave balances, their excess will be paid into their Ordinary CPF account, thereby allowing it to be used for their own housing or investment needs. The children, if they are that well off, can easily provide for the daily needs of the parents, if that is the case. It is important for us to ensure that the elderly are able to look after themselves because in the years to come there will be a large number of elderly amongst us. As we have seen in the United States and in the United Kingdom and the other developed countries, the plight of the elderly is fairly serious. In fact, there was an article in the Newsweek magazine last week that highlighted the inability of the elderly in the US to afford proper medical care because of lack of funds. I think it is important for us to bear that in mind and to ensure that we do not get into that same situation in the next 20 or 30 years.

Mr Speaker, Sir, another supplementary question for the Minister of State about the aim of the Medisave. Will the Minister of State again quite candidly concede that one of the principal aims of Medisave was to ensure that Government would be able to recover the cost of medical treatment? Is he aware that very recently the Attorney-General has written a letter to a man who owes the hospital something like $300 and who is at present out of employment, threatening to bring proceedings if he did not pay up the $300?

Mr Speaker, Sir, at the present moment our medical services are very, very heavily subsidized. If it is the intention of the Government, as it is, to reduce taxation and reduce the burden on business and on wage earners, then it is important that we are able to reduce these subsidies in years to come. However, whilst we are reducing the subsidies, the Government will still ensure, as I have stated many times in this Chamber, that the indigent and those who are unable to pay will still be given the appropriate level of medical care. That consideration must always be there. There is nothing wrong with the Government reducing the subsidy because the subsidy is still there and it is going to be still very substantial.

Question No. 6, Sir.

Mr Speaker, Sir, may I ask another supplementary question?

No, because the Member has already asked his Question. Mr Yeo.

asked the Minister for Health whether he will consider exempting a working spouse from contributing to his or her Medisave account if the combined balance in the working couple's Medisave accounts is $15,000 so as to allow more money for the repayment of a housing loan.

asked the Minister for Health whether he will allow the Central Provident Fund Medisave accounts of a married couple to be considered jointly so that when their combined Medisave savings exceed $15,000, the balance can be transferred to their CPF ordinary accounts for use towards repayment of any housing loan.

Mr Speaker, Sir, since Question No. 9 is also on the same topic, may I have your permission to answer both questions at the same time. Mr Speaker, Sir, the Government has already announced a number of measures to assist house owners who are unable to service their housing loan repayments because of the scheduled reduction in employer's CPF contributions. There is therefore no need to consider exempting a working spouse from contributing to her Medisave Account.

asked the Acting Minister for Trade and Industry, since the introduction of the Market Development Assistance Scheme in September 1985, (a) what was the amount granted as at the latest convenient date; (b) how many companies have benefitted from the Scheme; and (c) what kind of activities were promoted.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I will answer on behalf of my Minister. Sir, the objective of the Market Development Assistance Scheme (MDAS) is to help companies penetrate new markets, introduce new lines of products and services and expand existing market shares. Since its introduction, grants totalling about $680,000 have been awarded to 83 companies. Activities given funding support under the Scheme include redesign of packaging for exports, opening of overseas offices, and overseas marketing and advertising.

asked the Acting Minister for Trade and Industry, in view of the recent drastic fall in oil prices, when and by how much the next revision of Public Utilities Board tariffs will be made.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the Public Utilities Board reviews its electricity and gas tariffs once every three months and adjusts them according to international fuel prices. In response to declining oil prices, PUB reduced electricity tariffs by 5% on 1st November 1985, and by another 4% on 1st February 1986. As a result, savings of $144 million per annum have been passed on to consumers. The next adjustment is due on the 1st of May. The size of the adjustment will only be known in April 1986.

asked the Acting Minister for Trade and Industry (a) how the Public Utilities Board plans to overcome the problem of adequate water supply in the event of a shortage of supply from Malaysia; and (b) whether PUB (i) has any plans to construct new reservoirs or expand the capacity of our existing reservoirs, (ii) will look into the possibility of desalination of sea water,and (iii) will extend the use of industrial water to households for purposes other than consumption.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the PUB has two Water Agreements with the Johore Government which enable us to draw water from reservoirs in Gunong Pulai and Pontian, and from the Scudai, Tebrau and Johore Rivers. These agreements assure us adequate supply for our present needs. Should there be a drought in Malaysia, our own reservoirs in Singapore, together with appropriate water conservation measures, should be adequate to tide us over a difficult period. PUB's long-term plans have always included building new reservoirs and expanding the capacity of existing reservoirs. The most recent project has been the two new reservoirs under the Sungei Seletar/Bedok Water Scheme. This is the last Singapore surface water source which can be developed. Future water resources will have to be found outside Singapore. There are currently three schemes to expand the water supply from Johore: the extensions to the Scudai Waterworks, the extension to the Johore Waterworks, and the construction of the second Johore Pipeline. In addition, the Singapore and Malaysian Governments are jointly looking into the development of the Johore River water resources to meet the long term needs of both Singapore and Johore. Provided these schemes, together with others, are implemented in the 1990s, there should be adequate water to meet our needs up to the year 2000. Desalination of sea water is technically feasible but extremely costly, especially on a large scale. PUB's strategy is therefore first to develop conventional water sources to the maximum extent possible. As for industrial water, it is not economical to extend the use of industrial water to households. Doing so will mean building a separate parallel supply system. This will be expensive, especially as industrial water cannot be used for bathing and washing clothes. It can only be used for flushing toilets. However, industrial water is suitable for factory use. The Ministry of the Environment will therefore be extending the industrial water system to serve the new industries in the Tuas area. All this simply underlines the crucial importantce to Singapore of saving and not wasting precious water.

11.43 am

Mr Speaker, Sir, following the debate in the Committee Stage of the Budget Estimates on the 19th March 1986, I asked the Legal Service Commission for any minutes of the decision to post Mr Michael Khoo to the Attorney-General's Chambers. The Secretary of the Legal Service Commission has given this in a minute to my Principal Private Secretary. I shall read the relevant parts of the minute, which also refers to the transfer of Mr Michael Khoo and enclosing a photostat copy of the internal minute taken from the Legal Service Commission's file, and reproduced. The note is dated 20th March, 1986, yesterday afternoon. I received it this morning. 'I refer to the subject of transfers of legal officers brought up during the Parliamentary debate yesterday. The Legal Service consists of two branches. They are the Judicial Branch with 44 posts and the Legal Branch with 92 posts. The Head of the Judicial Branch is the Hon. The Chief Justice, while the Head of the Legal Branch is the Attorney-General. The organizational structure is given in Appendix I. For their career development, Legal Officers are regularly rotated between the two branches as well as within the same branch. From 1983 to 1985 a total of 22 Legal Officers were rotated. For 1986 some 10 Legal Officers, including five from the Judicial Branch, will be rotated with effect from 1st April. Standing instructions on the conduct of transfers and postings of Legal Officers as well as other staff matters have been in force since 1 December 1965'. The circular on those instructions has been annexed. On the transfer of Michael Khoo, a copy of an internal minute taken from the Legal Service Commission's files is in Appendix 3. I shall read Appendix 3: 'Legal Service Secretary LEGAL SERVICE POSTINGS I spoke to you last Monday evening regarding postings of superscale Legal Officers within the Legal Service. 2 Through the Registrar, Supreme Court (Mr R E Martin), the Honourable the Chief Justice has directed that the following postings be effected from Monday, 6 Aug 84: a Mr Michael Khoo Kah Lip Senior District Judge (Superscale D) Subordinate Courts To be posted to AG's Chambers b Mr Errol Carl Foenander Senior State Counsel (Superscale E) Attorney-General's Chambers To be posted to Subordinate Courts 3 Mr Martin has taken appropriate action under the Subordinate Courts Act to seek the President's approval for Mr Foenander to function as Senior District Judge, Subordinate Courts, wef 6 Aug 84. 4 Accordingly, the usual LSC's [Legal Service Commission] minute to effect the postings is at cover for your consideration/signature, please. (Signed) TAN ENG SIONG 1 Aug 84.' Mr Tan Eng Siong is the Personnel Director of the Legal Service Commission. His duties are to assist the Secretary, Legal Service Commission. Mr Speaker, Sir, it is important that the impartiality and the integrity of the Judiciary, including the Subordinate Courts, is not lightly impugned and made the subject of politicking. I have gone to some length to trace all documentary and other evidence on this transfer. I now ask the Member for Anson whether he accepts that the removal of Mr Michael Khoo from the position of Senior District Judge was in the ordinary and proper course of the transfer of officers in the Legal Service and unconnected with the Prime Minister or Ministers of the Government.

Mr Speaker, Sir, first of all, may I point out to the Prime Minister that it was not I who raised this question two days ago. It was his reference to what I said in this House in the debate on the Subordinate Courts (Amendment) Bill that brought up this discussion two days ago. I then said, why were not all these produced last year when we were discussing this matter? Nothing was done but I will let that pass. The Prime Minister says that transfers between the Legal and the Judicial branches of the Legal Service are quite normal. Of course, I know it is normal. I was once a member of the Legal Service. I was trans- ferred from the Subordinate Courts to the AG's Chambers, and then back again from the AG's Chambers as Head of the Civil District Court, and then as Registrar of the Supreme Court, and finally to the equivalent of the present post of Senior District Judge in the Subordinate Courts. I am well aware of that. But may I ask the Prime Minister how many instances are there of the holder of the post of Senior District Judge and before that, District Judge and First Magistrate, being transferred to a post in the AG's Chambers equal in standing and grade to his post? I am not talking about promotion. As I said, there was once a promotion. But how many holders of this post were transferred to the AG's Chambers to a post on the same level? As I said, the post of Senior District Judge enjoys a status and a prestige which is much higher than that of the Senior State Counsel or the Senior Deputy Public Prosecutor. Finally, the Prime Minister has quoted - I am not quite clear yet what is it he quoted - it was a note I gather from the Director of the Personnel Department.

Secretary of the Public Service Commission. Second last page, Annex 3. [The Prime Minister handed copy of document to Mr Jeyaretnam.]

To the Secretary, yes. That was what the Prime Minister quoted. This is a note from one Mr Tan Eng Siong, who is the Personnel Coordinator of the Legal Service Commission, to the Secretary of the Legal Service Commission. It simply says that the Chief Justice has directed through the Registrar of the transfers that should take place. What I did ask was whether the Hon. Prime Minister would make available as to how the transfer came about. Who originated it? Somebody must have originated it. And whether there was any reason given for the proposal that this man should be transferred. That is what I asked, whether there was a minute. I understood from the Prime Minister that the transfer was arranged or discussed between the Attorney-General and the Chief Justice because it had been delegated to them. If he wants the whole thing to be made public, subject it to scrutiny, then should not all that be placed? If the Prime Minister is very anxious - I am glad that he is anxious - that there should be no criticism made of this, then perhaps the best thing would be to set up a Parliamentary committee, and let the Parliamentary committee go into it and then report to the House. I think that would be the best method, may I tell the Prime Minister, of satisfying any public disquiet about this movement. Because I will tell the Prime Minister - I have said this before - that there was public disquiet about this man being removed from the post of Senior District Judge, not promoted, but transferred to the AG's Chambers.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the Member has not directly answered my question. He now proposes a Parliamentary committee to inquire into the originator or the manner in which the minute was originated.

How it came about that this man should be transferred.

In other words, he still has suspicions, reservations, about the transfer of this man, that it was not in accordance with what the Chief Justice and what the Secretary of the Legal Service Commission have said.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I am afraid the Prime Minister either refuses to see the principle involved or is perhaps unable to see it. He, as the Head of the Government, comes to this House and says there is no impropriety in this transfer. As I said, if the Prime Minister feels it is absolutely necessary that the whole thing should be cleared, then there is only one way to do it. I am glad that the Prime Minister is now offering to clear this. But will he accept what I tell him - that the only way to do it is for a Parliamentary committee to look into it? The Chief Justice's note, of course, I accept. He says, "I directed it." May I also say that the Chief Justice's note was a personal note to the Prime Minister. I was a little taken aback that the Prime Minister decided to make it public. But let that pass. The Chief Justice's note, of course, I accept. I do not know what is in there. He said, "I directed it" or "I arranged it in consultation with the AG." But it still does not tell us enough as to who originated the transfer. What was the reason for it?

I take it that the Member insists that there should be an inquiry because he has grounds for raising his eyebrows and indeed he knows of other people who have raised their eyebrows.

I can only repeat, Mr Speaker, Sir, what I said a little while ago. I am afraid the Prime Minister is unable to grasp that. If the Prime Minister is anxious that it should be made to appear to the public that there can be no suggestion of any impropriety in this, then the ball is at his feet.

I assume therefore that he has grounds for saying that the ball is at my feet. It is in the penalty area and that he intends to kick the ball into the goal.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the Prime Minister now seems to have suddenly discovered the technique of playing football.

It is not funny.

I am sorry.

On a point of order, Mr Speaker, Sir. I asked a very serious question whether the Member intends to pursue his allegation that there was something beyond what the Chief Justice has said, what the minutes of the Legal Service Commission have disclosed, and that he will produce reasons for his reservations before a Parliamentary committee. Because we are not going to have a Parliamentary committee to have a psycho-analysis of the Member for Anson. He must have hard evidence.

The Prime Minister - I am sorry to have to repeat, Mr Speaker, Sir - completely misses the point, completely misses the point. In the first place, may it be recorded and, if necessary, get the Parliamentary report of what I said in this House when we discussed the Subordinate Courts (Amendment) Bill. What I said was - and I stand corrected, of course, if the Report is produced - but going from memory, what I said was that there was disquiet about the transfer of this man four months after he had given a decision. And the Prime Minister must know, if he has read the report containing my speech, that what I was urging in that speech was the setting up of a separate body for District Judges to take them away from the Legal Service Commission, have a separate body which will determine their promotions, their transfers, so that they can be seen to be absolutely independent of the Executive in their decisions. So the Prime Minister must first get his facts correct. I was not making any specific allegation. I was urging the need for the independence of the District Judges, whose jurisdiction was raised last year, to be jealously safeguarded so that, in the minds of the public, there would be no qualms at all about their independence and their ability to have regard only for the due and proper administration of justice, without worrying about anything else.

Can I make sure that I have understood the Member correctly, because they are very grave words spoken on a grave matter? He has just said and we have all listened to him, and I have with great attentiveness, that the system (never mind whether the Chief Justice initiated this move or not) is wrong, it does not guarantee independence of his Subordinate Courts and that there should be a separate body to ensure their independence and their freedom from any pressure to which they can be exerted under the existing system. Please confirm.

Of course it was. That is what I said, that under the present system the Legal Service Commission, which consists of the Attorney-General as No. 2 who is Head of the Legal Service, decides on the transfers, promotions, discipline, of District Judges. And I said it was desirable that the Attorney-General should be removed from that.

I assume therefore that the Member is saying that because the Attorney-General is a member of the Legal Service Commission and given the circumstances that he has narrated of Mr Michael Khoo, a Senior District Judge, being transferred out four months after he acquitted the Member for three out of four charges, there was in fact something wrong, not quite right; it does not ensure the independence of the Subordinate Court Judge, and that therefore we should have a Parliamentary committee to investigate this. You have said something very serious.

I stand by everything I say, Mr Prime Minister. I never resile from anything I say in this House or outside. But we had the spectacle of the Prime Minister on - was it Wednesday? - we had the spectacle of the Prime Minister resiling, shamelessly, from his word. There he was challenging the Member for Potong Pasir to suggest a percentage for the reduction in Members' allowances. The Member for Potong Pasir did not respond. But I stood up, and I said, "25% cut". I reminded him that last year I had proposed in a motion a 25% cut. But did the Prime Minister move his motion? I had to ask him three times. Did he move his motion? So who is resiling, may I ask? Not me. I still stand by what I said, when speaking in this House on the Subordinate Courts (Amendment) Bill, that I think, in my view, the District Judges should be taken out of the Legal Service Commission; leave the Magistrates alone. But perhaps even they should be removed. There should be a separate Judicial Service Commission, independent of the presence of any Executive member of the Government on that Commission.

I do not want to mislead the Member for Anson as to the purpose of this clarification. It is not to score a debating point. It is not to establish that I can out-argue, or be bolder, or be more impetuous and vehement than the Member for Anson. I want to establish the unassailable nature and attributes of our judicial system which has been impugned by the Member for Anson, even after the Chief Justice had given me a written note, even after the minutes of the Legal Service Commission (a photostat copy) has been produced as he requested. He asked that there be an inquiry to look into the nature of the system because it is at fault. Will he now draft the terms of reference of this inquiry? Because there will be one, and he can give evidence before this inquiry. Draft the terms of reference and there will be the inquiry.

May I ask the Prime Minister whether he is now proposing that there should be a Parliamentary committee to consider proposals to safeguard the independence of the District Judges? Is that what he is proposing? Because if that is what he is proposing, I shall be very happy to make my views known before this committee and to give my recommendations. I shall be only too happy to do that. And if he wants the terms of reference, I shall be delighted to send him the terms of reference.

Mr Speaker, I did not propose an inquiry. I am completely satisfied that there was nothing improper, there was nothing out of the ordinary in the transfer of Mr Michael Khoo from the position of Senior District Judge. It is the Member for Anson who has insinuated that there are many things wrong. Confronted with the statement from the Chief Justice that he ordered the transfer out, supported by the minutes of the transfer in the Legal Service Commission files, he shifts his ground in two respects.

I did not shift my ground.

He says, "What is the motivation. What is the initiator?" Second, that the system is wrong because the Attorney-General is a member of the Legal Service Commission, and that there should be a Parliamentary inquiry. I now say, "Yes, let us have this Parliamentary inquiry." And he says it is my proposal to look into the system. It was his proposal. I am now asking him to draft the terms of reference. Let me have it. It shall be done.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I thought I told the Prime Minister that if -

Put it down.

You mean you want me to draft it now, right immediately, Mr Prime Minister?

Say it.

I do not think we should be too hasty about it. I will send it to you. Hold your patience for a little while, Mr Prime Minister. You know, terms of reference have to be carefully drafted out. You do not expect me, this very second, to scribble out something and hand it to you.

The Member for Anson made this proposal. I am not asking him for a legally crafted form of words. All I want is the subject matter of this Parliamentary committee of inquiry. What is the subject matter? Let us have it.

Mr Speaker, Sir, for the last time, may I say that what has been presented this morning are not the minutes. The Prime Minister keeps saying, "I produced the minutes." They are not the minutes. It is a letter from one Mr Tan Eng Siong, the Personnel Coordinator, who says that certain things have been arranged. They are not the minutes.

Let that also be the subject of the inquiry. Yes, all the allegations.

I do not know how many inquiries the Prime Minister is proposing.

You are going to be a hoist with your own petard.

May I assure the Prime Minister that I have no fears for myself. I know what I am doing. He need not worry on my account. Again, may I repeat - it would appear that I keep repeating, it should not be necessary, but obviously it is necessary for the Prime Minister. I said to him that since he has taken the trouble to come this morning and he is anxious that, before the public scrutiny, the transfer should appear to be completely free from any impropriety, then if he is anxious on that score, the only thing for him to do and the proper thing to do would be to appoint a Parliamentary committee, so that the parliamentary committee will then look into it and issue its report and the public will know. I did not suggest the Parliamentary committee of inquiry. The Prime Minister comes this morning and says, "perfectly above board." I said, if he is that anxious, then the only way to get the satisfaction would be to appoint a Parliamentary committee to inquire into it, and not just a committee from the 75 Members of this House who belong to his Party. May I also tell the Prime Minister that he has only got 75 Members of his Party in this Chamber in support of the Government. Because there is not only his Party in this House the Committee should also consist of the Opposition Members to look into this whole question. But I am more concerned, as I was last year, with preserving the independence and the impartiality of the District Judges. I certainly would commend to the Prime Minister that there should be a committee set up to look into the whole question of the independence of the District Judges. The independence of the Judiciary on the High Court Bench is safeguarded. But we should now look into the question of the independence and the impartiality or fear from any Executive pressure on the District Judges who, because of the passing of the two Bills, will now be hearing criminal cases of some magnitude, cases which were previously heard only by the High Court. So I certainly would welcome a committee to look into this question and I shall be very happy to make my recommendations and my views known to this committee.

Do I understand that he wants the committee to look into the question of safeguarding the independence of the Subordinate Courts (the Judges)? But he is satisfied with the High Court Judges, that their independence has been safeguarded? He said so just now. I want to confirm that he said so, in case I misheard him.

The High Court Judges do not come under the Legal Service Commission. I am concerned with the District Judges. So it is they who have to look over their shoulders at the Attorney-General. That is why I think the District Judges' position should be safeguarded.

He does not want the committee to inquire into the circumstances in which Mr Michael Khoo was transferred out and whether there was impropriety?

Again, I told the Prime Minister, Mr Speaker, Sir, that if he is anxious, that is the only course. Of course, yes, if he agrees that this parliamentary committee should inquire into that, by all means.

So I now have it clearly it is to inquire into the present system which does not safeguard the independence of the Subordinate Court Judges and Magistrates. Am I right?

Yes.

Second, any impropriety in connection with the transfer of Mr Michael Khoo out of the position of Senior District Judge. Yes?

Inquire into the circumstances.

Impropriety, circumstances of any other subjects.

The Prime Minister has not answered my question that I put to him earlier this morning. I realize, of course, that he may not be in a position to answer it this morning. I asked him how many instances have there been, prior to the removal of this man, of the holder of the post of Senior District Judge and before that, District Judge and First Magistrate, being transferred to the AG's Chambers, horizontally, not being promoted. That is why I said there was disquiet. One can understand if the man was promoted, but he was not. This is why I said there was disquiet. And I said if the Prime Minister is anxious to assure the public, then he should appoint a committee to look into it.

Therefore, really under subhead (2), the transfer of Mr Michael Khoo out of this position of Senior District Judge to the Attorney-General's Chambers is a specific investigation into precedents or previous instances, if any, where a Senior District Judge was transferred out to the Attorney-General's Chambers and was not promoted. Am I right? Put it in your own words.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the Prime Minister wants me to suggest what should be the terms of reference for this committee. All right, I will tell you now. One, to look into the independence - this is as he said is not the legal form of words but just what they should look into and if you like, I will draft it in legal form and send it to you. To examine or investigate the independence - I do not like the word investigate - to examine the independence and impartiality of the District Judges in the Subordinate Courts.

Not Magistrates?

All right, we will include the Magistrates. I think for good measure let us include the Magistrates as well. I think perhaps they should be included, yes. Whilst we are on this exercise, we might as well include them. And to see whether the present system provides adequate safeguards for their independence. And whether a better system should be now created to ensure that judicial officers in the Subordinate Courts are freed from any fear of Executive displeasure that would affect their promotions or career advancement. And to look into all the circumstances leading to the transfer of the then Senior District Judge in April 1985 to whatever post he was transferred to in the AG's Chambers.

I thought he mentioned specifically the non-promotion of this person. Does he not want to investigate that?

No. I was going to say for goodness sake but I suppose I should avoid saying for goodness sake. Mr Speaker, Sir, I thought I made it clear on Wednesday that I was not saying that the man should have been promoted. I know enough about the workings of the Legal Service Commission. And I would not be so rash and imprudent to come here and say, "The man should have been promoted." I never said that. What I did say was that the man was not promoted but he was transferred to a post on the same grade but less in prestige and status. So I do not want a committee to look into why he was not promoted. No.

Would he like the investigation to be into the circumstances why he was transferred into a position or job less in prestige and status?

I thought I have already spelt it out - into all the circumstances for the transfer of this man to the Attorney-General's Chambers, to a post on the same scale. Of course, it would not appear in the Establishment List as being less in prestige and status. But I say quite clearly the post of Senior District Judge is higher in prestige and status.

Is he sure he has no other items that he wants included in the terms of reference? Because then I want to move to the next question of the committee of investigation, or examination, or whatever he likes to call it, inquiry? Has he no other items? All the raised eyebrows?

Mr Speaker, Sir, I do not think there is anything else. I think it adequately covers it. I think the main part of it is the one which I first spelt out, the safeguarding of the independence of the District Judges and the Magistrates. That is the main one. But as I told the Prime Minister that if he still wants my help, I will send him the terms of reference spelling out in detail what the committee should investigate.

I look forward to receiving it because it will not be I who will draft it. It will go to the draftsman who looks after these matters in the AG's Chambers. Can I now ask him how many members there should be on this parliamentary committee, and who they should be? His proposals. It is completely above board. I want this exchange to be on the record.

I welcome that. I have no intention that it should be anything than above board. I said a Parliamentary committee.

Who?

Do you want me to name them now? I think we have to think about it. You are not going to leave it to me, are you? I am being flattered, extremely. I do not know why I have been suddenly given this honour this morning of naming the committee to be set up by the Government or by Parliament. But I would also commend that perhaps we should include on to this committee one or two people perhaps from outside of Parliament, people like the Dean of the Law Faculty, and perhaps the President of the Law Society, and three or four Members from Parliament; and certainly it should be an all-Party Committee from Parliament.

There should be the Dean of the Law Faculty, President of the Law Society, an Opposition Member -

Both Opposition Members.

How many other Members? Name them.

I do not think we want this to be too unwieldy. We do not want 17, 19 members of the Committee. I should suggest about seven, Mr Speaker, Sir.

Name them.

Why do you not give me a bit of time for me to think who should go on to this committee? It is not that I am shirking away from it. But, you know, it needs a little bit more thought. I just cannot say "that man, that man" or "that Member, that Member". I think you should give us a little bit more time.

How much time would the Member like? I am prepared to wait.

Not on the spot. Next week I will send it to you.

This afternoon perhaps? Can I ask whether he thinks it is proper that he who questions the goings-on of the transfer should be sitting in judgment over the proceedings?

Mr Speaker, Sir, if the Prime Minister is serious, I am glad, may I assure him, that he is taking it seriously. If the Prime Minister is serious about the independence of the Subordinate Judiciary, and I have suggested that that should be the main task of this Committee, I cannot see any objections to including the two Members of the Opposition on this committee because we happen to come from different parties. If the Prime Minister feels that I should not be on the committee which is looking into the circumstances of the transfer, then perhaps I could stay out of the deliberations of that committee on that point.

Can I ask if the Member has adverted his mind to the problem of having non-Members of Parliament on a Parliamentary committee - the Dean of the Law Faculty and the President of the Law Society? Should they not be asked to appear before this committee, or should they be on the committee?

Mr Speaker, Sir, I stand corrected, of course, but I think it is within the province of Parliament to appoint a committee consisting of people from even outside Parliament. I stand corrected.

No.

All right, then do not call it a Parliamentary committee. I can check this up for him in Erskine. Do not call it a Parliamentary committee. Call it a committee appointed by Parliament.

Can I assume that he will put it into a coherent form that there would be these two Members who are not Members of Parliament and seven members of Parliament, amongst whom will be the Opposition Member, the Member for Potong Pasir. He must reconcile two non-Members of Parliament with seven Members of Parliament.

I do not quite understand the question from the Prime Minister. Could he try and explain what he is trying to say?

I have pointed out that if he wanted a committee of Parliamentarians, he cannot have two non-Parliamentary Members. So he has to reconcile them. If he does not want a Parliamentary committee, then he should say so, because he wants two others who are not Members of Parliament.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I suggested a Parliamentary committee and I suppose if the term "Parliamentary committee" is to be followed, then it must consist of Members of Parliament only. But suddenly on reflection, I thought perhaps it would help if it had one or two other people from outside - the Dean of the Law Faculty and the incumbent of the post of President of the Law Society - to help in the deliberations of the committee. But I can see a way out. I suppose they can appear and give their views to the Parliamentary Committee. It does not really matter whether it is a Parliamentary committee or a committee appointed by Parliament, including people from outside. Let us not quibble over these little details. If the Prime Minister is anxious that this should be looked into, well, I welcome it. Thank you very much.

I have not had the answer. Would he prefer to have it outside Parliament with the two Members in, or would he like to have a Parliamentary committee with the two Members out. I am not quibbling either. It is his proposal. I am asking him for his choice.

I would ask the Prime Minister to allow me to consider this. I can see some merit in including these persons on to the committee. But, on the other hand, as I have just said, perhaps the same thing can be achieved by their appearing before the committee, or for that matter any body appearing before the committee, and giving their views to the committee. I suppose it does not really matter. I keep saying, let us get on with the job.

I take it that the Member for Anson will accept the findings of this committee, which he will name.

Whether I accept the findings of that committee or not should be irrelevant because there can be, as the Prime Minister is aware, even dissenting reports from committees or commissions. I should not now be told that I must accept whatever the rest of the committee says on it. I cannot be forced to do that. But, of course, if the committee reports to Parliament, then there will be again debate in this House. The Prime Minister should not overlook that. That committee will have to report to Parliament and there will be a further debate, and I will then again be at liberty to express my own views.

I find this a never-ending Pandora's box. Or it is like the babushka Russian dolls. You open one doll, there is another doll inside. I am now told that the Member, having named this committee - I am not naming it, he is going to name this committee - at the end of it all, if he does not like it, he is going to have a debate here and decide on his position. In other words, if the committee finds that the system as it is, is inadequate, then the Member will accept it. But if the committee finds that the system is adequate, the Member will reject it. Then why do we have a committee at all?

Does it matter so much to the Prime Minister that I accept or not accept? I am indeed flattered, again. The Prime Minister knows - I give him credit, he must know all about committees and especially Committees of Parliament - that the report must come back to the whole House and that the House should debate that report and say whether the House will accept it, and that it should be open to anyone to argue against the committee's report. And even if he is a member of the committee, provided he had made his reservations known. So what is all this, "Will you accept it, or will you not accept it?" It is for the public to decide. When the committee presents its report and the Committee says, "We are more than satisfied", the public says, "We are more than satisfied". The fact that I am not satisfied is irrelevant. I have to accept what the public will accept.

Am I right now in saying that whether he accepts it or not is irrelevant, but we must find out whether the public accepts it. Am I right?

Yes.

How do we find out whether the public accepts a committee's report?

Quite simple, Mr Prime Minister. Once the committee publishes its report, then you can invite any members of the public to write in, or - An hon. Member: Have a referendum.

Yes, if you like, let us have a referendum on it. [Laughter.] Yes, that is another way of finding out if you are really anxious. I am, for the third time, glad to see that the Prime Minister is anxious. Then I suppose you can have a referendum on whether the public thinks the present safeguard is adequate or not.

There are two main terms of reference under this Commission of Inquiry, (1) whether the system is adequate, (2) -

Inquire into the circumstances.

The suspicious circumstances.

All the circumstances.

All the circumstances of Mr Michael Khoo's transfer out of the Senior District Judgeship. If the findings of the inquiry are multiple, this will be a complex referendum with multiple questions.

I would ask the Prime Minister not to put the cart before the horse. Let us proceed first. Let us not worry too much. If he is really anxious that there should be this inquiry, let us get on with the job.

Can I not ask the Member to consider something much simpler, when two opposing sides cannot reconcile their differences. I say that I accept what the Chief Justice has said and what the Legal Service Commission's Secretary has stated, and abstracted from his minutes, not what he said now, but taken out from his minutes, that there was nothing improper in the circumstances of the transfer of Mr Michael Khoo. The Member for Anson says that not only does he not accept it, he wants it investigated. He questions also the system. If after all this inquiry, we come back again and the two contending sides, contending schools of thought, are still not reconciled, there will be no finality to the matter. Is there no way to have a High Court Judge perhaps, or anybody that the Member thinks is independent, impartial, without fear or prejudice, to make such a finding whether or not there was any impropriety, and we settle it? We resolve it. I accept that verdict, unreservedly.

What the Prime Minister is proposing is that, instead of having a committee, leave it to a High Court Judge just to determine it. Is that not what you are proposing?

I am proposing that the Member put forward a formula which decides the problem, and not brings it back to this House for further debate. Take it out of the House.

Mr Speaker, Sir, if the Prime Minister wishes to take it out of this House and have it completely decided outside, then I suppose that is another way. But we have to consider how many should go into it and who should go into it. I have suggested a committee from here, but now you are suggesting somebody from outside. You should then come up with all these names.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I think the Member should take his propositions more seriously.

I am. I am quite serious.

He has suggested a Parliamentary committee, and I have pointed out to him that there will be no finality if he insists that the reports are not conclusive. He is going to debate it here and we all have, I think, reasonably objective senses of reality to know that we will come back to exactly the same situation. So I am suggesting to him that he names someone whose judgment he is quite convinced is sound, who is beyond any pressure, executive or otherwise. 1, 2, 3, 5 (not 2, maybe it is awkward), but 1, 3, 5, 7, 9 members. Name it.

All right, Mr Speaker, Sir. If the Prime Minister is going to leave it to me, he is going to give me this great honour of appointing this committee, well, I will consider it and let him have the names. But it is not just a matter of naming persons. It is not a matter to be taken lightly. If the Prime Minister really wants me to name the persons, I will do that. I will send it to him next week, with the terms of reference.

I think I will not accept any nominee once the Member has left this Chamber. There will be consultations beforehand. I want a nomination now, either designation of office or otherwise, and I will tell him straightaway whether or not such a person is in the opinion of the Government impartial and one whose judgment we will be bound by.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I am not going to commit myself now. I have got to think about it. And if the Prime Minister thinks that is not good enough, then let him do whatever he likes.

Forget about it.

If you think that is not good enough, yes, you forget about it. This morning, the Prime Minister comes here, we have another resiling. The Prime Minister came, I thought in earnestness, exhibiting, manifesting his desire to have the whole subject examined. Now it would appear he wants me to name this very minute the person or persons that should sit on this committee. When I tell him that I need a bit of time, he says, "I am not going to accept that." Then I am afraid, Mr Speaker, Sir, one is left very much in doubt about the sincerity of the Prime Minister.

Can I make myself clear, Mr Speaker, Sir? The proposal to have a Parliamentary committee arose from the Member because he did not accept that the documents that I have produced have satisfied him as to the impartiality of the District Court Judges and Magistrates being free from executive pressure and, secondly, because of the circumstances of the transfer of the Senior District Court Judge to the Attorney-General's Chambers. I said I accepted a Parliamentary committee.

Then moved away from it and suggested somebody outside.

Because he was not prepared to accept the findings. I was prepared to accept whoever he nominated on the Parliamentary committee, but he wanted to reserve his position, to redebate it here. I now suggest to him he names one or three persons, whose judgment he accepts as sound, whose character he believes is impeccable and who will not be subject to any pressure. I would suggest we do it now because if we adjourn and he comes up with a name this afternoon, I would never be quite sure whether he has already found out, if not directly from that person, through friends, what that person's position is with regard to the issue involved. I am asking him now.

If the Prime Minister wishes, he can get some of his ISD men to follow me all around. They already do, sometimes. The Prime Minister must accept that I am in earnest. If he thinks I am going to go around and find people who will be of my persuasion to name them, then may I tell him that he is doing me wrong. I do not intend to do that. All I want to do is to think about it, and without any communication with them I will give the Prime Minister the names. Get your ISD men to follow me all round.

It is very simple. He has nominated two to this Parliamentary committee. He can nominate them - Dean of the Law Faculty, President of the Law Society. That makes for an even number. There could be no conclusive decision. Name a third.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I am not going to go on repeating. The thing must be brought to a close. If the Prime Minister thinks it should not be a Parliamentary committee and it should be from somebody outside and he wants me to name them, I said I would. I will name them but I am not prepared to do it now. No, I am not prepared. This is not a matter for me just to throw names without thinking carefully about them. This is my last word. If the Prime Minister is serious and he is in earnest about this, I will give him the terms of reference. I will suggest to him who I think should go on this committee next week. Today is Friday. We have got the weekend. By Monday or Tuesday I should be able to let him have them. I give him my word that I will not talk to anybody whom I wish to put on that committee. He laughs. But I value highly everything I say. I have told him. He has got a choice. The ISD men are at his command. He can put somebody on my tail between now and the time I come back to this House to give him the names and the terms of reference.

Would he not consider a simple solution? He has mentioned two, and I asked him to nominate one other person, say, a High Court Judge. His choice.

I have answered, Mr Speaker, Sir. I am not going to keep repeating what I have said.

I have been magnanimous, Mr Speaker, Sir. I will accept anybody he nominates now, before there is time for consultation and discussion. He has named two and I am asking him to accept a High Court Judge or a District Court Judge or a Magistrate as the third person, and we will have this inquiry.

Just one more name, Mr Jeyaretnam.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the Prime Minister has asked me to suggest somebody entirely outside this House now, and that departs from the previous committee. It was when I was thinking of a committee of Members of this Parliament that I brought these two people in. Now it is an entirely different committee. So I need a bit of time to consider. I may not even suggest these two persons on to this committee because they are two different committees now. The original committee was supposed to consist of partly Members of this House.

Order. I am afraid you have run out of time. It is 1.00 pm now. I suspend the Sitting and will take the Chair again at 2.30 pm. Sitting accordingly suspended at 1.00 pm until 2.30 pm. Sitting resumed at 2.30 pm

Resumption of Questions.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I was speaking when you said it was interruption time for the adjournment. First of all, I wish to assure you, Mr Speaker, Sir, that I have not spent the lunch adjournment telephoning people of my own persuasion nor spoken to anybody. I met, of course, the Chairman of my Party and we discussed Party matters. I did not tell him (I hear a snigger from somebody) I did not tell him what we were debating this morning, except that I was again engaged in debate with the Prime Minister. I stand by what I said, and I am very glad that the Prime Minister is responding to my desire to safeguard the independence of the Subordinate Court Bench. The Prime Minister, of course, is aware. He must be aware that it is not a question of whether they are independent or not. The paramount question is whether they appear to the public to be independent or not. So I am very glad that he is responding to it. And he has asked me to name the committee who will go into this very important question. I cannot think of anything more important for the society and I will give him the names of this committee, and he can have my assurance that I shall not speak to anybody on this, let alone to the persons whom I shall propose for the committee. I hope the Prime Minister will accept that and we can then, in earnestness, appoint this committee to look into it. I have given him what I thought should be the terms of reference but, if necessary, I can draft it again in proper language and send it to his office by Monday or Tuesday.

Mr Speaker, Sir, at the luncheon break I got in touch with the Chief Justice in order to acquaint him of the proceedings this morning. He was astounded that his written note to me and the file minutes of the Legal Service Commission have not been accepted without question. He asked if it could be so, and I said, repeating the Member for Anson, "that he wanted the circumstances of the transfer to be examined." The Chief Justice, reluctant though he is to lose the services of another High Court Judge, since one already has to look into the circumstances of the collapse of the hotel at Serangoon Road, has reluctantly agreed to make another Judge available. He asked me to have the matter disposed of expeditiously, and to put it to the Member for Anson whether he would not state, without the benefit of privilege, what he has stated here - that the Chief Justice's note and the minute from the Legal Service Commission is not the last word in the matter. That is one half. I leave him to reply. The other half is the two persons he mentioned as possible members. I was anxious to go along with him to accept them, but it has been pointed out to me that they are connected with members in the Legal Service. One of them is the wife of the Attorney-General, the Dean of the Law Faculty, and obviously she should not be sitting on this committee. I therefore propose to have this Commission of Inquiry of one Judge to inquire into all the statements that have been made in this House which are privileged, and to find the basis upon which they have been made, including the two terms of reference which he has suggested in this Chamber. So, in fact, there will be three terms of reference - first, the basis for all the allegations made, all the statements made by the Member in this Chamber concerning the Judiciary and the administration of the law, and to look specifically into the two items he has made. I am glad that he has accepted (unless I am wrong, the records will put me right) that he does not impugn that the High Court Judge is free from any executive pressure. This is not a matter a government takes lightly. It consumes a great deal of resources. I am loathe to have to tax the Judiciary on what are really unfounded charges of interference with the due process of law. But if we do not nail the lie, there will be no end to it. There will be someone appointed to conduct it and the Member for Anson will be one of the prime suppliers of evidence to this High Court Judge. I would be grateful if he would respond now whether or not he is prepared to have it said without parliamentary privilege that he does not accept the statement by the Chief Justice and the Legal Service Commission's minutes as the last word in the matter and that is without parliamentary privilege. That would be most helpful.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I thought this morning the Prime Minister had given me the honour, and as I said perhaps unprecedented honour, of naming the committee. And he wanted me to name the Committee before the House rose at 1 o'clock. Now it would appear that the Prime Minister had thought better of it. Now he proposes that a High Court Judge be appointed. Well, so be it. Let the Prime Minister appoint a High Court Judge to inquire into the terms of reference that I have suggested this morning. It is for the Prime Minister to recommend to the President to appoint a Commission of Inquiry. It does not lie in my province to recommend to the President to appoint a Commission. So it is for the Prime Minister, and if he thinks that is what it should be, well, fine. I will, if invited, certainly make my representations to whoever is appointed. All I wanted to point out is that now we have a departure from the proposals that were made this morning. We seem to have gone a long way from where we started. The Prime Minister asked me whether I accepted the letter from the Chief Justice. I thought I made it clear. Of course I accept this letter. His letter is a personal one to the Prime Minister, and I have read it. And it says, "after consultation with the Attorney-General, I arranged or directed the transfer" or words to that effect. I accept that the Chief Justice directed it or arranged it in consultation. All I said simply was that I think perhaps we should know the circumstances. That is all. There is no suggestion in what I said that the Chief Justice is lying when he said he directed it or he ordered it, whatever the words he used. I am not suggesting for a minute that the Chief Justice was lying in his note to the Prime Minister. Let that be clearly understood. All I said was that perhaps the minutes of the actual meeting at which this transfer was made could have been produced. But that is not to impute anything to the Chief Justice on his note to the Prime Minister. So I do not know what all the fuss is about. The other thing is about this note from the Legal Service Commission. I have already pointed out: it was not the minutes of the Legal Service Commission. What the Prime Minister read out and what he asked me to look at was a memorandum from this Tan Eng Siong, Personnel Coordinator, to the Secretary, Legal Service Comission, setting out something that has already been decided. So they are again not the minutes. It is a report on some- thing that has been decided and asking the Secretary to take action. So what are we quibbling about? I do not know if there is anything else for me to respond. If the Prime Minister wishes to appoint a High Court Judge, as I said, so be it.

I asked specifically, on behalf of the Chief Justice, whether the Member is prepared to have what he said in this House re-stated without privilege.

Yes, what did I say? That I accept the Chief Justice's note to the Prime Minister, that after consultation with the Attorney-General, he directed or ordered or brought about the transfers. That I accept.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I suggest that the Member leaves the Chamber at a convenient time when he has composed his thoughts and makes a statement outside the Chamber to those in the Press Gallery who would be interested to hear him without parliamentary privilege.

What statement does the Prime Minister wish me to make?

Up to you.

What statement? Please tell me what statement do you wish me to make? All these veiled threats!

I think we will carry on with the business for the day.

Order read for resumed consideration in Committee of Supply [3rd Allotted Day].

2.47 pm Head L -

Head L, Ministry of Education. The guillotine time is 5.10 pm. Mr Lim.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I have two amendments. If I may, I would like to take both at the same time. Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head L be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead LA-01 Object Group 1100 of the Main Estimates. In moving this amendment, I wish to express my support for the Government's plan to spend an additional $3 billion over the next 10 years towards education, ie, over and above the normal expenditure. Although an outline of how this money will be spent has already been given by the Minister for Education, perhaps the Minister could elaborate on it in this House. At the same time, I would like to make a special appeal for greater attention to be given to those now in the workforce. They need to upgrade their knowledge to keep pace with technological change. But in order for such an effort to succeed, it must be well coordinated and pushed. We must not only provide places in our institutions for continuing education but we must also make it convenient and affordable. On the workers' part, they must make the effort and sacrifices to upgrade themselves. I now turn to my next amendment which is on capital grants to aided schools. Sir, the contribution of aided schools run by missionaries and community organizations to education in our country is significantly acknowledged. In fact, we have only to look around in this House to note that many Members have been educated in aided schools. A number of aided schools which were established many years ago are now deficient in facilities. Some of these schools are being rebuilt. The character of these aided schools ought to be preserved. In this connection, the participation of the community in the affairs of our schools must be encouraged. We should tap the energies and talents of the community to enhance the quality of our schools. Sir, at this juncture, I must declare my interest. I am working with a group of former students of Montfort School to rebuild two schools, a primary and a secondary school. Montfort School has four old boys who are now serving in this House.

Hear, hear!

Hai Sing Girls' High School, one of the outstanding Chinese secondary schools in Hougang in Punggol Constituency, is also participating in this project and will merge with Montfort. While I am involved in the project, I have no personal pecuniary interest in it. And I am raising this subject not because of the project I am involved in but in the wider interest of all aided schools. Being a participant in the project, I am aware of the difficulties that the aided schools are facing. The main problem is financial. At present, the Government gives an 80% grant towards the cost rebuilding a school if it has consistently performed better than the national average. Otherwise, the grant is only 50%. Sir, I think Government should review this grant. To give Members an idea of the magnitude of the financial responsibility the community has to undertake, the building of one primary and one secondary school costs about $16 million. 20% of this is $3.2 million. On top of that, one must add about $1 million for the land. The lease is only for 30 years. We should not make it more difficult than is necessary for the community to participate in the affairs of our schools. So we should not impose too high a financial responsibility on the community. I would strongly urge the Government to review the level of grants so as to reduce the community's burden to 10% and to lease the land for a nominal fee.

Mr Speaker, Sir, in the Addendum to the President's Address last year on the Ministry of Education, it was stressed that teachers and principals are central to any improvement in the quality of education. How well teachers and principals perform their role in schools and help to improve the quality of education will depend on several factors, such as: (a) Good service conditions and prospects to attract capable young men and women to join the teaching service; (b) Adequate training programmes for upgrading and prospects for promotion, adequate staffing of trained teachers; (c) A conducive working environment in schools; and (d) Public recognition. If these factors are taken care of, then teachers' morale will be high and their ouput optimal. Mr Speaker, Sir, may I now turn to the subject of relief teachers. This is a perennial problem that the Education Ministry faces. Every year, criticisms are levelled at the Ministry of Education for not solving this problem once and for all. One of the reasons given in the past was that the Education Ministry was not able to attract the right people in sufficient numbers into the teaching service. Today, with the recession, there should not be any difficulty in attracting capable young men and women with the necessary qualifications to join the teaching service. In fact, in the recent recruitment exercise, the Ministry of Education had no difficulty recruiting some 600 graduates as temporary teachers. What better time can the Education Ministry find than now to recruit capable people into the teaching service. Is it not time to solve the problem of relief teachers once and for all, as it is an impediment to quality education? Can we afford to let our schools be understaffed continually in as far as trained teachers are concerned and expect to improve the quality of education? Surely the Education Ministry is aware that the shortage of trained teachers is also putting an extra strain on the existing trained teachers. They have to teach more periods than desired. If this situation continues, it will only impair their efficiency. In the teaching service, there should be an increase in staffing, not a decrease for the reasons that I have just stated. I am perturbed over the recent announcement that the Government is going to trim the civil service establishment by some 10% over the next five years. While not disagreeing with the need for such an exercise where it is not only applicable but desirable, I must urge that the trimming should not be done in a blind haste. In the teaching service, what is required is not trimming but the filling up of an under-strength staffing position. I am sure the Education Ministry under a very able Minister understands the problems that I have just outlined. I only hope that the Ministry of Finance and the PSC will lend a sympathetic ear and support the Education Ministry in its drive to improve the quality of education in Singapore.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I have two amendments under this Ministry. May I speak on both of them now?

Yes.

I assure you that I am not going to take 20 minutes. In view of the limited time, I will try and keep it to 10 minutes for both. Sir, my first query is on the need for the 'N' level examinations which were introduced some two or three years ago. I see from Dr Goh Keng Swee's Report that the reasons were three-fold: (1) To provide students, who could not succeed at 'O' level with a lower qualification, with a lower certificate; (2) To provide guidance on the number and choice of subjects for 'O' level examinations; and (3) To reduce examination fever or tension amongst students preparing for the 'O' levels by putting them through first the 'N' level. Mr Speaker, Sir, I understand that the introduction of the 'N' level examination has caused quite a bit of unhappiness among students and parents. First of all, I understand that the 'N' level certificate is not accepted outside except, I suppose, for courses in the VITB. Whatever the reasons for the introduction of this 'N' level examinations, I would ask the Ministry to consider this on two grounds, ie, first of all, the motivation of the students. Students who are admitted into secondary school should be motivated to finish the whole secondary education, terminating at the 'O' levels. An introduction of another examination will not help in this motivation. I understand it acts psychologically to prevent students from going on to the 'O' levels. I think students should be encouraged as far as is possible to have a go at the 'O' levels. If it is felt that there should be another certificate, somewhat lower than the 'O'- level certificate, then I am sure it should be possible to provide for two grades of 'O' level certificate. But students should not be discouraged from taking the 'O' level examinations, and this is what the 'N' level is doing for the Normal stream. It has been suggested, and I myself have said it here, that it was probably introduced so as to get students on to vocational training, into the workforce. I think we should not allow that suggestion or impression to prevail, and we should do all we can to help students, who wish to complete the whole of the secondary education terminating at 'O' level, to do so. I am told it does not even provide guidance on the choice of subjects which was one of the reasons given. I am told that the Normal stream students who take these examinations are doing only five subjects, which are the minimum subjects for the 'O' level. So there is really no guidance. I ask whether the Ministry will do away with this examination now. For an added reason, Sir, I understand that the British education system is now doing away with the Certificate of Secon- dary Education examination and the 'O' levels. They are merging both into one examination. I believe the 'N' level examination was introduced after the pattern of the Certificate of Secondary Education in British schools. Now that they are doing away with it, perhaps we should consider again whether the 'N' level examination is really necessary. May I speak briefly on the other amendment, and that is, about the primary education schools. First of all, Sir, I would like to know from the Minister how is the admission into secondary schools determined for those who pass the PSLE examination. Is it strictly determined on the performance of the student, or is it determined according to the school in which the student sits for his PSLE examinations? I understand that the tendency is that if a student is in a weak school, then he is discouraged from applying for a place in one of the good secondary schools. He is told, "Don't waste your time putting your name down for these good schools. It is better that you try and select some of the other weaker schools." This does not recognize the performance of the student because a student coming from a weak school might do considerably well in his PSLE examination. So I am told that there is unhappiness about the way children are now guided into secondary schools after they complete the PSLE examination. My plea is that children who are prepared to work and who wish to do better should be given all the motivation and not discouraged. They should not be labelled. There is far too much labelling of students in our education system. Can we move away from labelling, and try and motivate the students? Now, Sir, I would like to know from the Ministry about the position of foreign students in our secondary schools and junior colleges. I know quite a lot of them are from ASEAN countries. I understand that there is only a quota for Singapore students in secondary schools. I would like to know whether that is true and whether the presence of a large number of students from ASEAN countries and other countries is putting our students at a disadvantage. I am aware that students from other countries pay a contribution to the Government for their education. Are they being given preference at the expense of our own students because they are making a contribution to the revenue of this country? I would urge the Minister and the Ministry not to place our own students at a disadvantage when compared with students from ASEAN countries or other foreign countries. Finally, Sir, may I ask about the policy of the Ministry about foreign students studying in private schools, students who cannot get into Government schools or Government-aided schools but who wish to pursue their education in Singapore in private schools. Is this encouraged by the Government or not? There are a number of private schools which are prepared to cater for them, but I understand that students from other countries find it difficult to get Immigration students passes to study in this country in private schools.

Mr Speaker, Sir, may I join the debate now and not move my amendment. I wish to seek a clarification regarding the Gifted Programme and make a request for upgrading the facilities of the Pre-U Centres. I wonder whether designating a pupil as "gifted" has induced any aberration in the behaviour pattern of the pupil. Has any study been made on the behaviour of this group of pupils and, if so, what are the findings? According to a press report last December, pupils under this programme had to be prepared for the PSLE with measures such as being given plenty of exercises to tackle typical PSLE questions, and in the case of some boys being forced to finish their Mathematics worksheets. The report also stated that if the pupils did well, they would automatically move up to the Gifted Programme for secondary pupils. What is meant by "well", I wonder? If the report is correct, it seems strange that our very best pupils still need to be prepared for such a simple examination where the pass rate of ordinary pupils is normally over 80%. Why is it necessary for these pupils to sit for the same PSLE examination? Would not a separate exami- nation be more appropriate? After all, these are very special students. Furthermore, these children in later life need not have to depend on the PSLE certificate to look for a job. They do not really need to sit for the same examination. Would the Minister care to comment? The second matter I would like to raise is that at the moment some students spend two years at the junior colleges and others three years at the Pre-U Centres preparing for the same GCE 'A' level examination. It is generally known that the physical facilities at the junior colleges are far better than those at the Pre-U Centres. This means that the less able students are at a disadvantage compared to their better counterparts in terms of physical facilities when they, in fact, are the ones in greater need of such facilities. Could something be done to remedy this deficiency, especially now that the Government intends to invest a sum of $3 billion on education over 10 years, in addition to the yearly budget provision.

Sir, I have two matters to raise. One concerns greater teacher-parent interaction in schools, and the other is a policy matter regarding the use of school fields in housing estates. We all know that teachers as educators of our younger Singaporeans have a very responsible role. The expectation placed on them is indeed very high. They are not only expected to educate our students but also to develop their talents. Such a high expectation of them also includes the question of moral education, as teachers very often serve as a model for students to follow. Their job as educators would not be easy, if not impossible, to perform without the support of parents. In fact, most parents themselves shoulder the same responsibilites as they are playing the role of teachers at home. Sir, I feel there is presently not enough communication in our schools, especially those at primary level, between parents and teachers on the child's educational progress in school. There is often a lack of mutual sharing of knowledge between parents and teachers on the child's mental and physical development, his strength and weaknesses. I understand that the only occasions when the parents get invited to the school are the school annual sports meet and speech day. This is certainly not enough. Sir, may I propose that the Minister consider organizing more meet-the-parents sessions throughout the year to foster better understanding between teachers and parents and to facilitate the mutual exchange of knowledge on the child's educational progress. The second matter, Sir, is on the use of school fields. We are all aware that today the school field in housing estates has become a much valued and protected place. It is often very well fenced and outsiders, if you are not students of the school, are often prevented access to the school field on weekends. Where then do our young Singaporeans go to have fun during the weekends? Most of them convert void decks of HDB blocks into soccer fields. Some fly kites from their verandahs, and this can be quite dangerous. There is a price to pay for all these. We see not only unsightly football marks on the walls of newly painted void decks but also damaged RC notice boards, public telephones, and the like. This also endangers the safety of passers-by and young children playing in the vicinity. Sir, our youths today need more open space near their homes to pursue healthy activities during weekends and school holidays. Singapore is small with scarce land resources. Given the limited open space available in any housing estate, may I propose that the Minister look into making school fields more freely available for use by the public on weekends and during school holidays.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to speak very briefly on the issue of creativity. Creativity has become an important issue because we are now wanting to nurture and develop every individual to his fullest potential, and especially since the report of the Economic Committee has mentioned the central importance of creativity even to matters like economic development. Creativity obviously cannot be achieved simply through pumping more funds into building more schools, junior colleges or institutes of higher learning. It has much more to do with the quality of our educational services. Neither is creativity confined to the arts and culture only. It is a quality that does well in both the arts and the sciences, in business and in industry, in fact, in all spheres of life. So I would like to talk about creativity as a generalized quality. Some of the points I would touch on are not new, and I am sure teachers and principals must have raised them often in the past. But if we are serious about encouraging creativity, I think some of these ideas deserve serious consideration and immediate implementation. The first thing we can think of in order to nurture every individual to his fullest potential is obviously class-size. I do not need to belabour this point. The other day an hon. Member of the House distributed a Table on student-teacher ratios at various levels of our educational institutions. It was abstracted from the Yearbook on Statistics. On paper, these ratios look very good and I think the situation has improved tremendously over the years. But as the Minister well knows, statistics sometimes do not tell the entire story. In some primary schools and secondary schools, the class size is very often up to 35 students and sometimes it even exceeds 40. Under such a situation you cannot expect the teacher to give each individual student due attention. I suppose one can suggest that the situation can further be improved and I do not think the Minister can disagree with that. The second point I want to bring up is that creativity goes with curiosity and initiative. Our students are very sadly lacking in both these qualities, all the way from primary school to the university level. Curiosity and initiative can be encouraged to a certain extent if you bring the students more often out on field trips and allow them to do projects of their own choice. They should be given a certain amount of recognition in terms of grades which count towards examination results. In connection with this, it is very sad to hear the argument often repeated, again all the way from primary school to university level, that the very strictly invigilated examination hall is the best way to ensure student's honesty whereas, if you allow them to do projects and do field work, the students may cheat on you and ask somebody else's help. The question in my mind is, if you do not really have even this basic faith in students' integrity, how are we ever going to let them mature into students or people who can be responsible for their own action? In this kind of matter, there is need for us to be more understanding and to be more relaxed about letting students do things of their own choice and not just during the vacations but regularly throughout the year. I should think the full-day sessions that we are going into would allow teachers and students more time to be embarking on this kind of self-initiated projects. The third point I want to bring up is that obviously under the tremendous examination pressure that our students are facing now, there is very little room for them to be able to think on their own, to criticize, to question and to experiment. One thing that strikes me is that there is no reason why students should be made to go through so many examinations, especially all together at the end of the year, year after year. Some schools encourage the students to take even eight, nine or 10 subjects for the GCE 'O' levels when all that is required to pass the GCE 'O' levels is five subjects for pre-university admission. I feel that the Ministry of Education should really try to restrain this practice, because, in encouraging the best and brightest students to take more subjects we may be actually killing the initiative and creativity among our very best and brightest students. Finally, I would like to touch on the question of extra-curricular activities. The extra-curricular activities are meant to cultivate certain values and attitudes in our students and to provide recreation. With the new guidelines on the ECA, there are three types of core activities students should choose from. One is sports and games. The other is uniformed organizations and the third is cultural activities. I understand the majority of the students take sports and games or uniformed organizations rather than cultural activities. Students, it would appear, like adults, are quite pragmatic. Among them, they feel that it is easier to score points in sports and games and in uniformed organizations than in cultural activities. Besides, they are told that the grades they earn would help them in being considered for pre-university and scholarships and bursaries. One set of ECA activities encourages one type of attitudes and values rather than another type of attitudes and values as embodied in another set of ECA activities. You will notice that the uniformed groups and the sports and games emphasize character training and discipline but at the same time they emphasize discipline and conformity. What do we want? Do we want to encourage creativity or conformity? Do you not think it is time that the Ministry should encourage and guide students more into cultural activities which, I submit, can equally train a student's moral character and institute self-discipline? Playing a piano, for example, needs as much self-discipline and drilling as you go for your field exercises and your sports. So could the Ministry kindly think about these few points?

Sir, I have three points to make under my amendment. Firstly, I would like to speak a little on school appraisal. In line with the qualitative emphasis in education, the concept and practice of school appraisal is an important component in professional development. We have heard that initially when this concept and practice of school appraisal was introduced, there was some apprehension amongst teachers and principals and it was at first thought to be a fault-finding mission. But after several years of implementation, I am of the opinion that teachers have overcome this psychological barrier and also the emotional anxiety. However, much as the schools have accepted this as an integral part of their profession, I would like to know whether the teachers and principals have been tutored well enough to develop that expertise and confidence in self-appraisal of their school's programme because one can be alerted to school appraisal just before the time due for the schools to be appraised and later lapse into non-professional practices. In this connection, I am of the opinion that schools that have been doing well should be able to share and disseminate what they have in their own schools to other schools. In other words, have there been programmes between schools to share these methods and strategies that have been developed in certain schools in certain areas by way of workshops, seminars or in some form of in-house publications? In our emphasis on qualitative upgrading in schools and in the teaching profession, we would like to know whether as the system matures there is a corresponding increase in the professional standards of schools, and this can only be detected and identified through a systematic and a more organized school appraisal. Perhaps the Minister would enlighten us as to whether this is being monitored and what are the indicators that this is happening. Much has been said that teaching our students has been more of a book-bound method rather than a mind-centred approach. As far as the teacher is concerned, we would like to see that there should not be teaching-bound all the time but it should be more of a learning-centred approach. In other words, you can have a lot of teaching but you may not have a lot of learning. Perhaps there should be a corresponding balance between the two. The second point I would like to mention concerns the announcement just released, on the teaching of Malay as the third language (ML3). In this connection, I would like to congratulate the Ministry for introducing this because it is timely and they have taken cognizance of the future roles of our potential leaders. The target group that would be learning this subject is, I understand, confined to the top 10% or the high flyers of the non-ethnic Malay students. This is really timely because they would be holding important positions either in the diplomatic or the trade circles and also have to operate within the geo-political context of this region. I must say that initially, before this announcement, I had some doubts as to what is the definition and standard of this Malay language that is going to be taught. From the initial announcement, we heard that ML3 is going to be taught. This definition has been cleared because there is a difference between ML3 in our own definition as against Malay as a third language. So that area has been cleared. In other words, the proficiency standard that has been set would be somewhere along the ML2 standard. Perhaps it may not be too early for me to say that at some point of the programme when it is developed, when it has reached a certain level of stability, ie, when it can be offered at the JC level, other than the pure linguistic or the language element being taught, perhaps some element of the cultural component of the language should be included because we should realize that these students who would perform in their duties later would not only have the linguistic and communicative skills but perhaps they should need some background as to the cultural component inherent in the language. Perhaps that could be borne in mind at a later stage. However, Sir, in congratulating the Ministry on this matter, I detect a sense of haste in introducing this because a programme which has been targetted to be of four years is now being introduced at 3r years. This would jeopardize those students who would like to take this subject at the expense of dropping their third language. I am not sure why this haste has been introduced. My final point, Sir, is just to beg the indulgence of the Minister to try and give a little explanation because when I raised this the last time it was not answered and, that is, the singing of the National Anthem. Much as we give reverence to the singing of the National Anthem, I am not so sure whether most of the children understand what they are singing, bearing in mind that the national language is not taught in schools any more. I have this feeling that the students will sing it but not internalize it and have that emotional attachment with the song because, instead of saying, "Let's sing the Majullah Singapura", we hear students saying, "Let's sing the Mari-kita." This is an indication as to the misplaced understanding of what the meaning should be. I also get the impression from the group of students attending my tuition classes in my own constituency that quite a percentage of the students, when asked by the tutors up to now, even up to the upper primary level, say they do not understand. Perhaps the Minister could monitor this and assure that this song is given its due respect.

Sir, last October, the Ministry introduced the Temporary Graduate Teachers Scheme to alleviate the teacher shortage problem. I asked a question in this House relating to the matter but unfortunately the Minister did not seem to clear my doubts fully. I was more concerned for the children and the Ministry seems to give me the impression that they are more concerned with the shortage of teachers. Why do I say so? First, taking in graduates with non-teaching subjects. The Ministry experts must have held the belief that only graduates with teaching subjects can make good teachers and that is why they have always been employed. They know best, but why the change of mind? Surely it cannot be that we are prepared to lower our standards just to solve the shortage problem. Secondly, these temporary graduates with non-teaching subjects are trained only for two weeks. Normally it takes a graduate a year to be trained. Are we saying that the normal one-year training was a mistake and unproductive, or that these temporary graduates are of a higher calibre that they only need two weeks? Surely, the two-week training will not be sufficient to equip them to be good teachers. I was told that they would be supervised when they are posted to schools. But, Sir, with the shortage problem, I just wonder how this can be done. Thirdly, they are employed on a temporary basis. Frankly, I find it very difficult to expect commitment from people who are employed on a temporary basis. Mr Speaker, Sir, with this policy of temporary untrained graduates, I fear that the standard of teaching will be lowered and the children will suffer. On the other hand, for reasons unknown to me, if the Ministry is willing to accept these teachers, I suggest that the Ministry employ them on a permanent basis, give them the proper training and look for some other temporary ways to solve the teacher shortage problem. May I contribute by asking the Minister to consider the following suggestions to solve the temporary shortage of teachers: First, there are about 375 schools in Singapore, and this means there are at least 375 Vice-Principals. I understand that Vice-Principals spend one-third of their time teaching and two-thirds on administrative duties. Sir, not all teachers are cut for administrative duties. I suggest that the Ministry employ Administrative Assistants and re-deploy these Vice-Principals to do more teaching. The maximum number of teachers that can be obtained is 250. For every three Vice-Principals, you save two if the full teaching load is taken. Secondly, Sir, many schools use teachers for physical education. With respect to the teachers, many of them are just not cut out for physical education. Until the College of Physical Education produces enough PE teachers, why not enlist our NS men who are trained physical training instructors? After all, remember, we are talking of temporary measures. In this way more teachers could be re-deployed to teaching. There are about 16,800 teachers and I leave the Ministry to compute how many teachers can be obtained from this exercise. Mr Speaker, Sir, there is a third source. Many of our teachers are teaching in the evening classes. I am inclined to believe that if these teachers are offered to teach extra periods in the same session on an overtime payment basis, they will accept; after all, overtime is very prevalent in the private sector as well. Lastly, there are many qualified teachers who have left the service to become full-time housewives for one reason or another. I am sure that they will be willing to teach on a part-time basis. I thought there was a survey last year and I wonder what the Ministry has decided on this issue of part-time teachers. Mr Speaker, Sir, the above suggestions are made in the hope of solving the shortage of teachers without lowering the standard of education. I am of the opinion that qualified teachers are better placed to understand the needs of the children.

Mr Speaker, Sir, may I be allowed to join the debate. I have four amendments in my name. Our present school system is based on the recommendations of the Report on the Ministry of Education prepared in 1978. The Report is popularly known as the Goh Keng Swee Report. Dr Goh Keng Swee himself is not an educationist. His team comprised 12 persons who are also amateurs. They are young, in their 20s, perhaps early 30s. They lack experience which can only come with age. When it comes to education, everyone seems to imagine that he is an expert on the subject just because he has spent 10 or 12 years in school. Education, Sir, is a complex subject and there is certainly more in it than meets the eye. Dr Goh himself confessed in his Report: 'As none of us possess much knowledge nor any expertise in education we found it necessary to acquire knowledge as we proceeded with our study.' There you are, Sir, a committee comprising one very Senior Minister and 12 persons who do not possess much knowledge nor expertise in education had made recommendations which were subsequently adopted and became policies affecting the lives of thousands of our children. Mr Speaker, Sir, the Minister for National Development is not here. I was going to ask him whether he would be willing to appoint 12 or 13 persons who are not architects or engineers to build a high-rise building or construct a bridge; or perhaps ask the Minister for Health whether or not he will allow a team of men who are not doctors to operate on a patient. Of course, they will be given the opportunity. Both these teams will be allowed to acquire knowledge as they proceeded with their work. The answer is obvious. Of course not. Why? Simple. The high-rise building or the bridge will collapse if ever they could be put up at all, or that the patient will die. So it is really amazing that this Government, which prides itself in being a responsible one, allows a band of amateurs to decide on the education of or the fate of all our school children. Of course, in the case of education, one does not see the startlingly bad results quickly. But nevertheless, in the long term, the effects of bad education will show itself in widespread anti-social behaviour. What is the object of education? The British believe that the main purpose of education, which must be distinguished from just mere teaching, is to teach a child to think, to show initiative and to be able to work independently. The ability to think, to show initiative and to work independently are important if this country really wants to progress. Nowhere in the Goh Keng Swee Report have I seen this object of education spelt out. The Prime Minister did mention this in his letter to Dr Goh on 10th March 1979. He said, 'The objective [that is, of education] is simple. It was, and is, to educate a child to bring out his greatest potential, so that he will grow up into a good man and a useful citizen.' The words like "to bring out the greatest potential" or words to that effect were repeated in the Budget Statement. What do these words mean? The interpretation of those words is subjective. "Greatest potential" in what? This Government seems to give these words a narrow meaning. What they probably mean is potential in academic attainment. These words, in their present-day context, when translated into the real situation would mean something like this: give plenty of tuition to a child, get him to score eight or nine straight A's in '0' level and another five A's in 'A' level if possible, and get him to study very hard at the University and come out with a good Honours degree or, better still, a Ph.D. Then he would be considered to be in the top 5% of our society and highly qualified for a ministerial post. That is the potential. This kind of a citizen is likely to be a technocrat and not a leader who shines or inspires others. It is no accident that we have a Prime Minister in Singapore who is a product of Cambridge University, a prestigious British university which teaches its students to think, to question, to show initiative and leadership. And it is also no accident that the Prime Minister makes sure that his son attended that University. It is only under a more liberal and democratic environment where its students are encouraged to think, to ask questions without fear and to show initiative that students can eventually be leaders. I am not decrying or saying that to educate a child to its fullest potential is bad. It is a good objective but not good enough. We also need to educate all our children to think - I think that is very important - to solve problems, to show initiative and to be able to work independently without somebody telling him all the time what to do. So the issue really is what type of education system do we want. Do we want a more liberal, democratic type of education system? Or do we want an authoritarian system, with strict type of education? I would opt for the first one. We should have a more liberal, democratic open type of education rather than the present strict, closed, centralized, tightly controlled type of system. Mr Speaker, Sir, my Party has criticized the streaming of a child in his third year of schooling. From the educational, social or psychological point of view, this policy cannot be supported at all. Why? This policy, first, weeds out late developers; secondly, it may irreparably affect the morale and mental attitude of the child. As the child is very sensitive at that tender age, once he is branded a failure by adults, he suffers a traumatic experience which he may not fully recover. A scar is inflicted on his mind and it may remain there for the rest of his life. Thirdly, socially it is bad for the society to classify or divide our children into groups - the allegedly intelligent ones in one group or class, and the so-called "not so intelligent" ones in another. In this respect it is very irresponsible of the Government to give weight only to intellectual attainments in deciding on which group our future citizens should be divided. Psychologists will tell you that there are different kinds of geniuses, not necessarily only those who are good in solving abstract problems. Men and women are inherently different. Each is an individual. There are those who are good in their academic studies. Then there are those who are good in motor skills such as sportsmen, there are those who are good in the arts, music and other creative work. Others are good in organizing or public relations, ie, getting along well with others. All these types of talent are important to our society and they should be rightly recognized. So why are we always stressing only on academic performances? Our school system seems to favour only the academically advanced. Our present streaming system of hitting hard at the late developers or those who are not academically inclined at such an early age will only stifle children who are endowed with other talents. It is true that the Ministry of Education has mitigated its streaming policy by allowing parents to make the choice. The choice is now given to the parent to choose whether or not his child who has allegedly failed to get into the academic stream to continue in that stream. This slight change of policy is not good enough. All the bad effects of streaming as mentioned are still there. This is because the whole streaming structure is still left intact. I would recommend to the Minister to be bold. I would like to say to him, scrap the Primary 3 streaming now, in toto. Otherwise, more damage will be done to our pupils. Not long ago, the First Deputy Prime Minister was reported to have suggested that school principals be given more autonomy. They should be allowed a more free hand to run their schools. I support that suggestion. May I know from the Minister whether this suggestion has been taken up and implemented? The question here is really, do we still want a centralized highly controlled education system or a more open, less authoritarian, more democratic type of education system? In the early days, in the '50s and the '60s, it was understandable that the Government should control education tightly. Education was an emotional and often sensitive political issue. Times have changed markedly. The situation now is completely different. There are no communists or communalists who dare to exploit education to advance their political cause. It is also the intention of our Government to raise our standard of living to that of the present-day Swiss standard of living by 1999. Therefore, I would say that it is time now to democratize, to decentralize, our education system. It is time to discard the authoritarian, strict, paternalistic control of our schools and tertiary institutions. This is a prerequisite. Without this ingredient, Singapore can never hope to attain the Swiss standard of living. Society, as we know, never really stagnates. Either it progresses or it regresses. In our case, we note that we have regressed. This is evident. The Government has asked the workers to take a lower standard of living. We are going backwards now. The Government, under the present authoritarian policy, has reached its upper limit. It cannot have a breakthrough. The only way it can do so is to abandon its old policies, including its old educational policies. I say to the Government, be brave, adopt more enlightened policies in education. Open up more windows, let more light shine through. Only then can we achieve a breakthrough and progress to attain the Swiss standard of living.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I have a few comments to make and would like to seek some information from the Ministry. The first is related to the computer communications project under Subhead LB-01, Project 8101. In the age of information technology, computer and communication technologies will become increasingly indispensable in all large organizations. Terminals installed at the schools in the form of micros or personal computers or work stations can be linked by telecommunication lines to the data base at the computer centre in the Ministry. The flow of information between the Ministry and the schools will therefore be facilitated. The more information the data base provides and the greater the versatility with which the information can be used, the greater will be the influence of the data base system. Sir, while hardware costs have fallen greatly, software cost and staff cost have increased. And the use of this system would necessitate much greater costs overall. I note that in the provision for this project, $17 million has been allotted. The estimated development estimates for 1985 was $663,000 but the actual revised figure for FY 85 is only $178,000. Perhaps the Minister could explain the reason for the rather large difference. The second topic I would like to raise is the teaching of Confucian ethics. As we know, in 1984, the teaching of Confucian ethics was commenced in some schools. I note that in the 1979 Report on Moral Education headed by the Second Deputy Prime Minister, amongst other things, the Committee recommended that the teaching of moral education in Secondary 3 and Secodary 4 should be in the first language. But as it turned out, in 1984, Confucian ethics was offered in both English and Chinese. I would like to find out the number of students who have opted for either of the courses and whether those who have opted for the Chinese version have had any difficulty in the studying of this subject.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to talk on several topics under this Ministry. They are Islamic Religious Knowledge (IRK), ML1 classes in secondary schools, extra-curricular activities (ECA), Institute of Education (IE) and VITB. I will try to be brief. The teaching of IRK has been well received by most of the Muslim parents. However, what most parents want to know is whether there are sufficient, qualified and competent teachers to teach this important subject. Are there sufficient reference or textbooks available for the students? Would the Ministry consider introducing this subject to the lower secondary level instead of at Secondary 3 and Secondary 4 only? Mr Speaker, Sir, the Ministry has introduced ML1 this year. I would like to know the details of the response, the number of students offering this subject, and whether there are administrative problems encountered as the class is centralized at one location. Next is on extra-curricular activities. I would like to enquire on the progress of the Physical Education College. I understand that the first batch of trainees will be graduating. Where will they be deployed? I understand that most probably all of them will be posted to secondary schools. Last year, I made my observation on the need for qualified PE teachers in the primary schools where there are many lady teachers and some of them have difficulties in teaching PE lessons to our young boys. I would like to know what steps are being taken to improve the teaching of PE in these primary schools. Are there sufficient facilities, such as fields, available for our children to learn and acquire the basic skills in the various games and sports right from an early age? Mr Speaker, Sir, with the various changes taking place to upgrade our education system in order to meet the challenges ahead, I would like to know what in-service courses are conducted in the Institute of Education to ensure that our teachers are suitably equipped and prepared to meet the changing needs in our education system. Finally, Sir, on the VITB. Several Members have spoken on the need to educate and train our workforce. The advent of new technology in our industries brings with it the need for training and retraining of our workforce, especially the young ones. What efforts are being made to ensure that continuing education facilities are readily available for our workforce to continue to upgrade themselves? Is there a coordinating body to look into the types of courses that are being conducted in VITB?

Mr Speaker, Sir, I have several points to raise for the Ministry to consider. I note with deep interest that a large proportion of our teachers have long years of service. According to the 1984 key education statistics, among the 18,809 teachers in the education service, about 60% of them have 20 years of service and above. Many of these teachers are expected to retire in the years to come. I am wondering what plans will be made to fill the vacuum of this loss of valuable manpower who have the experience in terms of teaching. I would like to know (1) whether the Ministry has any plans to see how the invaluable services of these teachers could be retained; (2) whether the Ministry has any plans to see how the transition created by this vacuum could be made more smooth so that more younger teachers and others could be inducted into the education service and so enable us to build up a second line of leadership into the education service. Sir, the other area which I am concerned about is that much has been said about the education for disabled children. I feel that there are still a lot of disabled children who need to be educated. I understand that the Ministry has a shortage of teachers and there will be problems for the Ministry to deploy trained teachers to the organizations that are providing education for disabled children. I am wondering whether the Ministry could make plans to provide grants to these organizations so that they would be able to hire the necessary teachers to carry out the educational programmes for the disabled children. Sir, I feel that these children deserve the attention of the Ministry because they, like all other normal children, should be given the support in terms of their educational needs. The third area that I would like to bring up is with regard to the number of premature school leavers for the year 1984. I understand that there are about 6,700 primary and secondary school leavers who prematurely cease their education. I am wondering what programmes are being undertaken to help recycle these premature school leavers to enable them to gain vocational skills, because from our Education Committee Report we are trying to harness and enhance skilled manpower. I am wondering what plans will be made more concertedly to assist and to recycle these people back to our education stream.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I shall be brief. I feel compelled to rise to express my disappointment on the vote for free textbooks. I think the Ministry is not doing enough. For the present fiscal year the vote for free textbooks is $65,000. This is at the same level as last year. With the recession one would expect that this amount should have been increased. Presently the $65,000 would only benefit something like less than 1% of the population who are in primary schools. Yet we have said in this House many times that there are 15-20% who are in the lower income group. This 15-20% in the lower income group must be helped to improve and the Economic Committee Report has recognized this. It has said in several places about maximizing the potential of the population, upgrading the educational level of our people and, of course, increasing the talent pool. I say that free textbooks is just one of these. It will go a long way towards the achievement of our objective. Textbooks is a one-time expenditure for a family and families cannot be blamed for not saving up for this item which occurs at the end of the year. Those in the lower income group have just enough income to meet their monthly expenditure and they do not have any left for them to save for textbooks. Since this is just one of many household expenditures, of course, being poor, compromises will have to be made. If they have two children in school, more compromise. I think, presently,besides schools, free textbooks are provided by the School Advisory Committees and other well-meaning grassroots organizations. I think the implications are very clear. There is therefore a need for free textbooks and the Ministry's conditions are unduly stringent. I think the way to dampen demand for free textbooks is to set very difficult conditions. Presently, the income level that they have set is $350 take-home pay. I think many Members in this House will agree that, without any doubt, this level is too low. We must not treat textbooks as an expenditure item. It is more an investment, a development expenditure. Since it is not a handout, it must be viewed as an investment in our future. I hope the Ministry will be more generous in the next fiscal year.

Mr Chairman, Sir, with your permission and that of the Members of this House, I would like my two colleagues, the Minister of State for Education and the Parliamentary Secretary for Education, to share with me the work of answering the various points made by Members today. Sir, last year I identified four major and immediate problems which confronted the Ministry of Education. These were (1) the priority scheme for graduate mothers in the pre-primary and Primary 1 registration exercises. (2) The procedure for streaming at Primary 3, particularly with regard to the role to be played by parents at this early stage of the child's education. (3) Double weighting for English and for second language at PSLE. And (4) The criteria for promotion from Secondary 4N to Secondary 5N for students in the normal stream in our secondary schools. I informed Members then that the Ministry of Education would study these four problems with a view to resolving them by the end of 1985. We have done so, Sir, and I am happy that the solutions have been well received by the public and by parents. This year, Sir, I would like to take the opportunity to inform Members of what the Ministry of Education hopes to achieve in the next two to three years and how, with the assistance of Members and the support of parents and teachers, we believe we can achieve them. Let me first begin by telling Members what will not change. What will not change, Sir, will be our commitment to develop each child to the limits of his abilities and talents so that he will grow up to be a responsible adult, loyal to his country, concerned for his family and able to earn his own living. The basic structure and direction of our education system, I consider to be sound and do not need any further drastic modification. This will merely confuse parents and students and will not achieve any significant results. Our policy on bilingualism that every child should learn English and his mother tongue, I regard as a fundamental feature of our education system. I intend to preserve this policy. Children must learn English so that they will have a window to the knowledge, the technology, the expertise of the Western world. They must know their mother tongues so that they can understand what makes us what we are today. We would also not want our children to grow up to be mere book- worms, capable only of passing examinations and blinkered by the confines of the academic curriculum. A full education for our children means giving them not only rigorous academic standards which is essential but also healthy bodies, strong constitutions and robust moral values. However difficult it may be to achieve these aims, we must never stop trying. The two broad aims which the Ministry of Education will work towards in the next two to three years are (1) providing more flexibility and variety in our school programmes so as to allow more scope for the development of the different talents of our children. (2) Helping each school to develop its own character and special features so that the school does not become merely an anonymous training institution where children go to acquire knowledge, but an academic home where children go to be educated to become responsible adults. If we hope to achieve the above aims, one requirement is essential: continued upgrading of the quality of our teachers and our principals. Getting better teachers means making the Education service an attractive vocation for capable young men and young women, providing better training and retraining, particularly at the Institute of Education, and ensuring that teachers and principals have good prospects for advancement in their careers. In this connection, Sir, I cannot agree more fully with the comments made by the Member for Moulmein. I hope that those in the other Ministries which have some connection with Education, particularly the Ministry of Finance and also the PSC, will pay due regard to his wise words. Some hon. Members: Hear! hear!

Sir, for society to recognize and to give proper value to the status of teachers, we must ensure that the salaries and the remuneration of teachers do not fall behind other professions. The Japanese, perhaps more than other nations, have given tangible acknowledgment to the importance of the teaching profession by putting salaries of teachers at a premium over comparable salaries in the other sectors of their civil service. It is no wonder, Sir, that Japanese economic achievements have so astonished the world. We may not be able to achieve such a desirable situation in Singapore, but we can at least make sure that the salaries and the promotional prospects of teachers and principals do not lag behind those of the other services in the public sector. If we can do that, Sir, then I can assure the Member for Paya Lebar that the problem of a shortage of teachers will be rapidly and expeditiously solved. However, Sir, monetary awards alone will not ensure that we have good teachers and good principals. Recognition by the public, by parents, by Members of this House, is vitally important. This, I hope, we shall give unstintingly. I will now go on to discuss how the quality of education in our schools can be improved at the various levels. First, the primary schools. The majority of children in Singapore begin their education at the age of 6 when they register for Primary 1. We will continue to upgrade the skills and the professionalism of teachers in our primary schools and improve the curriculum materials. But the main issue in primary school education which we have to consider is whether or not to lower the school-going age to 5, ie, extending the pre-primary programme to all primary schools. There are many problems which have to be resolved. The pre-primary programme was initiated in 1978 in 67 Chinese-medium schools. The objectives at that time were (1) to facilitate the learning of languages, especially for children from dialect-speaking families and (2) to help arrest the steady decline in enrolment in the Chinese-medium schools. At present, we have 49 pre-primary centres in our primary schools with a total pupil enrolment of 4,865 compared with the Primary 1 enrolment of just under 40,000 pupils. The objective of the pre-primary programme is now to give children an early start in the learning of their school languages, which is English and their mother tongues. Since all children in our primary schools today study English as the first language, I consider it timely to reconsider whether the present restriction of the pre-primary programme to what were originally Chinese-medium schools should be broadened. The pre-primary programme has shown that an early start in proper language instruction is useful in providing pupils, especially those from dialect-speaking homes, a stronger foundation in the school languages, particularly English, which is the main language of instruction in our schools. It would appear to me to be logical, and indeed to be desirable, to make the pre-primary programme available to more children, including those children who take Malay or Tamil as their second language. Before the Ministry can decide to take this step, we will have to overcome a number of administrative problems. First, we shall need many more teachers who have been specially trained to look afer children of that young age. It is not desirable to have relief teachers teaching the pre-primary pupils. Children at that age require special care and special attention. Implementation of the pre-primary programme for a full cohort of 40,000 children will require an additional 2,000 teachers, the majority being teachers in English, and the others, teachers in the mother tongue. We would have to recruit potential teachers immediately and send them for training at the Institute of Education. New classrooms would have to be built and specially outfitted to cater for these young children. This means that the present primary schools would have to be expanded and new schools would have to be built. Extending the pre-primary programme to children who take Malay or Tamil as a second language would also mean the need to develop syllabus and curriculum as well as instructional materials for these two languages. The Ministry will therefore have to give this matter very serious consideration before making a final decision. Sir, I now move on to secondary schools. Here our major objective will be to implement the single-session system in all secondary schools. The principals whom I consulted at the last Schools Council meeting in February were enthusiastic about the advantages of having a single-session system. They believe that this will enable them to offer a richer variety of programmes to cater for the needs of their pupils. Time-tabling difficulties will be significantly lessened and teachers will have more opportunities to interact with their pupils and to know and guide them better. This, the principals believe, will enable them to significantly improve the quality of education they can provide for their pupils. It will also engender in them, I hope, the qualities of creativity and initiative which have been so eloquently suggested by the Member for Changkat. The concept of a single-session school, Sir, is different from that of a full-day school. In a full-day school, the curriculum time is increased. Formal classes stretch from the morning to the afternoon. However, in a single-session system the schools will conduct the normal curriculum in the morning. The advantage of a single-session school is that the principal and the teachers have the flexibility to make use of available school facilities in the afternoon to organize additional school activities, for example, remedial or additional lessons or sports or other extra-curricular programmes. I was worried that, with the implementation of the single-session system, the workload of teachers would be increased and this might cause some unhappiness. I was therefore pleasantly surprised to learn from the principals, whose schools are already single-session, that with proper scheduling they were able to take this problem in their stride and that they had not encountered any opposition or resentment from teachers to the introduction of the single- session system. In fact, the teachers in single-session schools found it easier to arrange their ECA and other activities since these can be spread out over the week and need not be confined to Saturdays. Indeed, Sir, one principal was even able to recruit the assistance of parents to run extra-curricular activities and courses in her school, including a course on social graces and proper grooming for her secondary school girls. I think such initiative by principals deserves to be highly commended. With single-session schools, more pupils will be going to schools in the morning. This will generate heavier morning traffic, strain the resources of the public transport system and necessitate an increase in the number of school buses. However, this problem will be alleviated when part of the MRT network becomes operational after 1988. The operating cost per student in single-session schools will be higher because the same school facilities will be used by fewer children. Also, those students who take part in activities after school hours will need to take their lunch in schools. Proper tuckshop facilities or other arrangements for pupils' lunches will therefore have to be worked out. To implement the single-session system in all secondary schools, we will need to build an additional 55 standard secondary schools over and above the present school building programme which is scheduled to end in 1989. The existing secondary schools will also need to be substantially upgraded. The most critical factor, however, in implementing a single-session system is the need to train an additional 100 principals who will have the resourcefulness and the imagination to exploit the opportunities that become available in a single-session system. If the principal lacks the leadership and initiative to make his teachers want to enrich the school life with imaginative programmes, then all that will result from the single-session system will be an expensive under- utilization of precious resources. To study in detail how a single-session system can best benefit students and what operational difficulties will be encountered, 20 schools are operating on a single-session system this year as a pilot project. I have encouraged the principals of these schools to follow their own initiative in developing programmes, activities and arrangements to implement the single-session system in their respective schools. I am sure, Sir, that we will learn much from this pilot project and the results obtained will help us to draw up a realistic schedule to implement the single-session system in our secondary schools. Now, Sir, the junior colleges and the pre-university centres. Over the last three months, I have had several discussions with the principals of our 12 junior colleges and the 21 secondary schools with pre-university centres to find out their views on the future of post-secondary education in Singapore. Let me first deal with the junior colleges. We have at present 12 junior colleges with a total enrolment of 18,767 students, 9,565 students in Pre-University 1 and 9,202 students in Pre-University 2. One new junior college, the Yishun Junior College, is presently housed in a new secondary school and will only be able to move into permanent premises at the end of this year. The 13th and the newest junior college, the Tampines Junior College, will begin classes in April. Like the Yishun Junior College, it will have to utilize secondary school premises until the end of this year when permanent accommodation will be ready. Sir, I do not regard the accommodation in our junior colleges to be satisfactory. To provide sufficient places to all those who have qualified, it was necessary for each for the 11 established junior colleges to increase their enrolment to between 1,600 and 1,800 pupils. If we consider that the junior colleges were designed to cater for a maximum enrolment of 1,200 each, the extent of overcrowding is very clear. Sir, we do ourselves a disservice when we stint on the resources that we devote to junior college education. The students in our junior colleges comprise the most promising 25% of our school cohort. From these students, Sir, will come the majority of our administrators, doctors, engineers, architects, other professionals and business and civic leaders. We cannot spend money more usefully than on educating these students. The return that Singapore will get from improving the quality of junior college education far outweighs any possible return from other Government expenditure. Sir, it is unlikely that our junior college enrolment will increase significantly from the present level since we are rapidly reaching the point when all students who can benefit from a junior college education are provided with a place. But even if our junior college enrolment does not increase further from the approximately 20,000 students which we now have, we will still need at least another four junior colleges to reduce the enrolment of each junior college to an average of 1,200, and if our school cohort becomes smaller in the 1990s with declining birth rates, then we should be able to look forward to reducing the enrolment further to 1,000 students in each junior college. Each junior college will then have about 500 students in each year of the two-year course and this will enable more individual attention to be given to each student than is presently possible. Just as important as improved facilities is the need to make sure that our junior colleges develop their own individuality and their own character. It is not necessary for all the junior colleges to offer the same courses or to have the same emphasis. Some junior colleges may want to concentrate on arts and science while other junior colleges would prefer to have a wider variety of courses. I think that it is best for each junior college to make up its own mind as to how it should conduct its own academic and college programmes. For this purpose, I have encouraged the principals of each of our junior colleges to draw up a development plan for his or her junior college covering not only the physical facilities but also the academic programmes, the administrative arrangements and other core curricular activities. When the principals have finalized their plans, I shall discuss their plans with each one of them individually. Now, the pre-university centres, a point brought up by the Member for Buona Vista. We have currently some 7,800 students in 21 pre-university centres and the intake is between 2,500 and 3,000 students each year. The situation in our pre-university centres leaves much to be desired. For one thing, the attrition rate is very high. Out of each cohort of students who are admitted to the pre-university centres in any one year, less than a third would eventually sit for the 'A' level examinations in three years' time and obtain two 'A' levels and two 'AO' levels, including the General Paper. One-fifth to one-quarter of the pre-university centre students, in fact, drop out before taking their 'A' level examinations. The principals of the secondary schools which have pre-university centres also informed me that they face considerable difficulties in integrating these students into the school life. The pre-university students who may be 19 or 20 years of age are much older. They have little in common with the secondary school students. They do not feel that they belong to the school. Consequently, problems of morale and discipline arise. About half of the students in the pre-university centres register for commercial subjects and many in the remaining half would register for the commerce stream if places were available. It is, I think, useful to retain the post-secondary course to provide further education for secondary school graduates who want some additional training before going to work. But we must find some means to eventually phase out the pre-university centres from the secondary schools. Since the majority of the students in the pre-university centres are attracted to useful commercial course, the VITB and the Polytechnics can expand their intakes of 'O' level students for their Diploma and their Certificate in Business Study courses. A substantial number of students who would normally have joined the pre-university centres would be attracted to these commercial courses. At the same time, the Ministry of Education will study the possibility of setting up centralized pre-university centres, independent from the secondary schools, which would teach mainly commercial subjects to meet the needs of those students who, for one reason or another, may find the courses in the VITB or the Polytechnics not suitable for them. Finally, a word about the present criteria for qualifying for admission to junior colleges and to Pre-University Centres. For admission to junior colleges, the present criterion is 17 points or better for the student's First Language and his best four other subjects at '0' level. ECA is not included. For admission to Pre-University centres, it is 18, 19 or 20 points which may include ECA. In both cases, a grade of at least D7 in the student's second language is compulsory. The Ministry will review the admission criteria this year with a view to putting greater weight on the subjects which are relevant to the courses taken by the students in the junior colleges and in the Pre-University centres. I hope that this matter will be resolved within the next few months. Sir, the Economic Committee, whose recommendations have been endorsed by the Government, pointed out that despite all the efforts which have been taken since 1979 to increase the enrolment at our various educational institutions, our workforce is still generally less educated than the workforces in the United States, Japan and even Taiwan. The Committee made the important point that the direct comparison of Singapore with the educational performance of these countries may not be entirely valid since the countries do not have uniform examinations at the national level. Furthermore, Japan and Taiwan have largely homogenous populations which make their education problems easier. Given the differences, it would be difficult for us to achieve the same levels as these two countries. Nevertheless, the Economic Committee stressed that we must upgrade the educational level of our population relentlessly. They recommended that we should aim by 1990 to raise the median educational standard of our workforce to Secondary 4N or the equivalent. Unless we can achieve this, our efforts to upgrade to high value-added and knowledge - intensive activities will be hampered. To meet the Economic Committee's recommendations that the intake of trainees for technicians and skilled workers be increased, the Polytechnics and the VITB, as well as the EDB training centres, will have to expand further and add to the variety of courses which they are now offering. VITB will expand its enrolment to 26,000 by 1990. The annual intake then will be about 15,000. This represents approximately 38% of all school leavers each year. Every school leaver will then have an opportunity to acquire an industrial or business skill before he or she joins the workforce. Three new vocational institutes will be built. Adjustments to courses will be made from time to time in response to the needs of employers. The Polytechnics will similarly restructure their enrolment programmes commensurate with the needs of our economy and the pool of qualified students that we can produce. The Polytechnics and the VITB will also continue to give emphasis to continuing education and training, the importance of which has been emphasized by the Member for Kebun Baru.

4.35 pm Each year more than 40,000 workers participate in 120 part-time evening courses conducted by the VITB. The BEST programme which is jointly administered by the VITB and the NTUC has been highly successful. Since its inception, about 60,000 workers have participated in this programme. The VITB now intends to extend this programme to offer GCE 'N' level courses in English and Mathematics to workers who complete their BEST courses. The VITB will also expand its modular skills training scheme which assists small companies to improve the skills of their workers. Now, Sir, after having gone through primary schools, secondary schools, junior colleges and polytechnics, I finally arrive at our two premier tertiary institutions - the National University of Singapore and the Nanyang Technological Institute. Sir, the two main issues concerning tertiary education in Singapore today are: (1) How to make the optimum use of the facilities and land which we have at the NUS at Kent Ridge and the NTI at Jurong? and (2) How to put the funding of tertiary education on an appropriate basis? The total undergraduate population at NUS and NTI in the present academic year 1985/86 comprise some 15,600 students, with 13,600 students enrolled in the eight faculties at NUS and just over 2,000 students in the three Schools of Engineering at NTI. Provided that there are sufficient students of the required academic standard, the Economic Committee has suggested that the enrolment at our tertiary institutions should continue to increase, although at a much slower rate than in previous years. Projections made by NUS and NTI indicate that, even with very conservative assumptions, our undergraduate population could exceed 20,000 students by the 1990s with about 17,000 students at NUS and just over 3,000 students at NTI. This would mean overcrowding at Kent Ridge and under-utilization of resources at NTI. I have discussed this problem at several meetings with the Vice-Chancellor of the NUS, the President of the NTI, and the Deans of the Faculties and Schools at both the NUS and the NTI. The consensus of these meetings is that it would be desirable to relocate the School of Accountancy from NUS at Kent Ridge to NTI at Jurong. This move would have many advantages. It would alleviate the overcrowding at Kent Ridge and keep the undergraduate population at Kent Ridge to under 15,000 students. The undergraduate population at NTI would eventually be between 5,000 and 6,000 students, and this would be sufficiently large to form the basis of a first-class integrated technological university at a very high level. The Accountancy courses would also complement the Engineering courses currently available at NTI and would make for a richer academic environment. As with the present Engineering schools at NTI, the Accountancy students will continue to receive NUS degrees. This is made possible by the present arrangement whereby the decisions of the NTI Academic Board which oversees academic standards at NTI, are confirmed by the NUS Senate. The staff members of the School of Accountancy and the Council of the Singapore Society of Accountants are of the view that the relocation would be in the long-term interest of the School. They have informed me that they are in favour of the proposal. Sir, the relocation of the School of Accountancy can only be effected when the new NTI Complex, which is presently under construction, is fully completed in 1987. I realize that the relocation may result in inconvenience and perhaps some financial hardship for a number of students. I have, therefore, asked the Vice-Chancellor of the NUS to arrange for me to meet with the representatives of the School of Accountancy students to see how the problems arising from the relocation can be alleviated. Now, Sir, on the problem of funding of our tertiary institutions. Members will remember that I pointed out last year that students at our University and Polytechnics are heavily subsidized by the taxpayers. I suggested then that to eventually reduce the subsidy it would be worthwhile to move closer to the American system whereby the fees for the various courses are fixed at a certain percentage of the recurrent cost per student for the various courses. The First Deputy Prime Minister in a recent speech to Singapore Polytechnic students has also suggested that a scheme should be devised to enable Polytechnic and University students to pay back at least part of the Government subsidy after they have graduated. It goes without saying, Sir, that whatever scheme we devise, we must make sure that students who come from poor families are not penalized or prevented from acquiring a tertiary education simply because of their financial circumstances. I think that this is very important. I stated last year that I was unfortunately not able to get the necessary information in time to introduce a suitable scheme in the 1985 Budget. I regret very much that due to pressing tasks I have had to postpone the resolution of this problem for another year. But knowing how disappointed Members must be, I therefore give my assurance that I shall make this problem a priority this year so that I shall not try Members' patience unduly. Sir, in giving this broad outline of the objectives of the Ministry of Education over the next few years, I am conscious that I have not touched on many other important areas, for example, improvement of curriculum, including subjects like Art and Music, as mentioned by the Member for Ulu Pandan, strengthening of moral education, and more assistance for the education of the handicapped, which was mentioned, I believe, by the Member for Bo Wen. I would like to assure Members that the Ministry of Education does not intend to neglect these important areas. We will do our best to effect what further improvements we can make, depending on our constraints and resources. Sir, two things are necessary if the Ministry of Education is to succeed in meeting its objectives: (1) We shall need the full support of teachers, of principals, of parents and of Members of this House; and (2) We shall need a lot of money. I am therefore happy that, as announced by the First Deputy Prime Minister, Government has committed to spend an additional $3 billion over the next ten years over and above the normal Education budget to improve the quality of education in Singapore. Sir, this handsome commitment, particularly at a time of severe financial stringency, gives me confidence that the Ministry of Education has more than a fair chance of success in its efforts to give the children of Singapore an advantage which is more precious than money, that is schools and institutions which do not stifle the spirit but which will inculcate in our young the qualities of intellectual adventure, self-confidence and respect for the nation and our traditional values. Sir, this is a great aim and a worthy challenge. Unlike last year I cannot promise Members that we will be able to resolve the issues, which I have outlined, by the end of 1986. However, I hope that we shall be able to make sufficient progress this year for me to be able to make an interim report to Members when we meet again next year to debate the estimates of the Ministry of Education in the 1987 Budget. Much obliged, Mr Chairman, Sir.

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, my Minister has set out the policy, comprehensively in his speech, giving the direction and the major areas in which the Ministry's attention will be directed in the next two or three years. In a word, the policy is aimed at improving quality and the excellence of education that we can offer to our children in Singapore. Many Members have raised various points which have been touched upon by my Minister. But I would like in the few minutes available to me to deal with some of them in greater depth. One topic which was touched upon by several Members, including the Members for Moulmein, Paya Lebar and Bo Wen, was the question of staffing, the question of shortage of teachers and, in particular, the need to depend on relief teachers. This point is well taken. We are very conscious of the importance of teachers and principals. They are the heart of the matter in any education system. They determine what happens in the schools day after day, and they determine the quality of education that is provided. So I can assure Members that this is very high on the priority of the Ministry in its agenda. The position is improving and we have a 5-year rolling plan in which we are projecting the needs for the future. We are aware of the retirements that are coming on as well as the loss of some teachers through resignations. So I can assure Members that there is a plan which is brought forward each year with targets, hopefully, which can be met by the recruitment. The point made by the Member for Moulmein was that in order to attract people into the education service, one of the key points must be good service conditions. I think it is no exaggeration to say that the service conditions in the education service today are good. Those who come in as graduates become graduate teachers. They are in Division I and they enjoy the service conditions as engineers and other professionals in other branches of the civil service. Those who come in as non-graduate teachers with the Certificate of Education after their 'A' levels, in my view, have probably the best terms of employment for anyone with an 'A' level. So I think we have established very good conditions to attract people into the education service. Over the years, it has not been easy to do so because in a competitive market with economic boom conditions, we had to compete with so many other sectors for people. But recession is upon us and, as it has been said, if there is one industry which is recession-proof, it is education. I think in times of recession, education has the advantage that it will be able to attract into its service people who would otherwise find so many other sectors drawing them. So I believe that in the next year or two, we should be able to draw into the education service many able people who can make a contribution. In fact, I would say that we are going to increase the intake into the Institute of Education (IE) as much as we can, bearing in mind the shortage of teachers that we have presently as well as our projected needs. This year, the intake into IE will be in the region of 1,000 persons. This is the highest for many years. On the subject of relief teachers, this is of course related to our ability to recruit teachers into the permanent service. I just want to point out to Members that there are two kinds of relief teachers. There are those relief teachers who today are filling vacancies which could not be filled because of the shortage of teachers. In the course of our recruitment and if we are successful in getting enough people in, I think that situation should resolve itself. We should not have to depend on relief teachers to fill vacancies which should be filled by trained full-time teachers. But there will still be the need for relief teachers for exigencies of service, to cover the duties of teachers who have to be away on courses or who are in the family way, expecting babies and so on. I think that we have to expect that this number cannot be reduced. But I would agree that we want to reduce the dependency on relief teachers as much as we can. Related to this subject of teachers and the upgrading of teachers, it is not only necessary to recruit the best people into the service, but we believe that we should also provide in-service training (a subject which was mentioned by the Member for Pasir Panjang) and continually give opportunities for our teachers to improve and upgrade themselves. In this respect, comprehensive courses have been planned by the IE, CDIS, the Language Proficency Centre and the Ministry itself. For example, during this first half of 1986, there are 26 such courses for in-service training for teachers. In addition to that, the CDIS, the IE, the Ministry, have also planned 37 school-based workshops. These are workshops that will be taken to schools or to groups of schools to provide school - based training for the teachers. For those who aspire to become principals or heads of departments or vice-principals - these are key positions in schools - the IE has already been running courses in Diploma in Educational Administration, the Further Professional Diploma in Education and a Masters in Education in specialized areas. So from this range of in-service courses that are being provided, it is quite clear that the Ministry is committed to continual upgrading and improvement of our teaching force. Another topic which was brought up by some Members, in particular by the Member for Changkat, is that of creativity. I think this topic deals not just with creativity per se but with the quality of education. What we are talking about is quality in education. How do we improve it? What steps can we take? In an indirect way, the Member for Potong Pasir was also referring to the quality of education. But, Sir, as I listened to the two Members speaking on this topic, I could not help contrasting the different approaches and coming to the conclusion that the Member for Changkat had very concrete suggestions to make which we would take note of. But rather disappointingly, the Member for Potong Pasir was using a lot of generalities and I could not find any concrete suggestions in what he had to say. I think there is one thing I must say to him, ie, that in matters of educational policy, it is not sufficient to make sweeping statements, to use words like "liberal democratic education" and just to stop there. Because these are just ideas. These are just words. What is more important is the substance of education, what goes into it, what concrete steps can be taken. So I am afraid the Member will have to try harder in future debates if he wants the Ministry to pay attention to the points he has to make. Notwithstanding that, Sir, I know he has criticized our system and said that it is autocratic. It is such a system that it does not encourage students to excel and to become creative. This is totally unfounded. Just for his information, over the past 20 years we have produced 150 President's scholars. These are persons of no mean ability, many of whom have gone on to distinguish themselves in the top rate universities of the world. I think they have done themselves proud. They have done Singapore proud. They have made Singapore known in these centres of excellence, in the United States, in Britain and elsewhere. So our system has its merits. It has enabled hundreds, if not thousands, of young people who come from a wide variety of backgrounds to make their way up to the highest reaches of education. There is not a university in the world which has received Singapore students who have not said, "Your students are exceptional. They have done well. They have obtained honours." And I think we should be proud of what our students have achieved and of the educational system that has enabled them to go as far as that. I would like to return to what the Member for Changkat said because some of the points need to be taken up. She has mentioned that somehow we have to create an environment in the schools where the children can be stimulated to become more creative through perhaps field work, project work and so on. I can assure her that this is being done. Many teachers are taking the children to the Science Centre, to the National Museum, to many places where they are exposed to things outside the classroom. But here I would like to counter propose something to the Member for Changkat as she is from the National University of Singapore. I would like to suggest that perhaps she and other lecturers at the University could play a creative role. They could perhaps organize, on their own initiative, talks, lectures, even courses, or demonstrations, to which students from our secondary schools, from our junior colleges, can be invited so that they can be stimulated in their thinking, in their knowledge, by the staff of the University. I think this is a contribution that the University can make towards creativity. I hope she will follow up my suggestion. Before I come to my last point which is on continuing education and skills training, I would just like to touch on a few other points brought up by Members. The Member for Kampong Ubi brought up the subject of the National Anthem. I feel I owe him a reply because last year he brought this up and the guillotine came down before I had the chance to speak. I can assure him that every primary school child is not only taught how to sing the National Anthem but he is taught the meaning of the words of the National Anthem. This is something which is given priority in our schools. It is our National Anthem and every child should know the meaning of the words and know how to sing this Anthem. This is in the curriculum. The Member for Buona Vista mentioned about the need for gifted children and why is it that they have to do PSLE. We believe that the PSLE is a comprehensive examination which is taken by all school children. It is good that the children who are in the gifted programme also take the same examination because it is a measure of how or what they can do in that examination. As for preparation for the examination, I am sure the Member for Buona Vista who has children would agree with me that in all examinations, whether you are gifted or you are not gifted, we do set for them a certain amount of preparation and exercise, which is a good thing. So this is what the children are going to receive during this year before they sit for the PSLE. 5.00 pm The Member for Kaki Bukit mentioned about teacher-parent interaction. We encourage this. In fact, schools do do this on their own initiative. They have orientation at Primary One for the new students coming in and their parents; they have orientation at Secondary 1 for, again, the new students who are coming in to the secondary schools. Many teachers take it upon themselves to visit parents when children have problems. Or they call the parents to the school itself to discuss the problems of their children. This is something which we encourage and I am glad to say that many teachers are doing this on their own initiative. The Member for Pasir Panjang mentioned a point about the Islamic Religious Knowledge (IRK). I want to assure him that first, the textbooks for this course are well prepared. They have been prepared by a CDIS team in consultation with the MUIS. The materials are now complete. Secondly, for the training of teachers and the selection of teachers, this is again something which the Ministry has done in conjunction with the MUIS. Quite a number of teachers are now trained to teach IRK and some are going to the next stage of advanced training as well. His point about bringing forward IRK to Secondary 1 and 2 is the same point that he made last year. I will give him the same reply that I gave last year, which is, that we believe that from Primary 1 to Secondary 2, eight years of schooling, it is highly desirable that the children go through a common moral education course where common values are learnt together. If we were to bring forward the IRK to Secondary 1 and 2, I think this will create some segregation at Secondary 1 and 2. It is not desirable that children at Secondary 1 should begin to be segregrated in the different moral education courses. So we believe that two years of Religious Knowledge at Secondary 3 and 4 should be sufficient for those who have already been through eight years of common moral education programme. The point by the Member for Bo Wen about disabled children and the teaching of disabled children. We have a commitment to provide teachers on an agreed basis with the Special Schools, and we will continue to do so. So far as I know, there is no difficulty at the moment because the numbers required are not large. Finally, Sir, on the point about continuing education and skills training. I think the Minister has mentioned this in his policy speech. This is the commitment on the part of the VITB as well as the two Polytechnics to enlarge opportunities for continuing education and training. The main areas that the VITB is concentrating on is, first, the BEST programme. This programme will be further publicized to get more workers into the scheme. Beyond BEST, VITB is looking into how workers can be helped to sit for their 'N' level examination through a shorter course than is presently available today. Presently, a person has to go from Secondary 1 to Secondary 4 by evening classes to prepare for the 'N' level, ie, four years at least. VITB is looking into the feasibility of a programme similar to BEST based on modules which can be completed in 2-2r years to prepare a person for the 'N' level examination. There is also the modular skills training scheme, a very flexible scheme which opens the door to many different types of skills courses on a modular basis. It can be used by employers as well as by workers who need only one or two modules to upgrade themselves. It is a completely flexible scheme. And this scheme, I am glad to say, now has the support of the Skills Development Fund. So there are now no financial obstacles for employers to offer this for their workers. I think, Sir, I will stop here. As the Member for Anson is not here, I shall not reply to his points. Mr Chiam See Tong rose -

Sir, as there are barely five minutes more, I think it is fair to let my Parliamentary Secretary use up the time. The Member for Potong Pasir has had more than his ample share of time in this Debate.

Sir, I will respond to some of the points made by hon. Members on behalf of my Minister. First, the subject of Confucian ethics brought up by the Member for Yio Chu Kang. Confucian ethics has been introduced into the Upper Secondary curriculum as one of the Religious Knowledge options. A pupil has the freedom to choose the language medium in which he wishes to study Confucian ethics. The programme is available in both Chinese and English. The Member would also like to know the number of students taking the subject. The total number of students in 1986 exceeds 13,000. The breakdown of the figures is as follows: Secondary 3 - English 1,860; Chinese 5,100. Secondary 4 - English 670; Chinese 5,640. It appears that the students have shown a preference to study the subject in Chinese. It should be pointed out that, however, the programme in Chinese has been fully implemented since the beginning of 1986, while the teaching of the subject in English began only in 1985 and is still in the try-out stage. It is available in only 14 pilot schools for Secondary 4 this year. From next year when the programme in English is in full swing, more pupils are expected to opt for it. However, a better assessment of pupil's language preference for learning the subject can only be made after both programmes have been fully implemented in all schools for a few years. Another point brought up by the Member for Kaki Bukit is the use of school facilities by residents. My Ministry's policy is to allow the community to have access to school facilities, like school fields and halls, for recreation purposes after school hours or during school holidays. Many grassroots organizations, in fact, have already been making use of them for their activities. However, only registered organizations are considered able to ensure optimum use of the facilities and for security reasons. So if any RC, CCC or MC wants to make use of the facilities, they can approach the school principal to work out an arrangement acceptable to both parties. Now on the subject of funding of aided schools brought up by the Member for Kebun Baru. As we all know, education at all levels is highly subsidized by Government and community participation is certainly welcome. The point made by the Member is noted. However, as far as allocation of funds is concerned, I am afraid the Ministry of Finance has to be consulted. Finally, I will respond to the point on free textbooks brought up by the Member for Radin Mas. Although certain criteria have to be met, the principals are given the discretion to approve the grant or loan of textbooks to needy cases. Whenever special requests are found to be deserving, they have been approved. I would like to assure the Member that my Ministry will continue to meet the needs of the students who deserve such financial aid.

Sir, in view of the long answers given by the Minister, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The sum of $1,409,096,700 for Head L ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. The sum of $337,945,900 for Head L ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. Head M -

Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head M be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead MA-01 Object Group 1100 of the Main Estimates. Sir, I would like to raise four matters with the Minister. Firstly, sometime in December last year the Minister announced a plan to alleviate the flooding problem in the Bukit Timah area. I understand that as part of the plan the Bukit Timah Canal will be widened and a diversion canal will be constructed from Swiss Cottage to allow flood water to flow from Bukit Timah Canal into Kallang River. The construction is scheduled to take place sometime this year. Sir, my concern is whether the widening of the Bukit Timah Canal is necessary? Would construction of the diversion canal from the Swiss Cottage alone solve the flood problem? The widening of Bukit Timah Canal will necessitate resettling the various nurseries, whose presence adds to the greenery and beauty of the place. Are there plans to encourage these nurseries to come back when the project is completed? Will widening of the Bukit Timah Canal result in the narrowing of the roads on both sides of the Canal, thus creating traffic problems? The construction of the diversion canal from Swiss Cottage cuts through various busy roads, such as Dunearn Road, Whitley Road, Thomson Road and the Toa Payoh flyover. Will construction of this diversion canal pose traffic problems to these roads as well? Are there plans to minimize these problems? I shall be grateful if the Minister will enlighten the House on these questions. Sir, the next matter I wish to raise with the Minister is the issue of public toilets. This is not new in the House. I wish to revive it again. I feel the majority of our public toilets are still in a disgraceful state. Surely something must be done to improve them, especially toilets in hawker centres, shopping centres and even some restaurants. Imagine how annoying it would be to have to discover on paying 10 cents that the toilet is either filthy or that you have to wade through pools of water in order to answer nature's call. Besides the users, I think our toilet cleaners and our toilet caretakers should share the blame. Most of our toilet cleaners and caretakers were perhaps brought up in a wet toilet regime. They believe that the only way to keep the toilet clean is to wet it, the more the merrier because they have to justify the collection of the 10 cents. Sir, may I know whether the Minister has any plan to improve the conditions in our public toilets? The third matter, Sir, is on the subject of street hawkers. I understand that by the end of this year all traditional street hawkers would have been resettled. Sir, while we stamp out street hawking in Singapore, hawkers appear to be a common scene in the streets of the more advanced countries like the US, Canada, Australia and even Japan. These street hawkers are unlike our hawkers, however. They are less mobile. They operate their businesses at pre-determined locations along the street. Their standard of food hygiene is very high. Most sell take-away fast food and very little cooking is actually done at the stall. Sir, I am not advocating that we bring back street hawking in a great way. I believe this relatively modernized form of street hawking has its own merits. It serves a useful purpose as it caters to the needs of pedestrians, office workers (especially those working in the City area) and even tourists walking along Orchard Road. Would the Minister consider allowing on a very selective basis this form of modernized street hawking in Singapore? Sir, related to this concept of street hawking is pasar malam. Would the Minister consider reviving pasar malam in housing estates, as it serves a useful role when properly run? Finally, Sir, the question of daily-rated employees in the Ministry of the Environment. I notice that the Ministry proposes to delete some 348 DRE posts in FY 86 and the majority of these posts to be deleted are those in the Environmental Health and the Sewerage Departments. While I understand that this is part of the Ministry's long-term move towards greater automation and mechanization of its services, we must not forget the long service and dedication rendered by these daily-rated employees in the past. Most of these workers have been on the jobs for many years and are relatively senior in age, in their 40s and 50s. They have families to support and some may be too old to be retrained. May I ask the Minister if he has any plan to help those workers to be retrenched take on other meaningful jobs in order that they can continue to earn a living to support their families.

Sir, I have got three amendments standing in my name on hawkers and hawker centres and I would like your permission to speak on them now. Sir, there is a hawker centre in my constituency in Lim Chu Kang. This hawker centre caters to residents in the Lim Chu Kang area but the whole of the Lim Chu Kang area, I understand, will be resettled in about two years' time. Even now, Sir, many of the hawkers complain that business is very bad and I wonder what would be the case when the whole of the Lim Chu Kang area is resettled. I am also not aware of any plans by the Ministry of the Environment to resettle the hawkers presently in the Lim Chu Kang hawker centre. I would urge the Minister to get in touch with the Minister for National Development to set out a coordinated plan so that, in the event the residents in the Lim Chu Kang area are resettled, the hawkers there who are now catering for their needs would also be resettled and would not have to worry about their livelihood. I would like the Minister to look into this and give some word of comfort to the hawkers presently in the Lim Chu Kang area. Also on hawker centres, Sir, a question was raised in this House last year and I was told that the Ministry was looking into the matter of having more cooked food centres in place of market produce stalls. At the moment, in our meet-the-people sessions, there are a lot of applications for cooked food stalls but invariably it would seem that the reply from the Ministry of the Environment is that there are no cooked food stalls. However, there are market produce stalls and would the applicants mind taking the market produce stalls instead? The Parliamentary Secretary promised to look into this question and to have more cooked food stalls in place of market produce stalls. I wonder what progress has been made and would he inform the House of the current situation?

Sir, I would like to discuss some points regarding food hygiene and the control of food cleanliness in the hawker centres and other eating establishments. Sir, eating out in Singapore is very much a way of life for Singaporeans. It is therefore very important for us to be assured that adequate measures are taken by the Ministry of the Environment to ensure that hawkers and cooks preparing the food are of good health, the raw ingredients used in preparing the food are of good quality and the food is prepared in a hygienic manner and the cooked food is properly kept after that. Sir, to most consumers and to many hawkers and cooks, the idea of bacteria is rather remote. I do not think many people have seen bacteria under a microscope. Bacteria in food can lead to diarrhoea in minor cases and food poisoning in more serious cases. I remember some years ago the Ministry of the Environment took some measures to improve on hygiene practised food centres. For example, those preparing the food are supposed to use tongs and not hands to pick up food for preparation, and for some time such practice was seen. But there seems to be some relaxation of such hygienic practice. We can still see hawkers using hands to pick up food for preparation as well as picking up cooked food. We can still see hawkers cooking with a cigarette in their mouth. I have also seen cooks preparing food and handling cooked food with bare hands rather than tongs, even at fast food chains. Sir, the hawkers and the cooks preparing food need to be educated on the need to practise hygiene in food preparation. I would like to suggest that all new licensees for cooked food stalls and all cooks for eating establishments be sent on a compulsory course on the hygienic process of preparing food, raw food preparation methods and cleanliness control in the cooking area. And any hawkers or cooks violating such prescribed practice should be sent back for retraining. Sir, there is also the need to educate the consumers to let them know what to expect so that consumers themselves can check if food is being properly handled and properly prepared. Sir, more and more people are turning to caterers for cooked food. Even our army is using caterers now for preparing the food and caterers preparing food at central kitchens have to transfer the food to the consumers. Sir, our country is hot, and food that is being transported to and fro, if not properly kept, will deteriorate. What I am really concerned about are the small-time caterers who are really hawkers but who have branched out into catering and who may not possess enough know-how on mass food preparation and enough knowledge on how to keep the food and preserve the food properly. I hope the Minister could brief Members of this House and the public on the measures that are being taken to ensure that cooked food being transported to consumers are maintained in good condition.

Sir, I share the view expressed by the Member for Boon Teck on hygiene at hawker centres. Sir, there are more and more people patronizing the various food centres scattered all over the island. What I want to know is what steps are taken by the Hawkers Department to ensure that the standard of hygiene is always high at these eating places. Are regular and surprise checks being made by the Hawkers Department officials? Are there plans to educate food handlers and others who are directly involved with the food preparation on proper food hygiene so as to further improve the food quality in these centres?

Sir, I would like to speak on two subjects - one on environmental health and another on hawker control. Firstly, under Environmental Health, I would like to speak on pasar malams. The Member for Kaki Bukit has mentioned this subject and I would like to further elaborate on this. The pasar malam organized by the Singapore Tourist Promotion Board at the Handicraft Centre has been a success with both tourists and local residents. May I ask the Minister why is it not possible for the Ministry of the Environment to set up more pasar malams in such popular sites like Chinatown or even at Orchard Road as previously mentioned by the Member for Kaki Bukit. May I point out that the open-air markets are popular tourist attractions also in developed cities. For example, London's Covent Garden was converted from a wet market selling vegetables and flowers to a modern open-air dry market frequented by tourists as well as Londoners. Paris too has established a series of popular open-air markets. Singapore used to have several such open-air markets, the Chinatown one being best known. I can understand the need for the Ministry of the Environment to clean up the streets and the drains of Singapore, but surely it is possible for the Ministry to establish new guidelines to encourage modern, clean and sanitized open-air markets to be set up. We are going through a recession and there should be no shortage of unemployed people willing to start a little business and able to comply with any fair and clear guidelines for the setting up of open-air markets. May I urge the Minister to put up a plan for the establishment of such pasar malams at Chinatown and other popular locations? The other topic I would like to bring up is the resettlement of hawkers. The Ministry of the Environment should be congratulated for their efforts to clean up our streets of illegal hawkers, dirty and unhygienic eating places and rat-infested buildings. Many of the resettled hawkers have benefitted from the resettlement. Many, however, have suffered from a drastic loss of income as a result of a loss of regular customers or simply being resettled in a less popular site. One example is Cuppage Centre which is in my constituency. In September 1978, stalls from the popular Orchard Road market were resettled at the newly-built Cuppage Centre. There were a total of 412 stalls, consisting of 112 cooked food stalls and 298 wet produce stalls. Their businesses were building up and they were happy with their new location until February 1983 when the CBD gate was moved from Orchard Road to Clemenceau Road, adjacent to the Holiday Inn Park View. The wet produce stalls suffered a drastic reduction in business as their regular customers were no longer able to park their cars in the Cuppage Centre car park without paying $5 for a CBD ticket. Many had to give up their businesses. Today, out of the original 298 wet market stalls, only 172 are left. I was told that of these 172, around 20 are no longer operating although they still have their licences. The hawkers of Cuppage Centre have taken their problems to me. I have repeatedly appealed to the Ministry of the Environment, the Ministry of National Development and the Ministry of Communications, but it was all to no avail. May I appeal to the Minister to look personally into the plight of the Cuppage Centre hawkers. Perhaps he can persuade the Minister for Communications to relocate the CBD gate to a more convenient position as I have failed to do so or to relocate the hawkers to a better site where they can continue to make a decent living.

Sir, in the past, the legislation dealing with hazardous substances was administered by various ministries. In April last year, the Ministry of the Environment was given the responsibility for administering the legislation dealing with the control of hazardous substances in Singapore. Could the Minister inform the House what his Ministry has done so far, and what are the roles played by the other ministries now in exercising control over hazardous substances? What aspects of the control have been identified for further improvement, and which of them have actually been implemented since April 1985?

Mr Speaker, Sir, I would just like to raise three points on the collection and the disposal of refuse in Singapore. Sir, Singapore is one of the few countries in the world right now where refuse is collected daily. This is something which we are proud of and something which even many developed countries are not able to achieve. Those of us who have been abroad will bear this out. The question is whether MOE is satisfied with the efficiency of our refuse collection system. Why do I ask this, Sir? It is because I still do get complaints from both my residents, and also through observation in other constituencies, of garbage spills from trucks and garbage spills in the rubbish bin centres. The Member for Ayer Rajah the other day distributed photographs of how bad the situation can be. The other problem, Sir, is the question of bulk refuse left at rubbish bin centres and also along the roadside and apparently they are not being collected for many days. The second issue is about the role that the public can play in keeping our country clean. This refers to (1) the progress of our Use Plastic Bags Campaign. To my mind, much as it is the role of the Government to keep an efficient system of refuse collection, the public still have a role to play in the sense that they too have to play their part in making sure that the rubbish they throw or dispose of in their homes and in front of their homes are properly stacked, properly packaged so thatwhen the garbage man comes, the garbage can be collected efficiently, with a minimum of spillage. Finally, Sir, I would like to know whether the Minister could enlighten us on the refuse disposal capacity of our country, whether the capacity is sufficient now, and what is the projected capacity of our refuse disposal. This is because we have incineration plants and dumping grounds. But in view of the shortage of land, I was wondering whether any other land-saving methods have to be considered for the disposal of our rubbish.

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I would like to make a few observations on the dry market in my constituency. Bukit Batok New Town is honoured that a dry market is given to this New Town. This is the first dry market we have in Singapore, and so there is not any specific clear-cut yardstick to follow. As a result, the market stallholders face quite a bit of difficulties in understanding exactly what is required of them. The MOE officers have been kind enough to explain to them exactly what to do. However, from the hawkers' point of view, all this advice should be given to them before they start business. But this advice was made known to them only a few months after they have already started to operate this business. Basically speaking, the dry market which I visited is not much different from a lock-up stall except that the floor of the dry market is about six inches lower than the passageway. Perhaps that is to prevent water from flowing out to make sure that the wet stall areas are kept away from wetting the passageway. Presumably, a layman will interpret that way. However, it appears that that is not the interpretation of the MOE officers. MOE officers insisted that the stallholder must re-arrange his stall in such a way that it is a few feet away from the passageway so that customers will be able to step down inside the stall, and then the hawkers are to make sure that the place is kept dry. If that is actually the intention, I would say, it is very good. MOE officers want customers the customers to be comfortable and they also would not want to wet their feet. But if you know exactly what the hawkers are selling, then you will appreciate that it is very difficult for them to follow the instructions. They are selling fish and prawns, chilled fish and prawns, so there is ice everywhere. I personally find it very difficult for them to follow exactly what the MOE officers want them to do. I hope the Ministry will be sympathetic towards them as this is the first dry market and from the very beginning when they tendered for the stall, they did not know exactly what actually is expected of them. Another observation I would like to make is complaints from mini-markets, which I have received. MOE officers get themselves involved in the layout. They say that putting vegetables here is not beautiful enough; they should put it right behind and that the dry stuff (provisions) should be in front. From the hawker's point of view, what he wants is business. So I would like the Ministry to clarify exactly what is the policy of the Ministry towards the hawkers, especially in this dry market. To me, the officers are mainly concerned with pollution and health standards. They should not be concerned with the beauty of the stalls, nor how to do business, because that is a matter for the hawkers themselves to decide. These are very basic issues. If this dry market problem cannot be resolved, subsequent dry markets will also face the same problem. May I request the Minister to look into this and formulate certain regulations. I would be pleased to assist in conveying all these regulations provided they are reasonable and can be observed.

Mr Chairman, Sir, my Senior Parliamentary Secretary will be replying to points raised by Members on hawkers and hawker related issues. First, I will give a reply to the Member for Kaki Bukit who has touched on the Ministry's Bukit Timah Flood Alleviation Scheme Phase II, involving the construction of a diversion canal at Swiss Cottage. I think, if I got him correctly, he wants to know whether this scheme would solve the problem of flooding, particularly in Bukit Timah area. Sir, the incidents of flooding in any catchment are attributed to a number of factors, chief of which are heavy rainfall (worse still, if it is continuous heavy rainfall for days on end, like the one we experienced about two weeks ago), tidal influence; low-lying nature of the catchment and the limited conveyance capacity of the drainage system in the catchment. Sir, of all these factors, unpredictability of weather, especially our weather in Singapore, is something beyond our control. You see, Sir, the drainage system of a catchment is designed for storms of a certain magnitude. When this capacity is exceeded, due to freak weather conditions or other factors, the drains overflow and flooding results. So the drainage system of a catchment cannot eradicate flooding. It can, however, alleviate flooding in catchment. Sir, the diversion canal at Swiss Cottage which the Member for Kaki Bukit mentioned is, as I have stated earlier on, part of the Ministry's Bukit Timah Flood Alleviation Scheme Phase II. Before launching this scheme, Sir, a comprehensive study was conducted by the Drainage Department of my Ministry, and among its recommendations are (1) the construction of this diversion canal at Swiss Cottage to divert the flow of water from Bukit Timah Canal into Kallang River; (2) the widening of the mid-section of Bukit Timah Canal itself from Coronation Road to Swiss Cottage; (3) the widening and deepening of Kallang River itself, from Jalan Toa Payoh to Sir Arthur's Bridge; and (4) the deepening and widening of all subsidiary drains which come under this scheme. Sir, Government has approved the expenditure of some $240 million for this project. Tenders will be called in the third quarter of this year, and the whole project is expected to be completed in 1990. Sir, some Members of this House may recall that following severe floodings in the 1960s, a major flood control measure was undertaken by the Government by constructing a trans-catchment diversion canal at the upper third of the Bukit Timah Canal to divert flow from the Bukit Timah Canal into Sungei Ulu Pandan. Called the Bukit Timah Flood Alleviation Scheme Phase I, this diversion canal taps the flow just upstream of the Sixth Avenue/Bukit Timah Road junction into Sungei Ulu Pandan at the Clementi Road/Ulu Pandan junction. The Member wants to know whether the widening of Bukit Timah Canal is necessary. In other words, can we do without it? Sir, my answer is no. Unlike the Phase 1 Flood Alleviation Scheme, where the diversion canal was built upstream of the flood areas thereby bringing significant improvement to flood areas downstream, the Phase 2 Bukit Timah Alleviation Scheme calls for the construction of the diversion canal at Swiss Cottage which is within the flood area itself. While it may bring significant improvement to flood areas downstream of Swiss Cottage, it will not bring significant improvement to flood areas upstream of Swiss Cottage unless Bukit Timah Canal is adequately widened to carry storm waters without overflowing its banks. So the answer to the Member's question is, we have to widen the mid-section of Bukit Timah Canal. The Member has also expressed some concern for the nurseries at the floral mile, along Dunearn Road which have to be resited. Sir, when the project is completed, the strip of land between the widened Bukit Timah Canal and Dunearn Road will still be big enough to accommodate the nurseries,should they want to go back to the present site. Incidentally, Sir, these nurseries use the present site as a staging point for their sales. Speaking of nurseries, Sir, of the 18 nurseries at the floral mile along Dunearn Road, only 11 have got to be resited due to projects of one kind or another. But of the 11, only four are affected by the Bukit Timah Canal widening, and these are the four who can go back to their present site if they want to after the completion of the project. For the record, Sir, the four nurseries I am talking about are Evershine Florist, Rose Garden, Khai Seng Garden and Coronation Nursery. The other seven, I am afraid, have got to be resited permanently because they are affected by PWD's Whitley Road flyover scheme. Speaking of flood alleviation schemes, I would like to inform this House that apart from the massive Bukit Timah Flood Alleviation Scheme Phase II, the Drainage Department of my Ministry has also obtained approval to implement the following drainage Schemes over the next few years. They are the Flood Alleviation scheme for Tanjong Katong area, Kranji Catchment Drainage Scheme, Sungai Lanchar Drainage Scheme, Concrete-lining of Earth Drains in the Jurong Industrial Area, Siglap Catchment Drainage Scheme and Drainage Improvement to the Pang Sua and Woodlands Catchment Areas. These schemes will alleviate floodings in the Tanjong Katong; Kranji; Jurong, Jalan Eunos, Frankel Avenue and Bukit Panjang areas. Mr Chairman, Sir, the Member for Alexandra has also been complaining to me about floodings in the Stirling Road area of his constituency. Sir, the area referred to is part of the catchment which is presently being served by the Stirling Road Outlet Drain and its tributaries. Various developments in the catchment have increased the surface run-off substantially, resulting in the drains being inadequate to convey storm run-offs. Flooding is expected to be more severe and more frequent in the coming years in view of the continuing land development in the catchment, particularly in the upper reaches of the catchment. My Ministry proposes to reconstruct the drains to alleviate flooding. The project estimated to cost $17 million would increase the conveyance capacity of the Stirling Road Outlet Drain so as to contain the flooding situation in the area. The Member for Kaki Bukit has also complained of the state of affairs in our public toilets and wants to know what could be done to improve them. At present, there are about 15,000 public toilets in Singapore. And the common complaints of public toilets are wet floors, dirty toilet seats, unflushed toilet bowls, damaged wash basins, damaged flushing cisterns. On the structural aspects, my Ministry has upgraded the requirements for public toilets, such as using heavy-duty toilet bowls, wash basins, flushing cisterns and non-slip tiles. On the software side, Sir, my Ministry has over the years carried out numerous public toilet campaigns, the most recent being the month-long campaign held over October/November last year. The managements and caretakers of public toilets have been impressed on the importance of keeping the toilets clean. Posters and stickers were displayed, talks cum slide shows and exhibitions were held in shopping complexes, factories and even schools. There has been a general improvement in the cleanliness of our public toilets compared to, say, a few years ago. Members of the public must also play their part in observing good personal hygiene and also in having enough public consciousness to keep the toilets clean for the other users. The Member for Kaki Bukit also spoke on the plight of daily-rated employees who may be retrenched as a result of mechanization of activities in my Ministry. Daily-rated employees of my Ministry who have been made redundant are offered alternative jobs in the first instance. To equip them for the new jobs, they are being sent for in-house courses or even VITB courses. Retrenchment is carried out only as a last resort when the individual DRE rejects the alternative vacancies in other grades and opts for retrenchment. Mr Chairman, Sir, my Ministry's personnel philosophy is to train employees to their maximum potential and not just those that are redundant. For the 1986-87 financial year, a sum of $6,000 has been set aside for the training of DREs alone. Sir, I move on to the issues raised by the Member for Siglap. He has spoken of refuse collection service provided by my Ministry. He wants to know whether I am satisfied with the service provided. He has also mentioned about the bulk refuse being left on roads and public places. The other issue he raised was on the "Use of Plastic Bag" Campaign and refuse disposal capacity of Singapore. My Ministry operates a fleet of 274 refuse collection vehicles with a workforce of 1,019 to provide daily refuse collection service. As the Member has rightly mentioned, Singapore is perhaps one of the few places, if not the only place in the world, where refuse is collected every day for 365 days of the year. Sir, this is possible as we have, over the years, developed a waste management system that is reliable and efficient. Our operation is computerized. We have continuously upgraded our fleet of refuse collection vehicles in order to ensure productivity and set high maintenance standards with a modern vehicle workshop. In spite of this, cost is kept low as we enjoy an economy of scale. I would like to assure the Member for Siglap that every effort is made to provide an efficient refuse removal service. Sir, the refuse trucks of my Ministry have been provided with devices such as compactors and what they call tail-gate seals to ensure that there is no spillage. As far as the work attitude of the workers are concerned, we have always advised them and trained them to do their best. But, of course, in any set-up there are always black sheep. Here again, Sir, the members of the public can help to make the job of the refuse collection worker easier by using plastic bags to dispose of their refuse. Needless to say, Sir, it is easier to handle refuse in plastic bags than in the loose form. The Member then talked of bulky wastes being indiscriminately dumped on the road, public places, car parks and so on. In the first place, they should not have been there. With a little bit of effort, members of the public can dispose of their unwanted articles, unwanted TV sets, unwanted refrigerators and washing machines, quite easily. Firstly, Sir, my Ministry operates a bulky refuse collection service. Members of the public can phone the Ministry directly or of our Environmental Health Offices nearest their home to arrange for their bulky refuse to be removed. There is, of course, a small charge for this service. Alternatively, Sir, members of the public can bring their unwanted articles themselves to either the Ulu Pandan Incineration Plant for those articles which can be incinerated, or to our two dumping grounds, one at Lorong Halus in the Tampines area and the other at Lim Chu Kang. There is no charge for loads under one tonne. Of course, for loads over one tonne, there is a scale of charges. Sir, the exemption of payment of fees for loads under one tonne is designed to encourage members of the public to bring their unwanted articles to these sites rather than dumping them on the roads, at car parks or at other public places. I think this exemption has worked. Roughly 75% of some 300,000 transactions in 1985 were below one tonne. I think contractors who often engage in renovation works are aware of this arrangement. With regard to bulky refuse left in HDB bin compounds, HDB has contractors to collect them and bring them to the disposal sites. Sir, the Member wants to know the refuse disposal capacity of Singapore, I presume, in the future. As I have mentioned earlier on, at present the Ministry of the Environment operates two dumping grounds and one incineration plant. The two dumping grounds are at Lorong Halus in the Tampines area and the other one is at Lim Chu Kang and the incineration plant is at Ulu Pandan. In 1985, 36% of the total refuse collected were incinerated and the remaining 64% dumped at these two dumping grounds. With the commissioning of the Tuas Incineration Plant by the middle of this year, 64% of the total refuse generated will be incinerated and the remaining 36% dumped at the two refuse dumping grounds. A third incineration plant has also been planned at Senoko. Another refuse dumping ground, also in the Tampines area, is presently under development and is expected to be ready for use by 1987. This site may be the last available place on Singapore mainland to be used for refuse disposal. Dumping on an offshore island may then have to be considered. Sir, based on the Solid Waste Master Plan put up in 1984, we may, after 1996, run into a shortfall of incineration capacity against the projected quantity of incinerable refuse. The shortfall will be quite substantial after the year 2005. There is therefore a need for us to look into the possibility of building a fourth incineration plant in order to conserve our available dumping grounds. I shall now turn to some of the queries raised by the Member for Buona Vista. The Member wants to know the progress made on the control of hazardous substances since my Ministry took over the responsibility in April last year. Sir, for the information of this House, there is no single Act of Parliament at the moment for the control of hazardous substances in Singapore. Existing legislations controlling different aspects of hazardous substances are vested in a number of Ministries. For example, Sir, under the Poisons Act, the Ministry of Health controls the importation, transportation, storage and manufacture of industrial and medicinal poisons. But under the present arrangement, the Anti-Pollution Unit (APU) of my Ministry will take over control of industrial poisons while the Ministry of Health still retains its control over medicinal poisons. Then there is the Petroleum Act under the Ministry of Home Affairs which controls the transportation and storage of petroleum. The Building Control Act under the Ministry of National Development controls the use of premises for dangerous trades. The Factories Act under the Ministry of Labour deals with the control on the handling and usage of hazardous substances, and to control pollution we have the Water Pollution Control and Drainage Act under the Ministry of the Environment. Sir, these are just five of nearly a dozen Acts of Parliament controlling different aspects of hazardous substances in Singapore today. Sir, the Anti-Pollution Unit of my Ministry is presently working very closely with these other Ministries to implement a more efficient system of management and control of hazardous substances. For instance, proposals for new industrial and commercial activities referred to the APU either by the HDB, JTC or even by the D&BCD are carefully scrutinized in order to ensure that my Ministry's policies on the control of hazardous substances are complied with. As a general policy, industries and commercial activities involving the storage, manufacture, handling, transportation and transhipment of large quantities of hazardous substances are not encouraged. The APU is also working with the Singapore Fire Service on measures to deal with emergencies. These include the use of caution labels onvehicles and containers used for the transportation of these substances. These vehicles are inspected annually at an ROV approved inspection centre. Then companies are also required to draw up emergency procedures for both fixed storage installations as well as for transportations of these substances. These procedures will be vetted by the Singapore Fire Service. Thirdly, Sir, companies are also required to keep the Singapore Fire Service informed of the times when large quantities of hazardous substances are being transported and of the routes taken. Sir, we are currently looking at international standards for the construction and inspection of specialized vehicles used in the transportation of hazardous substances for possible adoption as Singapore standards. Sir, one area which my Ministry has identified concerns the control of industrial chemicals. To date we have identified 22 such chemicals, and these have been gazetted as poisons under the Poisons Act since August last year. Companies dealing with these 22 gazetted industrial chemicals are now required to apply for special licences and to comply with specific requirements on their storage and transportation. Then companies are required to set up emergency procedures to deal with spillages in accidents and, as I have mentioned earlier on, they have to keep the Singapore Fire Service informed of the times when these chemicals are being transported and of the routes taken. Sir, transportation of large quantities of hazardous will, in future, be restricted to certain times of the day and along certain specified routes in order to avoid peak hour traffic, built-up areas, and our water catchments. And, in some cases, the transportation of large quantities of hazardous substances may even require the provision of mobile escorts. I think I have covered most, if not all, of the points raised by Members. I shall now ask my Senior Parliamentary Secretary to deal with issues related to hawkers raised by Members.

Sir, the Member for Kaki Bukit raised the idea of a modernized street hawking. Sir, as far as I know, our programme for resiting street hawkers has been completed and this has been completed at considerable expense. I think it took us something like 15 years to resite more than 18,000 hawkers into 103 hawker centres and costing us something like more than $100 million. But I do appreciate what the Member for Kaki Bukit said earlier on in his speech that he is not advocating the come-back of street hawkers. But the problem is, of course, identifying these people. Already there are hundreds of illegal hawkers operating every day in various HDB estates and our streets. Until we can control all these activities, I think we should be very careful in allowing another form of street hawking. We require, in other words, a period of time to settle down. Let us allow some orderliness to take root, then we will look into this idea. But maybe part of his idea is already manifested in the more modern kiosks that we see along Orchard Mall selling articles like magazines, newspapers, cigarettes, and so on. Our town planners, I am sure, will look into modernizing our streets and the malls and together with these things, the modernized street hawkers, as we call them in Singapore, will probably take shape also in Singapore. Just a comment before I leave this topic on modernized street hawkers. I believe that the Ministry of the Environment has done more than modernized our hawkers. In fact, they have upgraded them to mini-restaurants. It is just that they look different from those hawkers along the streets in Europe. In fact, I heard a very unofficial comment the other day from my officer and, of course, somebody from Europe was telling him that he admires the Government's ability to be able to resite all our street hawkers and if they could they would also resite their street hawkers. I really do not know whether or not these modernized street hawkers in Europe are really modern street hawkers or are they hawkers that the authorities find difficulty in housing them in proper hawker centres. The Member for Cairnhill and the Member for Kaki Bukit brought up this idea of the pasar malams. I know it is the Member for Cairnhill's pet subject. Therefore, I will spend some time discussing this with him. First, my knowledge of the Malay language is not very good. But "pasar malam" to me means night market. I believe that night markets actually had its origins in the early 1960's when the British Army was around in Singapore. They started operations in British bases and then in the housing estates where the soldiers lived. Later on they proliferated. They filled up our streets, they filled up public places and so on. They caused quite a lot of public nuisance, noise, littering, you think of it, you get it. There was lot of pollution and eventually there were much public complaints. Unfortunately the Ministry had to act and phased out night markets in 1978. But then the pasar malam or open-air market that the Member for Cairnhill talked about, we have what I called the ampute open-air markets, the more modernized and modified open-air markets. I am sure he is aware that there is such a thing as the handicraft centre which the Singapore Tourist Promotion Board started. If the Member for Cairnhill can identify open spaces, lands, or whatever where public health regulations can be conformed with and where it can be properly managed and he wants to run bazaars, then I think our Ministry will be prepared to look into his interest. The Member for Cairnhill referred to the CBD gantry points affecting the hawkers at Cuppage Road Market. All I can say to him is, "I thought he dialled the wrong number." But apparently he did not dial the wrong number. He wanted us to dial the number for him. I really do not know the real problem that caused this poor business at Cuppage Road Market. I suggest that since he knows the area well, being the Member of Parliament in charge of that area, perhaps he can try again the Minister for Communications and Information. He is a very patient man. An hon Member: ND.

ND, is it? So he might try the Minister for National Development. He is also a very patient man. I appreciate the Member for Chua Chu Kang's far-sightedness and concern for his hawkers. But let me assure him that the condition in his hawker centre, maybe in one or two years' time, will not be that bad. I will just have a look at the details given to me here. The vacancy rate of the hawker centre at Lim Chu Kang is about 12%. Considering that the worst hawker centre has a vacancy rate of more than 32% I would say that business in the Lim Chu Kang hawker centre is quite all right. The other point is that he wanted to know about the conversion of market produce stalls into cooked food stalls. I just want to let him know that, up to-date, 688 market produce stalls have been converted to 243 cooked food stalls at a cost of about $486,000. My Ministry is still looking into the various possibilities of converting the more suitable market produce stalls that are vacant. But it is not an easy task. It takes about three market produce stalls to convert into cooked food stall because you need to provide the refreshment area. Moreover, having found the suitable stalls for conversion, you have also got to consider the public health regulations, whether or not there is cross-contamination of food and so on. Of course, there is also the popularity of the place to think about. So it takes time to convert market produce stalls into cooked food stalls. It is not an easy matter. The Member for Pasir Panjang wanted to know how we safeguard public health and whether we do spot checks on hawkers at hawker centres. Sir, we ensure public health through three basic ways. First, of course, is the distribution of educational pamphlets containing the various basic information on how to handle food and also on hygiene practice. Second, public health inspectors do carry out regular checks to ensure that hawkers and food handlers practise good food hygiene. To ensure that they can see that the food is bacteria-free, as the Member for Boon Teck has said, they do take food samples back to the laboratory, culture them, and check for any microbiological contamination. The Member for Pasir Panjang can rest assured that food at these hawker centres and indeed at all other hawker centres in Singapore are of reasonable public health standards. The Member for Boon Teck also raised the problem of public health and catering services. I appreciate his concern for public health and how food can be contaminated if one is not careful with the handling of food before it is served. Restaurants and other food establish- ments that provide catering services are required to have a licence. Caterers are required to transport the food in proper and clean containers and conform to a high standard of food hygiene. This also concerns food handlers smoking while preparing food. Just to give an indication. In 1985, 315 summonses were issued to food handlers for various offences, including smoking while preparing food. This offence has more than twice the number of summonses issued in 1984. The increase is simply due to increased surveillance. On the microbiological standard of food, they are monitored over the years. For the more sensitive food, we monitor more often and, again, to give an indication, in 1983, the percentage of unfit food, microbiologically speaking, was 18.7%, 1984, 16.1%; and 1985, 12%. So that has also come down. The Member for Bukit Batok has a very specific problem. I appreciate again his concern for his hawkers and for the success of dry markets. I wish to assure him that I will discuss this problem with the officers and we will give maximum help to his hawkers at the dry market to make sure that dry markets are a success in Singapore.

Mr Chairman, Sir, I think I owe replies to two issues, one raised by the Member for Kaki Bukit and another by the Member for Siglap. Sir, the Member for Kaki Bukit would like an assurance of some sort that there will be minimum disruption to the flow of traffic while the widening of Bukit Timah Canal is going on. While work is going on along that section of Dunearn Road, it may be necessary to close, intermittently, one lane of Dunearn Road to traffic. But I would like to assure the Member for Kaki Bukit that every effort will be taken to reduce the disruption to the smooth flow of traffic by constructing temporary diversion lanes, wherever space is available. In fact, Sir, a Technical Committee under the Drainage Department of my Ministry has been set up for this purpose. This committee is made up of members from the Roads Division of PWD, the Parks and Recreation Department, Planning Department, Lands Office and services departments like the PUB and TAS, whose services may have to be diverted to make way for the larger canal along Dunearn Road. The Member for Siglap wants to know the results of our Plastic Bag Campaign. As this House is aware, my Ministry has over the years encouraged members of the public to use plastic bags to dispose of their refuse. Campaigns, talks, exhibitions have been held in community centres, markets, shopping complexes and so on. In fact, Sir, with the help of Members of this House, with the exception of two, and all the RCs, officers of my Ministry have conducted house-to-house visits to disseminate the good habit of using plastic bags and to distribute pamphlets showing how to dispose of refuse properly. Incidentally, in September last year, the Ministry conducted a "Use Plastic Bags" Campaign in Siglap Constituency. A one-month survey was conducted after that. The number of plastic bags taken from four random rubbish chutes increased from 373 per day to 496 per day, an increase of 33%. I think the campaign is producing some concrete, positive result.

May I seek some clarification from the Minister. I would like to ask the Minister what measures does his Ministry have for dealing with hazardous waste that could not be disposed of locally.

Sir, certain chemicals, for example, Polychlorinated Biphenyls, Tetraethyl Lead, and Tetramethyl Lead, for which local treatment facilities are not available, are re-exported to the country of origin and treated there.

Could we have a bit more example of such waste?

We can have a private discussion afterwards.

Sir, on behalf of the Members in the House, I would like to thank the Minister for his most thorough and enlightening replies. The same applies to his Senior Parliamentary Secretary, though I think his replies were less enlightening. Sir, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The sum of $187,353,810 for Head M ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. The sum of $287,400,000 for Head M ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.

It is approaching 6.30 pm. Do I have the assent of Members that progress be now reported? Hon. Members indicated assent. Thereupon Mr Deputy Speaker left the Chair of the Committee and took the Chair of the House.

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I beg to report that the Committee of Supply has made further progress on the Main and Development Estimates for the financial year 1st April, 1986 to 31st March, 1987, and ask leave to sit again on Monday, 24th March.

So be it.

Resolved, "That Parliament do now adjourn." - [Dr Ahmad Mattar]. Adjourned accordingly at Twenty-seven Minutes past Six o'clock pm.

asked the Acting Minister for Community Development whether his Ministry has accepted and implemented the various recommendations, that are within the purview of his Ministry, contained in the Report of the Committee on the Problems of the Aged (Paper Misc. 3 of 1984).

The Ministry of Community Development has accepted in-principle the recommendations of the Committee on Problems of the Aged (CPA) that are within the purview of the Ministry. Many of the recommendations have been or are being implemented. The Ministry has set up a Committee to co-ordinate the development of programmes and activities for the aged. It is also liaising with other organisations to monitor implementation of programmes which they are responsible for. The actions taken so far are detailed below. A. Community-based Social Services The Ministry has developed a range of community-based social services to help the aged to live in their own homes. These are:-