Source document: https://docs-lawep.s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com/1698940510652.pdf (Malaysia)
Volume IV No.
7 Thursday 22nd June, 1967 PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES DEWAN RA'AYAT (HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES) OFFICIAL REPORT FOURTH SESSION OF THE SECOND PARLIAMENT OF MALAYSIA CONTENTS ORAL ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS [Col. 1401] The Prisons (Amendment) Bill [Col. 1469] EXEMPTED BUSINESS AND ADJOURNMENT The SINE DIE (Motion) [Col. 1430] Bill Prevention of [Col.1470] Corruption (Amendment) BILL PRESENTED [Col. 1430] The Supplementary Supply (1965 and 1966) Bill to the Second Schedule to the Heads MOTIONS: The Sabah Income Tax Ordinance, 1956— Amendment Income Tax Ordinance, 1956 (Sabah Tourist Head Association—Addition) [Col. 1431] The Income Tax Ordinance, 1947—Amendment the Income Tax (The Rubber Producers' to Ordinance.
1947 Council of Malaya—Addition) [Col. 1436] The Employment Ordinance, 1955 (Amendment the First Schedule to to Schedule) [Col. 1443] The Parliament (Members' Remuneration) Act, 1960 (Amendment to Schedule) [Col. 1451] The Customs Ordinance, 1952—The Customs (No.

9) Order, 1967 (Amendment) Duties [Col. 1594] The Sabah Customs Ordinance (Cap.

33)—The Customs Duties (Sabah) (Amendment) (No.

9) Order, 1967 [Col. 1595] tions The Sarawak Customs Ordinance (Cap.
26)— The The Customs (Import and Export) Duties (Amendment) (No.
9) Order, 1967 [Col. 1596] BILLS: The Foreign Representatives Immunities) Bill [Col. 1462] (Privileges and The The Kidnapping (Amendment) Bill [Col. 1467] Trasfer Committee: First Schedule— and S.5 S.22 [Col. 1519] S. 19 [Col. 1519] Second Schedule- Heads S. 5, S. 7, S. 21 and S. 43 [Col. 1520] Heads S. 18, S. 19 and S. 20 [Col. 1522] Head S. 29 [Col. 1523] Head S. 37 [Col. 1524] Heads S. 46, S. 52 and S. 59 [ Col. 1524] Heads S. 65 and S. 71 [Col. 1524] Head S. 72 [Col. 1525] The Customs Laws (Malaysia) (Amendment) Bill [Col. 1525] The and Income Tax (Tin Buffer Stock Contribu- Repayments) Bill [Col. 1526] (Malaysia) (Amendment) Bill Income Tax [Col.1528] The Industrial Relations Bill [Col. 1529] The Employment (Amendment) Bill [Col. 1591] The Trade Unions (Amendment) Bill [Col. 1593] Functions (Registrar-General of of Sarawak) Bill [Col. 1593] DI-CHETAK DI-JABATAN CHETAK KERAJAAN OLEH THOR BENG CHONG, A.M.N., PENCHETAK KERAJAAN KUALA LUMPUR 1968 MALAYSIA DEWAN RA'AYAT (HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES) Official Report Fourth Session of the Second Dewan Ra'ayat Thursday, 22nd June, 1967 The House met at Ten o'clock a.m.
PRESENT: The Honourable Mr Speaker, DATO' CHIK MOHAMED YUSUF BIN SHEIKH ABDUL RAHMAN, S.P.M.P., J.P., Dato' Bendahara, Perak.

the Deputy Prime Minister, Minister of Defence, Minister of National and Rural Development and Acting Minister of Home Affairs, TUN HAJI ABDUL RAZAK BIN DATO' HUSSAIN, S.M.N.

(Fekan).

the Minister of Transport, TAN SRI HAJI SARDON BIN HAJI JUBIR, P.M.N.

(Pontian Utara).

the Minister of Education, TUAN MOHAMED KHIR JOHARI (Kedah Tengah).
the Minister of Commerce and Industry, DR LIM SWEE AUN, J.P. (Larut Selatan).

the Minister for Welfare Services, TUAN HAJI ABDUL HAMID KHAN BIN HAJI SAKHAWAT A LI KHAN, J.M.N., J.P. (Batang Padang).

the Minister of Labour, TUAN V. MANICKAVASAGAM, J.M.N., PJ.K.

(Klang).

the Minister of Information and Broadcasting and Minister of Culture, Youth and Sports, TUAN SENU BIN ABDUL RAHMAN (Kubang Pasu Barat).

the Minister of Agriculture and Co-operatives, TUAN HAJI MOHD.

GHAZALI BIN HAJI JAWI (Ulu Perak).


the Minister of Lands and Mines and Minister of Justice, TUAN ABDUL-RAHMAN BIN YA'KUB (Sarawak).

the Assistant Minister without Portfolio, TUAN HAJI ABDUL KHALID BIN AWANG OSMAN (Kota Star Utara).

the Assistant Minister of National and Rural Development, TUAN SULEIMAN BIN BULON, PJ.K.

(Bagan Datoh).

the Assistant Minister of Education, TUAN LEE SIOK YEW, A.M.N., PJ.K.

(Sepang).

the Assistant Minister of Finance, Dr Ng Kam Poh, J.p. (Teluk Anson.)
the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Health, TUAN IBRAHIM BIN ABDUL RAHMAN, J.M.N.

(Seberang Tengah).

1395 22 JUNE 1967 1396 The Honourable the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Labour, TUAN LEE SAN CHOON, K.M.N.

(Segamat Selatan).

the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance, TUAN ALI BIN HAJI AHMAD (Pontian Selatan).

TUAN ABDUL GHANI BIN ISHAK, A.M.N.

(Melaka Utara).

TUAN ABDUL KARIM BIN ABU, A.M.N.

(Melaka Selatan).

WAN ABDUL KADIR BIN ISMAIL, P.P.T.


(Kuala Trengganu Utara).

TUAN ABDUL RAHMAN BIN HAJI TALIB, P.J.K.

(Kuantan).

TUAN ABDUL RAZAK BIN HAH HUSSIN (Lipis).

TUAN ABDUL SAMAD BIN GUL AHMAD MIANJI (Pasir Mas Hulu).

Y.A.M.

TUNKU ABDULLAH IBNI AL-MARHUM TUANKU ABDUL RAHMAN, P.P.T.

(Rawang).

TUAN HAJI ABDULLAH BIN HAJI MOHD.

SALLEH, A.M.N., S.M.J., P.I.S.

(Segamat Utara).

TUAN HAJI ABU BAKAR BIN HAMZAH, J.P. (Bachok).

TUAN HAJI AHMAD BIN ABDULLAH, S.M.K.

(Kelantan Hilir).

TUAN AHMAD BIN ARSHAD, A.M.N.


(Muar Utara).

TUAN HAJI AHMAD BIN SA'AID, J.P. (Seberang Utara).

O.K.K.

DATU ALIUDDIN BIN DATU HARUN, P.D.K.

(Sabah).

DR AWANG BIN HASSAN, S.M.J.

(Muar Selatan).

TUAN AZIZ BIN ISHAK (Muar Dalam).

TUAN JONATHAN BANGAU ANAK RENANG, A.B.S.

(Sarawak).

PENGARAH BANYANG ANAK JANTING, P.B.S.

(Sarawak).

TUAN CHAN CHONG WEN, A.M.N.

(Kluang Selatan).

TUAN CHAN SEONG YOON (Setapak).

TUAN CHAN SIANG SUN, A.M.N., P.J.K.

(Bentong).


TUAN CHEW BIOW CHUON, J.P. (Bruas).

TUAN CHIA CHIN SHIN, A.B.S.

(Sarawak).

TUAN CHIN FOON (Ulu Kinta).

TUAN D. A. DAGO ANAK RANDAN alias DAGOK ANAK RANDEN, A.M.N.

(Sarawak).

TUAN C. V. DEVAN NAIR (Bungsar).

TUAN EDWIN ANAK TANGKUN (Sarawak).

TUAN SYED ESA BIN ALWEE, J.M.N., S.M.J., P.I.S.

(Batu Pahat Dalam).

DATIN HAJJAH FATIMAH BINTI HAJI ABDUL MAJID (Johor Bahru Timor).

TAN SRI FATIMAH BINTI HAJI HASHIM, P.M.N.

(Jitra-Padang Terap).


TUAN GEH CHONG KEAT, K.M.N.

(Penang Utara).

TUAN HANAFI BIN MOHD.

YUNUS, A.M.N., J.P. (Kulim Utara).

TUAN HARUN BIN ABDULLAH, A.M.N., J.P. (Baling).

WAN HASSAN BIN WAN DAUD (Tumpat).

TUAN STANLEY HO NGUN KHIU, A.D.K.

(Sabah).

TUAN HUSSEIN BIN T O' MUDA HASSAN, A.M.N.

(Raub).

1397 22 JUNE 1967 1398 The Honourable DATO' HAJI HUSSEIN BIN MOHD.

NOORDIN, D.P.M.P., A.M.N., P.J.K.

(Parit).

TUAN HUSSEIN BIN SULAIMAN (Ulu Kelantan).

TUAN HAJI HUSSAIN RAHIMI BIN HAJI SAMAN, S.M.K.


(Kota Bharu Hulu).

TUAN IKHWAN ZAINI, K.M.N.

(Sarawak).

TUAN ISMAIL BIN IDRIS (Penang Selatan).

PENGHULU JINGGUT ANAK ATTAN, Q.M.C., A.B.S.

(Sarawak).

TUAN KADAM ANAK KIAI (Sarawak).

TUAN KAM WOON WAH, J.P. (Sitiawan).

TUAN THOMAS KANA, K.M.N.

(Sarawak).

TUAN KHOO PENG LOONG (Sarawak).

TUAN EDMUND LANGGU ANAK SAGA (Sarawak).

TUAN LEE SECK FUN, K.M.N.

(Tanjong Malim).

TUAN LIM PEE HUNG, PJ.K.

(Alor Star).


TUAN T. MAHIMA SINGH, J.M.N., J.P. (Port Dickson).

TUAN MOHD.

DAUD BIN ABDUL SAMAD (Besut).

TUAN MOHAMED IDRIS BIN MATSIL, J.M.N., P.J.K., J.P. (Jelebu-Jempol).

TUAN MOHD.

TAHIR BIN ABDUL MAJID, S.M.S., P.J.K.

(Kuala Langat).

TUAN HAJI MOHAMED YUSOF BIN MAHMUD, A.M.N.

(Temerloh).

TUAN MOHD.

ZAHIR BIN HAJI ISMAIL, J.M.N.

(Sungei Patani).

WAN MOKHTAR BIN AHMAD (Kemaman).

TUAN HAJI MOKHTAR BIN HAJI ISMAIL (Perlis Selatan).
TUAN MUHAMMAD FAKHRUDDIN BIN HAJI ABDULLAH (Pasir Mas Hilir).

TUAN HAJI MUHAMMAD SU'AUT BIN HAJI MUHD.

TAHIR, A.B.S.

(Sarawak).

DATO' HAJI MUSTAPHA BIN HAH ABDUL JABAR, D.P.M.S., A.M.N., J.P. (Sabak Bernam).

TUAN MUSTAPHA BIN AHMAD (Tanah Merah).

TAN SRI NIK AHMAD KAMIL, D.K., S.P.M.K., S.J.M.K., P.M.N., P.Y.G.P., Dato' Sri Setia Raja (Kota Bharu Hilir).

TUAN NG FAH YAM (Batu Gajah).

TUAN ONG KEE HUI (Sarawak).

TUAN HAJI OTHMAN BIN ABDULLAH (Hilir Perak).

TUAN QUEK KAI DONG, J.P. (Seremban Timor).


TUAN HAJI RAHMAT BIN HAJI DAUD, A.M.N.

(Johor Bahru Barat).

TUAN RAMLI BIN OMAR (Krian Darat).

TUAN HAJI REDZA BIN HAJI MOHD.

SAID, PJ.K., J.P. (Rembau-Tampin).

RAJA ROME BIN RAJA MA'AMOR, P.J.K., J.P. (Kuala Selangor).

TUAN SANDOM ANAK NYUAK (Sarawak).

1399 22 JUNE 1967 1400 The Honourable TUAN SEAH TENG NGIAB, P.I.S.

(Muar Pantai).

TUAN SIM BOON LIANG, A.B.S.

(Sarawak).

TUAN SIOW LOONG HIN, P.J.K.

(Seremban Barat).

TUAN SNAWI BIN ISMAIL, P.J.K.


(Seberang Selatan).

TUAN SNG CHIN JOO (Sarawak).

TUAN SOH AH TECK (Batu Pahat).

TUAN SULEIMAN BIN A LI (Dungun).

TUAN SULEIMAN BIN HAH TAIB (Krian Laut).

TUAN TAJUDDIN BIN A L I, P J .

K. (Larut Utara).

TUAN TAI KUAN YANG, A.M.N.

(Kulim-Bandar Bharu).

TUAN TAMA WENG TINGGANG WAN (Sarawak).

DR TAN CHEE KHOON (Batu).

TUAN TAN CHENG BEE, A.M.N., J.P. (Bagan).

TUAN TAN TOH HONG (Bukit Bintang).

TUAN TAN TSAK YU (Sarawak).


TUAN TIAH ENG BEE (Kluang Utara).

TUAN TOH THEAM HOCK (Kampar).

TUAN HAJI ZAKARIA BIN HAJI MOHD.

TAIB, P.J.K.

(Langat).

The Honourable the Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs, ABSENT: Y.T.M.

TUNKU ABDUL RAHMAN PUTRA AL-HAJ, K.O.M.

(Kuala Kedah).

the Minister of Finance, TUN TAN SIEW SIN, S.S.M, J.P. (Melaka Tengah).

the Minister of Works, Posts and Telecommunications, TUN V. T. SAMBANTHAN, S.S.M., P.M.N.

(Sungei Siput).
(Sungei Siput).

the Minister of Health, TUAN BAHAMAN BIN SAMSUDIN (Kuala Pilah).

the Minister for Local Government and Housing, TUAN KHAW KAI-BOH, P J .

K. (Ulu Selangor).

the Minister for Sarawak Affairs, TAN SRI TEMENGGONG JUGAH ANAK BARIENG, P.M.N., P.D.K.

(Sarawak).

the Assistant Minister of Culture, Youth and Sports, ENGKU MUHSEIN BIN ABDUL KADIR, J.M.N., S.M.T., P.J.K.

(Trengganu Tengah).

the Assistant Minister of Finance, DR NG KAM POH, J.P. (Teluk Anson).
the Parliamentary Secretary to the Deputy Prime Minister, TUAN CHEN WING SUM (Damansara).

WAN ABDUL RAHMAN BIN DATU TUANKU BUJANG, A.B.S.

(Sarawak).

TUAN HAJI ABDUL RASHID BIN HAJI JAIS (Sabah).

DATO' ABDULLAH BIN ABDULRAHMAN, S.M.T., Dato' Bijaya di-Raja (Kuala Trengganu Selatan).

PUAN AJIBAH BINTI ABOL (Sarawak).

TUAN FRANCIS CHIA NYUK TONG (Sabah).

TUAN S. FAZUL RAHMAN, A.D.K.

(Sabah).

1401 22 JUNE 1967 1402 The Honourable DATU GANIE GILONG, P.D.K., J.P.
(Sabah)., TUAN GANING BIN JANGKAT (Sabah).

TUAN HAJI HAMZAH BIN ALANG, A.M.N., P.J.K.

(Kapar).

TUAN HANAFIAH BIN HUSSAIN, A.M.N.

(Jerai).

TUN DR ISMAIL BIN DATO' HAJI ABDUL RAHMAN, S.S.M., P.M.N.

(Johor Timor).

TAN SRI SYED JA'AFAR BIN HASAN ALBAR, P.M.N.

(Johor Tenggara).

TUAN AMADEUS MATHEW LEONG, A.D.K., J.P. (Sabah).

DATO' LING BENG SIEW, P.N.B.S.

(Sarawak).

DR LIM CHONG EU (Tanjong).

TUAN LIM KEAN SIEW (Dato Kramat).

TUAN PETER LO SU YIN (Sabah).


DR MAHATHIR BIN MOHAMAD (Kota Star Selatan).

TUAN C. JOHN ONDU MAJAKIL (Sabah).

TUAN JOSEPH DAVID MANJAJI (Sabah).

DATO' DR HAJI MEGAT KHAS, D.P.M.P., J.P., P J .

K. (Kuala Kangsar).

TUAN MOHD.

ARIF SALLEH, A.D.K.

(Sabah).

DATO' HAJI MOHAMED ASRI BIN HAJI MUDA, S.P.M.K.

(Pasir Puteh).

ORANG TUA MOHAMMAD DARA BIN LANGPAD (Sabah).

TUN DATU MUSTAPHA BIN DATU HARUN, S.M.N., P.D.K.

(Sabah).

TUAN OTHMAN BIN ABDULLAH, A.M.N.

(Perlis Utara).


TUAN D. R. SEENIVASAGAM (Ipoh).

DATO' S. P. SEENIVASAGAM, D.P.M.P., P.M.P., J.P. (Menglembu).

PENGIRAN TAHIR PETRA (Sabah).

TUAN TAN KEE GAK (Bandar Melaka).

TUAN YEH PAO TZE, A.M.N.

(Sabah).

TUAN STEPHEN YONG KUET TZE (Sarawak).

P R A Y E RS (Mr Speaker in the Chair) voters so that more Malaysian citizens can participate in the political process.
O R AL A N S W E RS TO Haji Abdul Razak): Sir, under the QUESTIONS existing law, application forms can The Deputy Prime Minister (Tun only be accepted by the Elections REGISTRATION OF V O T E R S- ISSUE OF FORMS the registration Commission within period that is between the 1st of September and the 12th October, and such forms must be dated within 1.

Tuan C. V. Devan Nair (Bungsar) to state period.


The practice is, therefore, to asks the Elections Commission distribute forms within the period for whether would furnish political parties with some time a week before the corn- application forms for the registration mencement of the period.
However, of voters any time of the year to assist the Election Commission is prepared in future to furnish political parties the Elections Commission to register the Prime Minister 1403 22 JUNE 1967 1404 with forms for registration of voters a month before the commencement of the revision period on request.

the furnishing of Now, there are several reasons why the Election Commission does not encourage forms earlier than one month.
The first is to prevent confusion to would-be voters, who might be approached by more than one political party.

This in turn may lead to duplication of registration.

The second reason is that applicants, who have filled the forms too early, may move to a new residence just before the commencement of the registration period.

This will make the filling of form null and void and the applicant incapable of registration.
Tuan C. V. Devan Nair: The first ground given by the Honourable Deputy Prime Minister does not seem to me to be too valid.

Would the Honourable Minister agree that more than one political party could approach persons for registration, even if it is the one month period?

The after argument would hold good for any time.


Tun Haji Abdul Razak: Sir, it is true, but the longer the period given the more confusion there will be because, by doing so, much opportunities will be given to more than one political party to approach the voters.

if the Prime Minister Dr Tan Chee Khoon: Mr Speaker, Sir, is the Honourable Deputy Prime that Minister aware of this question I have asked and that the answer has been given?
The question that I have asked for written reply is this: "To ask the Election Commission has considered my proposal made in the last Budget Session of the House that the Electoral Register be kept open all the year round, so that anyone, who is qualified to be placed on the Electoral Roll may register himself any time of the year, and to state if the Election Commission agrees to this proposal, when it will be implemented".
The written reply given by the Honourable the Prime Minister is: "The Election Commission is still in the process of studying the proposal to introduce the system of automatic registration of electors in this country.

its The Commission will proposal to Government, when it is ready".

submit Tun Haji Abdul Razak: That has already replied to the question.

Tuan Mohd.
Tuan Mohd.

Daud bin Abdul Samad (Besut): Mengikut tahun yang sudah, sa-sudah buku daftar pengundi itu di-semak dan di-kaji, maka buku daftar pengundi itu di-beri kapada tiap2 parti politik bagi tiap2 kawasan dan ini telah di-lakukan.

Tetapi, apa yang tahu pada masa dahulu saya buku2 daftar pengundi itu di-jual kapada mana2 parti politik atau pun orang ramai, tetapi pada tahun ini sa- panjang yang saya tahu tidak di-jual— apa-kah sebab-nya?

ingin Tun Haji Abdul Razak: Tuan Yang di-Pertua, ini soalan lain.
in in effect, the past, where Dr Tan Chee Khoon: Mr Speaker, Sir, is the Honourable Deputy Prime Minister aware that the practice that has been the Election Commission sets apart only one month for registration is a farce— that, the people who are designated to register new voters, or voters who have changed their resi dences, they do precious little work at all?

In fact, they spend most of their time in coffee shops.
The reason is not because they are lazy, or they do not want to work, the reason is that when they go to the homes concerned, the people who have changed their resi dences, who have not been on the register, are away at work.

The head of the family is not at home.

Conse quently, given is absolute waste of time on the part of the Election Commission.
Whereas, if the Electoral Register were open all the year round, those of us, whether in the Alliance Party, or on this side of the House, can go to the would-be voters during the times that they are at home and register them, and that would be far more effective and will not cost the taxpayers any money.
this one month then 1405 22 JUNE 1967 Tun Haji Abdul Razak: The Honour able Member had already expressed his views on this before, and the matter, as explained, is being looked into by the Election Commission and that the Commission is still studying the pro their recom posal and will submit mendations to Government soon.

WITHDRAWAL OF BRITISH TROOPS FROM MALAYSIA 2.


Dr Tan Chee Khoon asks the Minis ter of Defence for details of his talks with Mr Denis Healey on the pull-out of British troops from Malaysia.

Tun Haji Abdul Razak: Sir, the British Secretary of State for Defence came here to consult us on the pro posal of the British Government to run down their forces in the Far East.

Their plans have not yet been finalised.

It is, therefore, not proper to explain the details of the talk at this stage.
that Dr Tan Chee Khoon: Mr Speaker, the Sir, while I do appreciate British have not come to a final decision as to their defence policy East of Suez, is the Honourable Minister for Defence aware that we should not place too friends, reliance on so-called much because the so-called friends may well turn out to be effect as the Soviet Union has proved to the Arab nations in the recent Middle East crisis.

The Soviet Union virtually did not lift a finger from the Israelis bashing up the Arab nations.
The question I wish to ask the Honourable Minister of Defence is that we should in effect do away with defence pact which only draws antagonism towards us to prevent Mr Speaker: May I point out that a supplementary question should be in the form of a question and not a statement of facts.
Dr Tan Chee Khoon: The question which I wish to pose to the Honourable Minister of Defence is that we should rely more on our own forces Mr Speaker: You said that you wish to pose a question, but you said that "we should rely on the question?

1406 "—where is Dr Tan Chee Khoon: That has very much to do with the question I have asked.

The question that I have asked is on the pull-out of British troops.

Mr Speaker: You wish to ask a supplementary question now.
Please ask your supplementary question in the form of a question.

Dr Tan Chee Khoon: Yes, Mr Speaker, Sir.

The question that I wish to ask the Honourable Minister of Defence is, does he not realise that we should depend less on British troops, or any other troops and do away with defence pacts, but depend on our resources look after our own defence in a sea of friendly countries?

Thailand, Philippines, Indonesia, all are friendly countries.
to Tun Haji Abdul Razak: Sir, as I have stated in this House many times that we are depending on our forces as much as possible, but we are a small nation and with our limited financial resources, obviously, we are not in a position to have sufficient forces to defend ourselves against external aggression.

That is why we need friends to help us in the event of our being attacked by forces on our side.
It is clear that our policy is to be friends with all countries, and it is a matter of opinion as to which countries are sincere with us or which countries are not.

As far as we are concerned, we have a defence treaty with the United Kingdom, associated by Australia and New Zealand, and it is the intention of this Government to continue with this defence treaty.

RA'AYAT BUKAN WARGA- NEGARA MALAYSIA DI- ANTARA PENUNJOK2 PE lhb MEI RASAAN PADA (HARI BUROH) 3.
Tuan Ramli bin Omar (Krian Darat) bertanya kapada Menteri Hal Ehwal Dalam Negeri sama ada ra'ayat bukan warganegara Malaysia ada-lah di-antara penunjok2 perasaan yang telah 1407 22 JUNE 1967 1408 di-tahan pada lhb Mei, 1967 (Hari Buroh) dan jika ya, ada-kah tindakan yang akan di-ambil oleh Kerajaan.

The Minister of Lands and Mines (Tuan Haji Abdul-Rahman bin Ya'kub): Tuan Yang di-Pertua, tidak ada.

Tuan Ramli bin Omar: Tuan Yang di-Pertua, tiap2 lhb Mei nampak-nya ada rusohan berlaku.
Ada-kah Kera jaan berchadang hendak mengharam- kan perarakan atau perjumpaan lhb Mei ini pada masa yang akan datang untok mengelakkan kejadian yang tidak di-ingini dan siapa-kah yang akan bertanggong-jawab?

Tuan Haji Abdul-Rahman bin Ya'kub: Tiap2 perarakan menurut undang2 kita hendak-lah mendapat tidak mendapat jika kebenaran dan ada-lah di-sisi Undang2 kebenaran perarakan-nya haram.

Jadi, tidak perlu Kerajaan mengishtiharkan semua pera rakan itu haram dengan membuat undang2 yang baru.
Tuan Mustapha bin Ahmad (Tanah Merah): Tuan Yang di-Pertua, di- antara perarakan haram yang di- lakukan itu daripada jawapan Menteri itu dapat-lah kita fahamkan seluroh- nya ada-lah warganegara Malaysia.

Daripada jenis kaum mana-kah yang terbanyak mengikut perarakan itu?

Abdul-Rahman Tuan Haji bin Ya'kub: Jikalau Ahli Yang Berhormat itu bacha surat khabar tentu sa-kali soalan tambahan ini tidak timbul.

Jadi saya nasihatkan dia bacha balek surat khabar.


MENGELUARKAN KAD2 PE- NGENALAN MALAYSIA BAGI RA'AYAT2 SINGAPURA YANG BERMAUSTAUTIN DI-MALAY- SIA 4.
Tuan Ramli bin Omar bertanya kapada Menteri Hal Ehwal Dalam Negeri sama ada beliau sedar bahawa ra'ayat2 Singapura yang ada telah bermaustautin di-Malaysia untok bebe- rapa tahun telah di-tolak permohonan mereka untok mendapat kad2 penge- telah di-suroh nalan Malaysia dan juga kembali ka-Singapura pula, di-mana permohonan mereka telah di- telah tolak dengan alasan mereka menetap di-Malaysia; jika sedar, tidak- kah patut Kerajaan menimbangkan permohonan mereka untok mendapat- kan kad2 pengenalan Malaysia.
Tuan Yang pulang Tuan Haji Abdul-Rahman bin Ya'kub: di-Pertua, Undang2 kita, ya'ani Undang2 Pendaf- taran Negara tahun 1960, meng'itiraf- kan kad2 pengenalan Singapura, dan dengan hal yang demikian tidak-lah timbul keperluan untok Kerajaan kita mengeluarkan kad2 pengenalan Malay sia pada orang2 Singapura yang tinggal di-Negeri2 Malaysia Barat.
Di-masa akhir2 ini Kerajaan Singapura mula mengeluarkan kad2 pengenalan plastik dan mengishtiharkan bahawa kad2 pengenalan dahulu-nya tidak lagi sah di-sisi Undang2 bermulaan daripada lhb February, 1967.

Walau bagaimana pun, di-ishtiharkan juga bahawa orang2 Singapura yang tinggal di-luar negeri boleh menukarkan kad2 pengenalan mereka pada bila2 masa sahaja apabila mereka dan tidak-lah ada had masa di-tentukan untok mereka membuat demikian.
Pengishtiharan dasar Kerajaan Singa sa-jajar dengan pura kehendak2 Undang2 negeri ini yang telah saya nyatakan tadi yang hanya meng'itirafkan kad2 pengenalan Singa pura yang sah.

Dengan itu berarti bahawa jikalau orang2 Singapura yang tinggal di-negeri2 di-Malaysia Barat tidak mengambil pengenalan Singapura yang baharu dan sah itu, mereka boleh di-tangkap dan di-bawa di-mahkamah kerana tidak mempunyai kad2 pengenalan yang sah.
Saya tidak- lah sedar ada-nya satu2 keputusan oleh Kerajaan Singapura menolak penge- luaran kad2 pengenalan baharu kapada orang2 Singapura yang tinggal di- negeri2 Malaysia Barat sa-bagai meng- gantikan kad2 pengenalan Singapura yang dahulu itu.

ka-Singapura, tidak-lah kad2 ini Tuan Ramli bin Omar: Tuan Yang di-Pertua, mengikut keterangan surat khabar hari ini, kalau tak salah saya, orang2 yang demikian ini hanya akan di-beri kad pengenalan merah.
Apa- kah hal-nya pula kira-nya pemegang 1409 22 JUNE 1967 1410 kad pengenalan Singapura yang telah tinggal dengan ta'at setia di-Malaysia sa-lama lebeh daripada tahun ada-kah mereka akan di-beri kad2 pengenalan yang biru?

lapan itu Tuan Haji Abdul-Rahman bin Ya'kub: Sa-bagaimana yang saya nya- tadi, Tuan Yang di-Pertua, takan masaalah penukaran kad tidak timbul oleh kerana kita menganggap kad itu sa-bagai kad yang sah.
Ada persetujuan di-antara kedua negara ini semenjak sa-belum Malaysia di-tuboh- kan, kemudian ada-nya Malaysia, kemudian sekarang Singapura tiga lagi dalam Malaysia.

Bagaimana pun, ia-itu timbul telah keadaan yang dengan ada-nya perishtiharan yang baharu oleh Kerajaan Singapura meng- gantikan kad yang lama itu, perundi- ngan sedang di-jalankan untok meng- haluskan apa sahaja kerumitan yang timbul di-dalam masaalah yang saperti ini.
Dr Tan Chee Khoon: Mr Speaker, Sir, I am very glad that the Honourable Minister of Justice has said that there is a meeting between officials of both countries to sort out this problem.
Is the Honourable Minister of Justice aware that there are many citizens of Singapore, who hold Singapore identity cards, who stupidly have not renewed their identity cards but who have lived all along in West Malaysia; some of them are born in West Malaysia and during election time they have gone there to work and then come back and renewing then their if Singapore refuses to change their old identity cards, and that the old identity cards are not recognised in this country, virtually these people, some of whom or rather many of whom are born in this country, virtually become stateless persons.
Can the Honourable Minister give an assurance to this House that these people who have been very stupid in not changing their cards in time, their cases would be considered sym pathetically, if they apply for a red identity card in this country to start with?

cards.
cards.

Therefore, totally identity forgot about Tuan Haji Abdul-Rahman bin Ya'kub: Mr Speaker, Sir, as I have said to the replace just now, Government is not aware of any decision by the Singapore Govern ment, Singapore authority, to refuse to issue new Singapore identity cards to Singaporeans old Singapore identity cards in respect of citizens of Singapore residing in West Malaysia.

If such a case does crop up, I am sure that both Governments will find a solution to the problem.
It is not just the problem for the Govern the ment of Malaysia, but also for Government of Singapore.

We may also have cases, where citizens of Malaysia, residing for a long time in Singapore and wanting to reside there some problem permanently, having with regard to this question of renewal of identity cards.

But so far we have not come across such problem.


If specific case, where there citizens have met with Singapore hardship as mentioned by the Honour able Member for Batu, and also the Honourable Member from the State of just now, we would be very Perak full if he could give us grateful, information, so that we could take up the case with the authorities concerned.

is any Dr Tan Chee Khoon: Sir, I do not know what the Honourable Minister of Justice means by a citizen of Singapore.
I have only two days ago met a person born in this country holding an old identity card from Singapore.

Now, if he goes to Singapore now, he will be arrested; so he has gone to the Singa pore High Commission, and he has been that his card cannot be changed by the High Commission, or by the Singapore Government.
If that is so, and I believe that is the case, because he came to see me to find some solution to it, will the Govern ment consider his case favourably, when he applies to the Registrar of Citizens in this country for an issue of a red identity card to start with?
told Tuan Haji Abdul-Rahman bin Ya'kub: I have not a definite answer to that problem, Mr Speaker, Sir, but I would be very grateful, if he would, during recess time, give me the full facts of this case and I will look into this matter immediately.

1411 22 JUNE 1967 1412 FORMATION OF UNION FOR F.L.D.A.

EMPLOYEES 5.

Tuan C. V. Devan Nair (Bungsar) asks the Minister of National and Rural Development to state: (i) whether there had been any past effort to form a union for F.L.D.A.
employees; (ii) if so, the result of such past efforts; and the Government en (iii) whether courages formation of a the union for F.L.D.A.

employees.

Menteri Muda Pembangunan Negara dan Luar Bandar (Tuan Sulaiman bin Bulon): Tuan Yang di-Pertua, yang di- ketahui' tidak ada pehak Lembaga ini menerima sa-barang permohonan bagi menubohkan kesatuan daripada kaki- itu sendiri dengan tangan Lembaga rasmi-nya: (i) Hal ini tidak berbangkit, dan (ii) Ada-lah soal itu soal mereka itu sendiri.
Tuan C. V. Devan Nair: Would the Honourable Minister give a categorical assurance that the Government would not place any obstacles in the way, if employees of the F.L.D.A.

decided to form a union?

Tuan Sulaiman bin Bulon: Tuan Yang di-Pertua, itu ada-lah hak kaki- tangan Lembaga itu sendiri dan jika ada kita akan timbangkan.

Tuan C. V. Devan Nair: Sir, it is not a question of just "akan timbang kan".
What I wanted was a categorical assurance that the Government would not place any obstacles in the way of such a union being registered.

Tuan Sulaiman bin Bulon: Tuan itu belum Yang di-Pertua, perkara sampai kapada kita dan kita tidak tahu; dan kalau ada patut-lah kita timbangkan.

Dr Tan Chee Khoon: Tuan Yang di- Pertua, barangkali wakil dari Bungsar hendak bertanya bukan jawapan akan timbangkan akan menolong pekerja2 F.L.D.A.

untok menubohkan persatuan tersebut.


tetapi Tuan Sulaiman bin Bulon: Perkara ini tidak berbangkit, Tuan Yang di- Pertua.

to know is, whether Tuan C. V. Devan Nair: Sir, what we want the Government, not whether the Govern ment would consider and so on, but whether the Government would give a categorical assurance that if employees of the F.L.D.A.

decide to form a union that would be welcome.

No obstacles would be placed in the way.

Tuan Sulaiman bin Bulon: Baik-lah kita akan .

.


.. Mr Speaker: (Ketawa).

timbangkan The Minister of Labour (Tuan V. Manickavasagam): Mr Speaker Sir.

When an application for such a forma tion is asked for, Government would consider the request.

From past expe riences is aware that Government and statutory if an bodies have had unions, and application is received, we would give it due consideration.

the Honourable Member BILANGAN GURU YANG SEDANG DI-LATEH DALAM SAINS, ILMU HISAB TEKNIK, RUMAH TANGGA 6.
Tuan Hussein bin Sulaiman ber tanya kapada Menteri Pelajaran berapa bilangan guru, mengikut kaum dan bahasa penghantar, yang sedang di- lateh dalam jurusan (a) Sains, Ilmu Hisab; (b) Teknik; (c) Sains Pertanian; dan (d) Sains Urusan Rumah-tangga.

Menteri Muda Pelajaran (Tuan Lee Siok Yew): Tuan Yang di-Pertua, Tuan, dukachita saya tidak dapat mem- beri jawapan kapada soalan ini, oleh dasar Kerajaan kerana jawapan mengemukakan mengikut kaum atau bangsa.
bukan-lah sa-barang Tuan Haji Ahmad bin Abdullah: Tuan Yang di-Pertua, boleh-kah di- fahamkan bahawasa pehak Kerajaan tidak mahu memberi jawapan di-atas soalan yang ke-enam ini dengan alasan bahawasa ini ber- sangkut paut dengan soal perkauman?

Ada-kah ini satu helah daripada pehak kerana soalan 1413 22 JUNE 1967 1414 Kerajaan untok menyembunyikan per- kara yang benar?

Tuan Lee Siok Yew: Tuan Yang di- Pertua, tidak (Ketawa).

PERKHIDMATAN GURU SUKA RELA SEBERANG LAUT DI- SEKOLAH2 RENDAH 7.
Tuan Hussein bin Sulaiman bertanya kapada Menteri Pelajaran jika Keinen- terian ini akan menimbang mengirim guru2 Perkhidmatan Sukarela Seberang Laut ka-Sekolah2 Rendah.

Tuan Lee Siok Yew: Tuan Yang di- Pertua, dukachita-nya bahawa Kemen- terian saya tidak dapat menempatkan guru2 laut ka- sekolah2 rendah oleh kerana perkhid matan mereka ada-lah lebeh di-perlukan dengan segera di-sekolah2 menengah.
seberang sukarela CHALUN2 YANG DI-PILEH MASOK KA-MAKTAB PER- GURUAN PERSEKUTUAN DAN MAKTAB LATEHAN DAERAH—BILANGAN 8.

Tuan Hussein bin Sulaiman minta kapada Menteri Pelajaran sebutkan angka2, menurut kaum dan kursus, mengenai chalun2 yang di-pileh masok ka-Maktab2 Perguruan Persekutuan / Maktab Latehan Daerah bagi tahun 1967.
Tuan Lee Siok Yew: Tuan Yang di- Pertua, dukachita saya tidak dapat memberi jawapan kapada soalan ini, oleh kerana bukan-lah dasar Kerajaan mengemukakan jawapan mengikut kaum atau bangsa yang saya telah jawab pada soalan yang keenam.

sa-barang Tuan Hussein bin Sulaiman: Boleh- kah Menteri Yang Berhormat berjanji memberi jawapan ini dengan bertulis kapada saya sendiri?

Tuan Lee Siok Yew: Tuan Yang di- Pertua, dukachita saya tidak boleh jawab dengan bertulis kapada Yang Berhormat dalam perkara itu.
Tuan Mustapha bin Ahmad (Tanah Merah): Jawapan daripada Yang Ber hormat Menteri Muda Pelajaran kerana alasan memberi angka antara kaum2 negeri ini ada-lah satu perkara yang bertentangan dengan dasar Perikatan hari ini, maka sa-jauh mana-kah pehak Kerajaan Perikatan akan mempertahan- kan tidak akan memberi tahu angka2 saperti ini di-masa2 yang akan datang, dan yang kedua pula apa-kah sudah merupakan satu perkauman sa-kadar angka untok di-beri tahu kapada kami sa-bagai Wakil Ra'ayat dan kami ber- segala2-nya hak untok mengetahui dalam negeri dan apa-kah sudah me- nimbulkan satu huru-hara yang akan melibatkan sa-suatu yang menimbulkan pertumpahan angka darah saperti itu sahaja, dan tidak-kah sa- balek-nya, Tuan Yang di-Pertua, pula dengan sebab angka yang di-simpan sa-chara yang bagitu kemas akan me nimbulkan satu suspect maka perkara ini tidak akan menimbul lebeh berat lagi daripada apa yang kita beri tahu?
Sebab itu saya mahu tahu daripada pehak Menteri Muda jawapan yang sa- benar-nya dengan masaalah ini?

kerana Tuan Lee Siok Yew: Tuan Yang di- Pertua, berpehak dasar Perikatan bukan satu kaum sahaja, akan tetapi semua kaum masing2 di-dalam Malay sia.

Dasar itu ia-lah sa-bagai warga- negara Malaysia ia-lah sama-lah itu anak kita.

Jadi tidak membangkitkan salah fahaman satu kaum dengan satu kaum yang lain.

Ini-lah dasar Kera jaan Perikatan.


Tuan Mustapha bin Ahmad: Pehak di-sini pun dan pehak saya pun me- nanyakan masaalah itu bukan-lah saya.

menganggap satu dengan yang lain itu ada-lah tidak warganegara dan satu yang lain itu ada-lah lebeh melebehi di-dalam kelas kewarganegaraan-nya.

Tetapi, apa salah-nya pula sa-kira-nya kami berhati lapang saperti hati dari pada Menteri Muda itu juga untok memikirkan masaalah itu jika mereka tahu kapada memberi perkara kami?
itu Mr Speaker: Itu ada terkandong dalam atoran dan peratoran Majlis ini.

Jika di-kedai kopi Meshuarat boleh-lah berchakap, bertanya2 bagitu (Ketawa), Jika di-sini apa yang tak boleh itu, tak boleh-lah.

Apa yang di- hadkan, di-hadkan sahaja (Ketawa).

Tuan Mustapha bin Ahmad: Tuan Yang di-Pertua, apa-kah bagitu tidak 1415 22 JUNE 1967 1416 betul pertanyaan saya itu untok menge- tahui dalam masaalah itu?

Mr Speaker: Sudah keluar daripada ini.

Saya tadi sudah patut saya tegah.


Tuan Mustapha bin Ahmad: Tuan Yang di-Pertua, saya fikir tidak jauh, kerana angka yang tidak dapat di- beri, bukan saya hendak lawan Tuan Yang di-Pertua, itu sahaja tetapi sa-kadar Mr Speaker: Jika hendak lawan pun tak patut-lah saya orang tua (Ketawa).

BILANGAN KEMATIAN ANAK2 ORANG MELAYU YANG BER UMOR 5 TAHUN KA-BAWAH DAN TINDAKAN KESIHATAN UNTOK MENGURANGKAN KE MATIAN ITU 9.
Tuan Haji Abu Bakar bin Hamzah bertanya kapada Menteri Kesihatan, ada-kah benar bahawa anak2 orang Melayu yang berumor 5 tahun ka- bawah (belum masok sekolah) mati kira2 tidak kurang dari 29,000 orang tiap2 tahun berikutan dengan penubo- han Malaysia pada hal anak2 bukan Melayu di-Malaysia ini yang sama lengkongan umor-nya mati kira2 tidak tahun.
lebeh dari 8,000 sahaja Jika ya, maka: tiap2 (a) apa-kah sebab2 besar bagi ke- jadian itu; dan (b) apa-kah tindakan kesihatan yang di-buat untok mengurangkan ke matian.

Jumlah Setia-usaha Parlimen kapada Men (Tuan Ibrahim bin teri Kesihatan Abdul Rahman): bilangan kematian kanak2 Melayu berumor 5 tahun ka-bawah tidak pernah mening- kat ka-angka 29,000 dalam mana2 tahun semenjak penubohan Malaysia sa-bagaimana yang di-katakan oleh Ahli Yang Berhormat dari Bachok itu.
Jumlah kematian yang di-daftar dalam lengkongan umor ini bagi tahun 1963 hingga 1965 ada-lah saperti berikut: Tahun 1963—jumlah kematian dalam 5 lengkongan tahun ka-bawah ia-lah 25,519.

Jumlah kema sahaia tian Melayu 15,178. umor Tahun 1964—jumlah kematian semua bangsa 21,386 dan jum lah kematian Melayu sahaja 12,329.

Tahun 1965—bilangan semua bangsa 21,204 jumlah dan Melayu sahaja 14,258.
Perbedzaan ini ada-lah khas-nya di- sebabkan kebanyakan orang2 Melayu tinggal di-kawasan2 luar bandar di- mana perkhidmatan perubatan dan ada-lah di-dapati maseh kesihatan kekurangan.

kesihatan Sa-lain daripada itu, di-kawasan2 luar bandar juga ada-lah kekurangan dalam beberapa kemudahan yang men- jadi asas kesihatan mereka, saperti mengadakan bekalan ayer yang baik dan tandas.
Dengan penoh kesedaran di-atas serba kekurangan ini, maka Kerajaan telah pun memberi keutamaan ranchangan pembangunan-nya dalam untok luar ranchangan bandar, sa-bagaimana yang dapat kita lihat pada hari ini.

beberapa pusat2 kesihatan dan kelinik2 bertaboran di- tanah ayer.

Ahli Yang Ber seluroh hormat tentu bersetuju dengan saya, ia-itu serba kekurangan yang lalu itu mungkin tidak dapat di-perbaiki dalam tempoh satu malam, kerana kita tidak ada lampu tongkat sakti atau pun ajaib.
Ranchangan2 kita bergantong kapada kewangan dan terpaksa di-buat sesuai untok di-terima oleh ra'ayat.

Ada-lah akan mengambil masa untok menukar chara hidup dan tabi'at pen- dudok2 luar bandar supaya ranchangan yang di-buat itu akan dapat memberi kesan yang penoh kapada mereka.
kebersehan Untok mengawasi dan menjayakan ranchangan ini maka bahagian pela- jaran kesihatan telah pun di-tubohkan, dan satu jawatan-kuasa bersama ke sihatan sekolah telah pun di-lanchar- kan di-antara Kementerian Pelajaran dan Kementerian Kesihatan.

Alat perojek di- kampong2 di-sabelas telah berjalan daerah di-seluroh Malaysia Barat di- mana gerakan ganyang chaching di- lancharkan untok semua kanak2 sekolah rendah di-dalam kawasan2 itu sa-belum akhir tahun ini.
Sa-lain daripada itu ranchangan menghapuskan malaria ke- selurohan-nya akan di-lancharkan pada bulan Julai tahun 1967. sekeliling 1417 22 JUNE 1967 1418 Tuan Mustapha bin Ahmad: Tuan Yang di-Pertua, boleh-kah pehak Yang Berhormat, Setia-usaha Parlimen ka- pada Menteri Kesihatan ini memberi jaminan dalam Dewan ini pada masa2 yang akan datang angka di-antara orang2 Melayu dengan bukan orang Melayu tidak boleh di-sebutkan saperti mana yang di-kehendaki oleh Menteri Muda Pelajaran tadi, kerana itu ber- tentangan dengan dasar Kerajaan?
Tuan Ibrahim bin Abdul Rahman: Itu soal lain, Tuan Yang di-Pertua.

Tuan Haji Ahmad bin Abdullah: Soalan tambahan, Tuan Yang di-Pertua, langkah2 yang istimewa kenapa-kah daripada pehak Kementerian Kesihatan baru sahaja hendak di-ambil untok memperbaiki kesihatan2 orang2 di-luar bandar, kerana apa-kah perkara ini tidak di-jalankan pada Ranchangan Lima Tahun Yang Pertama dan Ran changan Lima Tahun Yang Kedua dan di-biar bagitu sahaja sa-hingga sampai sekarang baru tindakan akan di-ambil?
Tuan Ibrahim bin Abdul Rahman: Tuan Yang di-Pertua, pada tahun 1960 kita hanya ada 8 buah Pusat Kesihatan Besar, 8 buah Pusat Kesihatan Kechil dan 26 Kelinik Bidan.

Tetapi pada tahun 1966 kita ada 39 buah Pusat Kesihatan Besar, 135 Pusat Kesihatan Kechil dan 664 Kelinik Bidan pada tahun 1966 (Tepok).

Tuan Ramli bin Omar: Tuan Yang itu ke- di-Pertua, ada-kah kematian salahan Kerajaan Perikatan, saperti yang di-tudoh oleh Ahli Yang Berhor mat di-sana?
Tuan Haji Ahmad bin Abdullah: telah Tuan Yang di-Pertua, ada-lah menjadi satu keterangan yang jelas bagi pehak Kementerian Kesihatan, bahawasa-nya penyakit yang mem- bunoh ra'ayat jelata yang besar sa-kali di-dalam daerah kawasan luar bandar ia-lah penyakit tidak di-ambil dalam Ranchangan Lima Tahun Yang Per tama dan Lima Tahun Yang Kedua?
Tuan Ibrahim bin Abdul Rahman: Tuan Yang di-Pertua, ranchangan menghapuskan malaria ini akan meng- ambil masa yang panjang, tetapi sa- belum ranchangan ini di-buat, satu Jawatan-kuasa Bertindak telah pun di- itu kita tubohkan.

Tetapi, sa-belum telah mula dengan Malaria Eradication Pilot Project pada tahun 1960, ia-itu membuat banchi, statistics—mengana- tempat2 yang ada malaria sa- lisa hingga tahun 1964.

Sebab itu-lah kita dapati yang 67.4 peratus pendudok2 luar bandar itu mengidap penyakit malaria.
Dalam masa tiga tahun yang sudah (tahun 1964 hingga 1966) kita telah menjalankan Pre-eradication Pro gramme, sa-bagai permulaan.

Dan pada tahun 1967 bulan Julai ini akan di- adakan satu ranchangan menghapuskan sama sa-kali malaria dalam Malaysia ini, ia-itu Malaria Eradication Barat Programme.

telah membelanjakan Tuan Haji Ahmad bin Abdullah: Tuan Yang di-Pertua, soalan tambahan.
Kita maseh ingat lagi di-dalam per- sidangan Parlimen ini di-dalam bulan satu yang lepas, bahawa sa-nya Kera jaan juta ringgit untok menghapuskan dan men- kawasan chegah malaria bandar, tetapi chuma 10 peratus dari pada wang yang tersebut itu sahaja yang di-gunakan dalam kawasan2 luar bandar, kenapa?
di-dalam lima Tuan Ibrahim bin Abdul Rahman: Tuan Yang di-Pertua, masaalah ini ia- lah masaalah teknik, atau perkara detail, tetapi sa-belum kita menghapus kan malaria, atau wabak satu2 penyakit di-satu2 kawasan, terpaksa-lah kita menjalankan daripada luar ka-dalam, atau pun daripada dalam ka-luar.

luar bandar, Berbanding kedudokan dengan bandar, maka ada-lah lebeh mudah menjaga bandar dahulu; sa- lepas itu baharu-lah kita mula—dari pada dalam ka-luar.
Jadi, tidak-lah bijak daripada luar ka-dalam—from outside inwards.

Ini-lah yang kita telah pun buat—from within outwards, ia-itu daripada bandar.

Sekarang baharu-lah kita mulai masok ka-luar bandar untok menghapuskan itu kerana semua penyakit malaria bandar2 telah pun berseh daripada malaria.
ka-luar bandar Tuan Haji Abu Bakar bin Hamzah: Tuan Yang di-Pertua, soalan tambahan, kalau-lah sebab2 yang menyebabkan 1419 22 JUNE 1967 1420 kematian, sa-bagaimana yang di-kata- kan oleh Yang Berhormat tadi, maka dapat-kah saya ketahui berapa buah- kah agak-nya akan di-buat kelinik2 kesihatan di-dalam kawasan luar ban dar pada tahun 1967 ini berbanding dengan hanya satu kelinik sahaja pada tahun 1966.

Jadi, ada-kah hendak di- buat lebeh dua-kah, atau pun hendak satu juga-kah pada tahun 1967 ini?
The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Health (Tuan Ibrahim bin Abdul Rahman): Mr Speaker, Sir, with regard to the danger of plague and malaria, as far as we know, they have been either innoculated or under active treatment.

Venereal disease is an occupational hazard to servicemen, and this is not confined to American service men only.
Tuan Ibrahim bin Abdul Rahman: Tuan Yang di-Pertua, dalam Ran- changan Malaysia Yang Pertama ini, saya suka bagi tahu, ia-itu 60 buah Pusat Kesihatan Kechil akan di-bena dan 45 buah Kelinik Bidan akan di- bena dalam Ranchangan Malaysia Yang Pertama ini.

Tuan Haji Abu Bakar bin Hamzah: Tuan Yang di-Pertua, saya bertanya yang lain—saya bertanya kelinik yang untok di-luar bandar itu sahaja—yang khas, tidak-lah Ranchangan Malaysia yang luas itu yang boleh jadi kita pun sudah ta' ada dalam Dewan ini.
Dalam tahun 1966, kelinik bagi rural areas— satu sahaja kelinik yang di-buat, jadi pada tahun 1967 berapa buah yang hendak di-buat dalam ranchangan luar bandar?

Tuan Ibrahim bin Abdul Rahman: Tuan Yang di-Pertua, itu perkara detail, saya ta' dapat-lah hendak mem- tahun beritahu berapa buah dalam tahun 1966 dan berapa buah dalam 1967, dan di-mana, kerana saya tidak menyediakan kertas itu di-sini.

Kalau Ahli Yang Berhormat itu hendak tahu boleh-lah berjumpa dengan saya dan saya boleh beritahu.
ENTRY OF AMERICAN SER VICEMEN INTO MALAYSIA- SPREAD OF DISEASES 10.

Dr Tan Chee Khoon asks the Minister of Health if he is aware of the threat of disease posed by the entry of American Servicemen for their Rest and Rehabilitation Scheme into Malay sia, and the danger of plague, malaria and venereal disease being spread by the American Servicemen; if so, the steps to check the spread of these diseases by American Servicemen.
the Government has taken Dr Tan Chee Khoon: Mr Speaker, Sir, I am very glad for this very eluci dative and short reply from the Parlia mentary Secretary.

I do not know whether he, or his Ministry officials, are aware of the dangers.

I will take them one by one.

The first one is plague.

"Not enough action taken against rats, the danger of plague", says W.H.O.
Can the Honourable Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Health tell us, in addition to their being innoculated, whether these certi ficates will be very carefully looked into by our health authorities?

Second ly, it is well known that plague is spread by rats.

Perhaps these chaps might have been innoculated but they might have been in contact, during their sleep in camps, with rats and come here, touch somebody else and then we may well have plague.
Thank God, there has been no plague in this country so far, but it might well arise as a result of this Rest and Rehabilita tion or Recreation Scheme for the Americans.

Tuan Ibrahim bin Abdul Rahman: Mr Speaker, Sir, I think the Honourable Member is aware that we are free from plague for umpteen years, and it is known that every serviceman is immu nised not only against plague but several other infectious diseases as well.
Aircraft coming from Vietnam, civilian or military, have their aircraft dis-insectisized before arrival at Malay sian international airports.

This is an adequate anti-flea measure, and the local Airport Authorities also maintain the airport areas free of rats.

Dr Tan Chee Khoon: Mr Speaker, Sir, arising from the statement by the Honourable Parliamentary Secretary who has talked about aircraft, what these the personal effects of about 1421 22 JUNE 1967 1422 servicemen?
Have they also been dis infected before they are allowed entry?

(Laughter).

Tuan Ibrahim bin Abdul Rahman: They are being disinfected in the air craft before embarking.

(Laughter).

Dr Tan Chee Khoon: Mr Speaker, Sir, now I come to the second disease that I have mentioned here—malaria.

the Honourable Parliamentary Can Secretary tell us what measures have his Ministry the American Servicemen do not spread their resistant type—I repeat, the resis tant type—of malaria.
I hope he would not give us the answer that these people have been immunised against malaria.

to see that taken Tuan Ibrahim bin Abdul Rahman: Mr Speaker, Sir, as far as the Ministry understands, they have been given routine suppressive treatment—suppres sive malaria treatment.

(Laughter).
(Laughter).

an that Dr Tan Chee Khoon: Mr Speaker, Sir, I hate to be very technical with a non-technical person, although I under stand the Honourable Parlia mentary Secretary to the Ministry of ex-Hospital Health had been Assistant.

Merely taking suppressive doses of drugs against malaria does not that malaria cannot blossom mean forth and blossom out, when these people arrive in this country.

What other steps has the Ministry taken?


Has the Ministry insisted, for example, that all servicemen coming into this country have no history of malaria?

Tuan Ibrahim bin Abdul Rahman: Mr Speaker, Sir, we receive this informa tion from the American Embassy, and I am sure those servicemen who come to Malaysia, either via Kuala Lumpur or Penang, have been examined thoroughly and fully.

So, I am sure they are free from plague, malaria and so forth.
So, we have not taken any other steps, because we have been given the assurance that they are free, that they are not carriers of diseases.

Tuan Haji Abu Bakar bin Hamzah: Tuan Yang di-Pertua, soalan tambahan.

Yang pertama, dapat-kah Dewan ini tahu daripada Ahli Yang Berhormat daripada Batu, berapa banyak-kah orang2 yang kena penyakit ini telah pergi kapada kelinik-nya, dan ada-kah Kementerian Kesihatan akan bekerja- sama dengan kelinik-nya di-Batu?
Mr Speaker: Soalan2 itu kena tanya- di-sini yang kan ka-sana, bukan (Ketawa).

Tuan Haji Abu Bakar bin Hamzah: Tuan Yang di-Pertua, soalan tambahan.

Ada-kah Kementerian Kesihatan akan bekerjasama dengan mana2 private clinic, umpama-nya kelinik Ahli Yang Berhormat daripada Batu, untok meng- ubati penyakit2 yang telah merebak di- sini?

Dan jika ya, ada-kah bersedia akan di-buat pada hari ini juga?
Tuan Ibrahim bin Abdul Rahman: Tuan Yang di-Pertua, pehak Kemen terian saya akan bekerjasama dengan semua kelinik2 private.

Dr Tan Chee Khoon: Mr Speaker, Sir, the third question that I wish to ask the Honourable Minister, is with regard to venereal diseases.

For the benefit of the Honourable Parliamentary Secretary, if I may read this statement from the Malay Mail of 1st May, 1967, which reads: "Threat of disease from Vietnam.
The harder-to-cure Vietnam's train of venereal disease may be enter ing Malaysia through the hundreds of American Servicemen visiting Kuala Lumpur and Penang from rest and recreation.

A private medical practi tioner has said few American servicemen coming here had venereal diseases".
Now, will the Honourable Parliamentary Secretary tell us what steps has the Ministry taken to see that those who suffer from venereal diseases are not allowed entry into this country because, as I have stated before, like malaria, it is a resistant form of gonococci that have been found amongst the American troops in Vietnam.
that quite a Tuan Ibrahim bin Abdul Rahman: Mr Speaker, Sir, as I have said earlier, is an occupational venereal disease hazard to American Servicemen but all service men—and we know that in the case of venereal disease, the situation is more to servicemen—not only 1423 22 JUNE 1967 1424 complicated here, because the control of this disease in this country is not adequately organised yet.

It involves, among other things, the question of control of prostitution.
to Dr Tan Chee Khoon: Mr Speaker, Sir, is the Honourable Parliamentary Secretary the Minister of Health aware that in Kuala Lumpur—and I can speak with authority of what is happening in Kuala Lumpur—there is a clinic, not mine for the information of the Member for Bachok (Laughter), which has found out that there is a marked increase of American Service men with venereal diseases attending that clinic.
Again, for the information of the said Honourable Member, is he aware that Saigon has been described as a "Vast of brothel" by none other than Senator Fulbright?

May I warn here that we in this country do not want this "fair city" of Kuala Lumpur to be turned into a vast of brothel much as we would like to see the "green backs" of the American Servicemen?

Tuan Ibrahim bin Abdul Rahman: Mr Speaker, Sir, I do feel that these servicemen get locally the (Laughter).
infection Dr Tan Chee Khoon: Mr Speaker, Sir, how does he know that the local people are the cause of these people getting venereal diseases and that it has not been brought over from Vietnam?

Has he got any medical statistics to prove that?

Mr Speaker: If the Minister does not know the answer, he might say, "No".

It is not necessary for him to answer every question whether he knows the answer or not (Laughter).
Dr Tan Chee Khoon: Mr Speaker, Sir, speaking as a medical man, can the Honourable Parliamentary Secretary substantiate that the fair ladies in this fair capital city are the cause of the spread of venereal diseases amongst the American personnel, troops, who come to this capital city?

Tuan Ibrahim bin Abdul Rahman: Sir, I dare not substantiate my state ment, but it appears to me so—that is all.

I cannot substantiate it.


Dr Tan Chee Khoon: Mr Speaker, Sir, then he should withdraw his last sentence and not cast a slur on the fair ladies of this capital city (Laughter).

Tuan Haji Abu Bakar bin Hamzah: Tuan Yang di-Pertua, soalan tambahan yang terakhir.

Berapa banyak lagi butir2 yang telah di-sebutkan oleh Setia-usaha Parlimen bagi Kementerian Kesihatan itu yang ia tidak dapat substantiate dalam jawapan tadi?

Mr Speaker: Mana dia hendak pula jawab macham itu?

(Laughter).
(Laughter).

ESTABLISHMENT OF FACTORIES SINCE IN EAST MALAYSIA FORMATION OF MALAYSIA 11.

Tuan Edmund Langgu anak Saga asks the Minister of Commerce and Industry: (a) how many factories have been established by his Ministry in the East Malaysia since the establish- of Malaysia.

(b) the nature and where each one of these factories has been estab lished.
The Minister of Commerce and Indusisy (Dr Lim Swee Aun): Mr Speaker, Sir, we believe in free enter prise, and as such my Ministry does not establish factories but allows private enterprise to establish factories.

That is the general rule.

In regard to part two of his question, the nature and location of pioneer companies which have been established are as follows: Kayar Pearl Co. Ltd for the cultiva tion of pearls at Sandakan, Sabah.

Mostyn Palm Processing Ltd, for palm oil processing at Tawau, Sabah.
Chuang Mui Food Stuff Manufac turing Co., producing canned and bottled food at 7th mile, Perrissan Road, Kuching, Sarawak.

Yee Hiap Seng Co. Ltd, producing canned and bottled food, Pending Road, Kuching, Sarawak.

Borneo Biscuit Factory for the manu facture of biscuits at Sungei Prick, Kuching, Sarawak.

1425 22 JUNE 1967 1426 Kim Hwa Co. Ltd, for making printed batek cloth, rubber foot wear, at 3rd Mile, Batu Kawa Road, Kuching, Sarawak.
Teck Heng Loong Veeners Ltd, for manufacture of veeners at Sanda- kan, Sabah.

Sin Hua Industries Ltd, for manu facturing impregnated timber and kiln dried timber at Pandungan, Kuching, Sarawak.

Sabah Wiremesh and Fencing Ltd, for the manufacture of wiremesh at Jesselton, Sabah.

Hume Sabah Ltd, for the manufacture of concrete products at Jesselton, Sabah.
North Borneo Fishing Co., for pro ducing frozen fish and prawns and shrimps at Sandakan, and Sarawak Company for the manufac turing of veener and plywood in Kuching, Sarawak.

Tuan Sim Boon Liang (Sarawak): Mr Speaker, Sir, will the Honourable Minister these factories belong to Malaysians or to foreigners?

inform us whether Dr Lim Swee Aun: Some of these belong to Malaysians, and some are joint ventures.

ENCOURAGEMENT OF LOCAL INDUSTRIES IN SARAWAK 12.


Tuan Edmund Langgu anak Saga asks the Minister of Commerce and Industry whether steps have been taken to encourage more operations of local industries in Sarawak.

Dr Lim Swee Aun: Mr Speaker, Sir, since the formation of Malaysia, my to Ministry has made every effort encourage the establishment of indus tries in Sarawak by private enterprise.
Some of the important measures taken by my Ministry are: (1) The unification of the Pioneer Industries Ordinances of Sabah and Sarawak which was then in force before Malaysia day with the pioneer legislation in Western Malaysia by the Modification and Extension Order of May, 1966.

This has improved and facilitated the consideration and approval of application for pioneer status in Sabah and Sarawak.

(2) The establishment of a Common Customs Union in March, 1966, consisting of Western and Eastern Malaysia.
This has resulted in the free movement of certain manu factured goods in Sabah and Sarawak throughout the whole of Malaysia without import duties, thus enlarging their markets.

This has made it possible for factories in Sabah and Sarawak to find new markets in Western Malaysia.

to certain existing industries in Sabah and Sarawak against competition from the more efficient manufac turers in Western Malaysia.
(3) The granting of protection Tuan Abdul Rahman bin Haji Talib: Mr Speaker, Sir, does the Minister consider that the setting up of Malaysia itself that has encouraged local industries being estab lished in Sarawak?

is one of the steps Dr Lim Swee Aun: Certainly.


Tuan Haji Abu Bakar bin Hamzah: Tuan Yang di-Pertua, ada-kah Ke- menterian Perdagangan dan Perusahaan telah membuat satu2 langkah untok mengadakan tabong amanah untok menolong perusahaan2 di-negeri Sara wak, khas-nya, saperti mana yang di- lakukan kapada Sarawak Refrigerator Advance Fund?

Dr Lim Swee Aun: Mr Speaker, Sir, I did not quite catch his point.

Shall I have it again?

Mr Speaker: Chakap orang puteh- lah.


itu Tuan Haji Abu Bakar bin Hamzah: Menteri chakap orang puteh, Tuan; kalau saya berchakap China dia pun tidak tahu (Ketawa).

Saya tahu dia orang Taiping dia tahu chakap China.


Tuan Yang di-Pertua, saya bertanya bagini: ada-kah termasok di- usaha2 Kementerian dalam Per hendak dagangan dan Perusahaan amanah mengadakan tabong telah di- wang sa-bagaimana yang lakukan kapada Sarawak Refrigerator satu ta' 1427 22 JUNE 1967 1428 Advance Fund yang di-kechualikan daripada Income Tax?
to set up a factory Dr Lim Swee Aun: Sir, if any enter prise wants in Eastern Malaysia and is short of funds, they are able to get that assistance from the M.I.D.F.L.

; I think that is quite enough and there is no necessity for putting up another trust fund to assist in Eastern Malaysia.
industrialisation Tuan Ong Kee Hui (Sarawak): Mr Speaker, Sir, would the Minister inform us as to what arrangement has been made, as far as Sarawak is con cerned, for the processing of applica tions for pioneer industries?

Dr Lim Swee Aun: The position now is that we are trying to streamline and cut off unnecessary red tape and my officer, in fact, is on the way to Sarawak and Sabah just now to clear up on the spot with the State Finan cial Officers of both States the quickest possible way of doing things.
As one time, applications had to be processed by in the State Financial Officers Sabah and Sarawak and then sent to the Minister of Finance who then refers it to the Minister, or the Minis try of Commerce and Industry, and then it goes up and down the chain, thus wasting a lot of time.

We are now trying to evolve a shorter method, whereby these applications for pioneer status could come up as soon as possible.

SCHEME TO SUBSTITUTE THE RUBBER PLANTING SCHEME "B" IN SARAWAK 13.
Tuan Edmund Langgu anak Saga asks the Minister of Commerce and Industry to state what other schemes there are to substitute for the Rubber Planting Scheme B those areas where this scheme is found unaccept able to the hulu people of Sarawak, in order to encourage them to leave the unprofitable hill padi planting busi ness.
in Dr Lim Swee Aun: Mr Speaker, Sir, areas where Rubber Planting in Scheme " B" is found unacceptable to smallholders the people in the hulu in Sarawak, there is available the Rubber Planting Scheme "A" to encourage and sub sidise to plant high- yielding rubber on their own land.
In addition to this, there are also other agricultural schemes to enable the hill padi planters to improve their living, namely: (i) the Coconut Planting Scheme with the object of encouraging smallholders to plant coconuts in blocks of up to 10 acres per farmer; (ii) the improvement of wet padi lands which aims at encouraging the opening of new swamp areas and the productivity of these areas already farmed; increasing (iii) the Livestock Productive Scheme which has as its aim the produc the distribution of and tion imported to breeds of pigs farmers; (iv) the French Water Fisheries Scheme, which Development provides free insecticide for the destruction of natural predators prior to stocking the ponds with fish; (v) the Farm Mechanization Deve lopment Schema—in order to keep abreast of new advances particularly in the field of small holders cultivating machinery, new machinery and equipment the have been purchased by Department of Agriculture for test Sarawak conditions with a view to adopting them for use in Sarawak; (vi) the Fruits Production Scheme, which has as its aim the promo tion and distribution of good quality to farmers; and also planting material (vii) there are offered by Department.
the Farm Services the Agriculture The Rubber Planting Scheme "A", together with these other agricultural development schemes, would go a long way to help the people in the hulu in Sarawak to improve their standard of living and to achieve a more balanced and stable system of agriculture.

1429 22 JUNE 1967 1430 Mr Speaker: Question time is up!

{Question time is up and the follow ing are answers to Oral Questions Nos.

14 and 15).

LEGISLATION FOR REDUNDANCY PAYMENTS FOR WORKERS 14.
Tuan C. V. Devan Nair asks the if he would Minister of Labour introduction favourably consider of a redundancy payments Act for the benefit of all workers employed in industry.

the The Minister of Labour (Tuan V. Manickavasagam): Sir, considera tion is now being given to introducing legislation for the payment of redun dancy benefits for plantation workers laid off as a result of sub-division of estates.

I am not in a position, at this stage, to state anything on similar pay ments for other workers.
THE SRI JAYA TRANSPORT EMPLOYEES' UNION— DE-REGISTRATION OF 15.

Dr Tan Chee Khoon asks the Minister of Labour (a) why the Regis trar of Trade Union has not exercised his powers to cancel the registration of a splinter Union the Sri Jaya Trans port Employees Union, when the Registrar has taken advantage under the provisions of the law to cancel the registration of the United Malayan Estate Workers Union; (b) the reasons for the de-registration of the said union and for the Registrar of Trade Unions.
the biased attitude of Tuan Y. Manickavasagam: I under stand from the Registrar of Trade Unions that a substantial portion of the employees of Sri Jaya Transport Com the Sri Jaya pany are members of Transport Employees' Union and it is to difficult under such a situation the Trade invoke the provisions of Unions Act, 1965, its registration.

to cancel In the case of the United Malayan Estate Workers' Union, there was no doubt whatsoever as to its position.
This Union could not claim to be representative of any group of estates in the country and the Registrar had felt that it was not in the interest of the workers for its registration to continue.

to There is absolutely no ground claim the Registrar of Trade Unions was biased in his approach to this question.
that EXEMPTED BUSINESS AND ADJOURNMENT SINE DIE (Motion) The Minister for Welfare Services (Tuan Haji Abdul Hamid Khan bin Haji Sakhawat Ali Khan): Tuan Yang di-Pertua, saya menchadangkan: ini sa-hingga Bahawa Majlis ini tidak akan di-tanggoh- kan hari telah selesai di- timbangkan semua sa-kali urusan Kerajaan yang di-bentangkan dalam Atoran Urusan Meshuarat untok hari ini, dan sa-telah tamat ini akan di-tanggohkan meshuarat Majlis pada satu tarikh yang tidak di-tetapkan.
Tan Sri Haji Sardon bin Haji Jubir; Tuan Yang di-Pertua, saya sokong.

Question put, and agreed to.

Resolved, Bahawa Majlis ini tidak akan di-tanggoh kan hari telah selesai di- timbangkan semua sa-kali urusan Kerajaan yang di-bentangkan dalam Atoran Urusan Meshuarat untok hari ini, dan sa-telah tamat meshuarat Majlis ini akan di-tanggohkan pada satu tarikh yang tidak di-tetapkan.

ini sa-hingga Mr Speaker: Persidangan tempohkan.

ini di- Sitting suspended at 11.10 a.m.


Sitting resumed at 11.30 a.m. (Mr Deputy Speaker in the Chair) BILL PRESENTED THE PADI CULTIVATORS (CONTROL OF RENT AND SECURITY OF TENURE) BILL Bill to amend and re-enact the law relating to the Control of Rent and Security of Tenure of padi cultivators and matters incidental thereto; presen ted by the Minister of Agriculture and Co-operatives; read the first time; to be read a second time at a subsequent meeting of the House.
1431 22 JUNE 1967 1432 MOTIONS THE SABAH INCOME TAX ORDINANCE, 1956 Amendment to the Second Schedule to the Income Tax Ordinance, 1956 (The Sabah Tourist Association—Addition) The Parliamentary Secretary the Minister of Finance (Tuan Ali bin Haji Ahmad): Tuan Yang di-Pertua, saya motion menchadangkan: to That this House pursuant to the provisions of Section 87 (2) of the Sabah Income Tax Ordinance.
1956, resolves that the Second Schedule to the Income Tax Ordinance, 1956, be amended by adding therein the following new item— "Sabah Tourist Association'; and that such amendment shall be deemed to have come into force on 1st January, 1964.
Tuan Yang di-Pertua, sekshen 11 (1) (e) Undang2 Chukai Pendapatan Sabah, 1956, memperbekalkan bahawa sa-barang pendapatan dari pehak ber- kuasa, yayasan, kumpulan wang atau pun orang persaorang yang di-nyata di-dalam Jadual Kedua undang2 ter- sebut ada-lah di-kechualikan daripada pembayaran chukai.
Pehak berkuasa, yayasan, kumpulan wang atau pun orang persaorangan yang sa-umpama itu ka-dalam di-masokkan Jadual Kedua Undang2 itu dengan chara membuat suatu ketetapan oleh Dewan Ra'ayat mengikut kehendak sekshen 87 (2) undang2 yang tersebut itu.

boleh Persatuan Pelanchong Sabah ada- tidak lah sa-buah pertubohan yang telah di- menchari keuntongan yang terutama-nya bagi meng- tubohkan kemudahan2 galak dan memajukan pelanchong, dan bagi memperkem- bangkan perdagangan pelanchongan di-Sabah sana.
Sa-saorang yang men- jalankan perniagaan di-Sabah ada-lah boleh menjadi ini bersama2 dengan badan2 rasmi, per tubohan2 atau orang yang lain yang mungkin oleh Lembaga Persatuan ini menjadi ahli.

ahli Persatuan di-terima Untok pengetahuan tuan, hal ehwal persatuan ini ada-lah di-uruskan oleh terdiri dari sa-buah Lembaga yang pada wakil2 oleh Dewan Perniagaan dan Masharakat perdagangan di-Sabah.
Sa-orang wakil yang di-lantek oleh Kerajaan Negeri yang di-lantek dan Pegawai Penerangan Negeri ada- lah jua menjadi anggota Lembaga ini.

sa-mata2 di-gunakan perdagangan Harta dan pendapatan Persatuan ini bagi ada-lah memajukan pelan chongan.

Semenjak tahun 1964, Kera jaan Negeri telah memberi sumbangan sa-banyak $30,000 sa-tahun dan ini merupakan sa-bahagian yang terbesar daripada pendapatan Persatuan ini.
Bagaimana pun, dengan bertambah sadikit demi sadikit per maju-nya di-Negeri dagangan Sabah, bahawa yuran2 anggota dan pendapatan yang di-terima daripada iklan2 pada akhir- nya akan membolehkan Persatuan ini berdiri di-atas kaki-nya sendiri.

pelanchongan di-jangka ada-lah hendak-lah pembayaran Sayugia di-ingati bahawa Dewan ini telah pun membuat ketetapan dahulu bahawa Persatuan Pelanchong Pulau di-kechualikan Pinang daripada chukai pen dapatan.
Memandang kapada peranan Persatuan ini dan memandangkan bahawa kebanyakan daripada pen- dapatan-nya ada-lah di-terima dari pada Kerajaan Negeri, maka ada-lah di-anggap bahawa Persatuan Pelanchong di-anggap bahawa Persatuan Pelan- juga di- chong Sabah hendak-lah kechualikan pembayaran daripada chukai pendapatan ini.

Tuan Yang memohon menchadangkan.

di-Pertua, saya Tuan Lee San Choon: Sir, I beg to second the motion.
Tuan Haji Abu Bakar bin Hamzah: izin Tuan Yang di-Pertua, dengan turut berchakap sadikit tuan, saya berkenaan hendak usul dengan memasokkan Sabah Tourish Associa tion ka-dalam jadual yang kedua di- dalam Undang2 Chukai Pendapatan untok dapat pengechualian.
Tuan Yang di-Pertua, saya ber- setuju dengan Kerajaan supaya di- galakkan persatuan2, atau pun badan2 yang menaja urusan2 pelanchongan, kerana usaha2 yang sa-macham itu menambahkan pengetahuan lagi bangsa2 luar terhadap negara Malaysia dan juga boleh jadi dari satu segi kita dapat menarek keuntongan pertukaran luar, atau pun Foreign Exchange.
1433 22 JUNE 1967 1434 Tuan Yang di-Pertua, Undang2 Income Tax ada memberi satu penge jadual yang kedua, chualian dalam tetapi yang saya ingat Income Tax ini di-buat pada tahun 1947 yang di-masa itu ia-lah Sir Edward Gent menjadi High Commissioner di-sini barangkali saya pun muda, tuan pun pada masa itu maseh segar lagi dan Ahli kita ingat yang mengemukakan maseh di-sekolah lagi pada masa itu.
Pada masa itu, Tuan Yang di-Pertua, 22 perkara yang telah di- beri kurang daripada 22 perkara dan kalau di- masokkan pula Persatuan Pelanchong Penang, atau yang lain2 lagi boleh jadi sampai 25. pengechualian—tidak ini saya rendah ini, juga tetapi ada Tuan Yang di-Pertua, ada baik-nya kita mengadakan pengechualian sa- macham tidak lebeh suka mencha- baik-nya.
Saya dangkan, atau pun memberi shor kapada Kerajaan supaya Persatuan ini tidak di-masokkan ka-dalam jadual yang kedua tidak di-beri erti-nya kechuali daripada membayar Income Tax, ia-itu dengan jalan kita boleh memberi bantuan, atau pun grant kapada association yang sa-macham itu.
Tuan Yang di-Pertua, ini bukan tidak hendak meng- berma'ana kita galakkan persatuan yang sa-macham ini, tetapi kita mahu supaya badan itu berjalan dapat berapa kira2 untong menunjokkan atau pun rugi dalam masa mereka menjalankan kerja pada tiap2 tahun.
dengan baik dan 1 itu, tetapi itu, tetapi Kerajaan hendak-lah mem beri grant menolong Persatuan yang sa-macham ini, atau pun kalau Men- teri kita tidak mahu bertolak ansor dalam perkara ini, saya pun boleh-lah mengikut Menteri saya tidak mahu di-kirakan pengechualian haribulan daripada ini mulai Januari.

Sebab-nya, Tuan Yang di- Pertua, saya lebeh suka Kerajaan kita ini dapat penyata yang lengkap ber- kenaan dengan Persatuan ini.
Kalau sa-kira-nya kita mengechualikan maka tentu-lah dia tidak mustahak, atau tidak wajib memberi penyata pun kewangan-nya sa-bagai-nya, atau sebab dia sudah di-kechualikan dari pada Income Tax.
Kalau kita hendak saya beri minta Kerajaan ia-itu tersebut hendak-lah bahawa pindaan berjalan di-anggap haribulan kuat-kuasa-nya Januari, 1967. juga pengechualian kita ubah telah 1 sa-bagai pada ini, dan kewangan-nya Tuan Yang di-Pertua, pindaan yang saya shorkan ini ia-lah supaya Persa tuan itu dapat membentangkan betul2 dapat penyata menerangkan kapada Dewan ini sa- banyak mana kemajuan yang telah di- chapai dan dengan demikian kalau kita memikirkan Persatuan ini dapat kita, memberi keuntongan kapada sama ada dari segi propagation, atau pun propaganda atau pun dari segi menarek foreign exchange, maka bole ia- lah kapada pertubohan ini.
kita memberi grant kalau sa-macham Tuan Yang di-Pertua, bukan-lah satu tekanan kapada satu persatuan yang kita ini kerana mengenakan Income Tax, kalau hasil-nya tidak banyak, sudah tentu-lah dia tidak membayar banyak dan boleh jadi dia tidak membayar langsong, tetapi kalau dia di-kenakan Income Tax, maka dia akan membuat kerja dengan lebeh elok dan lebeh baik.
Tuan Yang di-Pertua, boleh jadi ada lagi pehak Kementerian Kewangan ini lagi akan meminta di-kechualikan agak-nya daripada Income Tax ini dan kita akan bertemu dalam perkara itu kalau ada lagi.
Saya minta bagini, Persatuan i ni kalau boleh tidak di- masokkan di-dalam jadual yang kedua Ada pun, Tuan Yang di-Pertua, apa yang telah kita lakukan kapada Persatuan di-Pulau Pelanchongan Pinang tidak-lah boleh kita samakan dengan apa yang akan kita lakukan di-Sabah, atau pun Sarawak, kerana Penang merupakan satu unit di-dalam Malaya dan Sabah dia merupakan satu unit, atau Sarawak merupakan satu unit di-dalam Malaysia.
Maka apa yang kita lakukan kapada Pulau Pinang laku tidak-lah sa-mesti kita kan di-Sabah dan di-Sarawak dan ini 'adil dalam bukan bererti kita tidak perkara itu.

Sekian, Tuan Yang di-Pertua, dan saya minta-lah Menteri kita itu ubah sadikit sahaja, satu perkataan, satu word sahaja, ia-itu 1964 ini ubah, yang 1435 22 JUNE 1967 1436 4 itu potong jadikan 7, sudah-lah— yang lain2 tak terima sa-kali ta' apa.
Tuan Ali bin Haji Ahmad: Tuan Yang di-Pertua, saya pun merasa pelek dengan uchapan daripada Ahli Yang Berhormat dari Bachok ini.

Mula2 dia kata dia setuju, dia sokong menggalakkan pelanchongan, kemu dian dia shorkan jangan di-kechuali- kan daripada Income Tax.

Kemudian yang akhir sa-kali dia kata dia sadikit sahaja hendak pinda.

Jadi daripada mula-nya sokong, kemudian tak setuju di-kechualikan, kemudian dia kata pinda sadikit sahaja, erti-nya setuju pula di-kechualikan daripada Income Tax, tahun 1967.
Jadi dalam masa yang singkat sahaja kita tiga perubahan nampak-lah sudah sikap Ahli Yang Berhormat dari Bachok.

Jadi, Tuan Yang di-Pertua, saya tidak dapat menerima-lah shor meminda tarikh memulakan ini dari pada tahun 1964 kapada tahun 1967. letapi mulai itu hendak Yang kedua-nya, shor Ahli Yang Berhormat dari Bachok tidak menyetujui di-kechualikan.

Kita, telah saya nyatakan tadi ia-itu sa-bahagian besar daripada kewangan Persatuan ini datang-nya Pelanchong di-Sabah Jadi daripada sumbangan Kerajaan.
tidak-lah dari segi kewangan negara ada banyak perbedzaan sebab sa- bahagian yang besar datang-nya dari pada dan sumbangan Kerajaan kemudian di-kechualikan, hendak di-kenakan pula Income Tax.

Jadi, yang sa-benar-nya shor yang di- kemukakan oleh Ahli dari Bachok ini tidak dapat di-terima oleh kerana memikirkan dalam usaha Kerajaan hendak menggalakkan pelanchongan, terutama sa-kali dalam usaha hendak mendapatkan sa- foreign berapa banyak untok pembangunan negara kita.
Dan sa-lain daripada itu untok memajukan dan di-dalam hal ini untok Sabah dan membela negeri Sabah untok kemajuan ra'ayat-nya di-sana dan juga untok mengenalkan Sabah kapada seluroh dunia, dan oleh kerana itu shor Ahli Yang Berhormat dari Bachok kesemua-nya tak dapat di-terima dan sa-kali ia-itu lagi saya mengatakan saya pun pelek mula2 dia kata dia bersetuju menggalakkan pelanchongan, di-majukan exchange negeri tak kemudian dia kata dia setuju, kemudian dia kata hendak pinda sadikit sahaja yang bererti dia ber setuju chuma sadikit sahaja dia tidak bersetuju.
Question put, and agreed to.

Resolved, That this House pursuant to the provisions of Section 87 (2) of the Sabah Income Tax Ordinance, 1966, resolves that the Second Schedule to the Income Tax Ordinance, 1956, be amended by adding therein the following new item: "Sabah Tourist Association"; and that such amendment shall be deemed to have come into force on 1st January, 1964.
THE INCOME TAX ORDINANCE, 1947 Amendment to the First Schedule to the Income Tax Ordinance, 1947 (The Rubber Producers' Council of Malaya— Addition) Tuan Ali bin Haji Ahmad: Tuan Yang di-Pertua, saya mohon menchadang- kan: That this House pursuant to the provisions of Section 102 (1) of the Income Tax Ordi nance, 1947, resolved that the First Schedule the Income Tax Ordinance, 1947, be to amended by adding therein the following new item: The Rubber Producers' Council of Malaya; and that such amendment shall be deemed to have come into force on 1st January, 1965.
Tuan Yang di-Pertua, mengikut section 131 (e) Undang2 Chukai Pen- dapatan 1947, sa-barang pendapatan dari pehak berkuasa Yayasan, Kum- pulan Wang, atau pun orang persa- orangan yang di-tetapkan di-dalam Jadual Pertama Undang2 yang tersebut ter- itu ada-lah di-kechuali daripada kena membayar chukai pendapatan.
Chara memasokkan pehak berkuasa Yayasan, Kumpulan Wang, atau pun orang persaorangan ini ada-lah dengan jalan suatu ketetapan yang di-buat oleh Dewan Ra'ayat ini mengikut kuat kuasa Section 102 (1), Undang2 Chukai Pendapatan yang tersebut itu.

Untok pengetahuan, Majlis Pengeluar Getah Malaya telah di-tubohkan dalam tahun 1951 dengan tujuan memelihara dan melindongi pengeluaran perusahaan getah di-Malaysia Barat ini.
Satu dari pada peranan Majlis ini ia-lah mem- bantu Kerajaan mengadakan wakil2 1437 22 JUNE 1967 1438 yang tertentu untok menghadhiri per- sidangan2 antara bangsa mengenai getah.
Majlis ini juga membantu Kerajaan anggota2-nya untok melantek ber- khidmat di-dalam Jawatan-kuasa Pe- nasehat Kumpulan Wang Getah Malaysia, ya'ani "Malaysian Rubber Fund Advisory Committee" dan juga lain2 badan saperti Lembaga Pene- rangan Amerika, ya'ani "American Publicity Board", Lembaga Pusat Penyelidekan Getah Malaysia, ya'ani "Board of the Rubber Research Insti tute of Malaya", Lembaga Kemajuan Getah British, ya'ani "British Rubber Development Board" dan Persatuan Penyelidekan Pengeluar2 Getah British ya'ani "British Rubber Producer Re search Association".
peranan2 Sa-lain daripada yang tersebut itu, Majlis ini juga memberi sumbangan membahagi2kan wang kum- pulan-nya bagi tujuan penerangan dan penyelidekan mengenai perusahaan getah.
Keanggotaan Majlis ini terdiri daripada wakil2 daripada Persatuan Peladang2 Getah, "Rubber Growers Association", Kesatuan Pela dang2 Bersatu Malaya, ya'ani "United Replanting Association of Malaya", Persatuan Pemunya2 Ladang Getah, ya'ani "Malayan Estate Owners Asso ciation" dan Majlis Persatuan Tana- man2 Getah Malaya, ya'ani "Council of Malayan Small-holders Association".

ya'ani Majlis ini ada-lah di-biaya oleh Kumpulan Wang Getah Malaysia, ya'ani "Malaysian Rubber Fund".
Dan di-samping itu ada juga mempunyai sumbar2 pendapatan yang kechil dari pada penjualan berita2 perangkaan bulanan keluaran-nya sendiri dan juga daripada hasil sewaan salah sa-buah daripada rumah2 kepunyaan-nya.
kapada ini saperti yang peranan2 Memandangkan tersebut di- Majlis atas, dan oleh kerana sa-bahagian besar daripada wang-nya ada-lah di-perolehi daripada Kumpulan Wang Getah Malaysia, ia-ini suatu badan yang telah di-kechualikan daripada mem bayar chukai pendapatan, maka Kera jaan menganggap bahawa Majlis ini juga patut-lah di-berikan layanan yang sama dengan mengechualikan-nya dari pada membayar chukai pendapatan dan chukai jumlah gaji itu.
Penge- chualian daripada membayar chukai pendapatan akan juga membebaskan Majlis ini daripada membayar chukai tax.

Ini jumlah gaji ya'ani payroll ada-lah berdasarkan perentah Undang2 164 tahun 1965 yang mensharatkan bahawa telah di- sa-saorang yang kechualikan daripada membayar chu kai pendapatan, sama ada sa-chara keselurohan, atau pun sa-bahagian yang di-tetapkan, ada-lah juga dengan sendiri-nya terkechuali daripada kena membayar chukai jumlah gaji.

Tuan Yang di-Pertua, saya mohon menchadangkan.


Tuan Lee San Choon: Tuan Yang di-Pertua, saya menyokong.

Tuan Haji Abu Bakar bin Hamzah: Tuan Yang di-Pertua, apa yang saya telah sebutkan tadi, ia-itu ramalan saya Kementerian Kewangan akan meminta mengechualikan beberapa perkara lagi sudah menjadi kenyataan.
Tuan Yang di-Pertua, saya juga di-sini tidak dapat hendak menyetujui dengan Kerajaan supaya The Rubber Producers' Council of Malaya ini di-kechualikan daripada bayaran, ia-itu dengan jalan di-masok- jadual yang pertama kan ka-dalam dalam Undang2 Income Tax yang berkenaan.

pendapatan.
pendapatan.

Sunggoh Semenjak ia di-tubohkan, Majlis ini tidak pernah mempunyai pendapatan yang menchukupi bagi di-kenakan pun chukai bagitu keadaan-nya, dengan berjalan- nya kuat-kuasa chukai jumlah gaji, tax" mulai dari 1 ya'ani "pay-roll haribulan Januari, 1965, Majlis ini terkena membayar telah menjadi chukai jumlah gaji yang tersebut itu.
Tuan Yang di-Pertua, benar bahawa Council ini mendapat wang-nya atau sumber kewangan-nya daripada Malay an Rubber Fund, atau pun Malaysian Rubber Fund, tetapi, Tuan Yang di- Pertua, kalau-lah nyata bahawa Coun cil ini bergantong kapada Malaysian Rubber Fund, maka tidak-lah sa-patut- nya kerja2 ini di-lakukan oleh pehak2 yang bukan Kerajaan, ia-itu di-lakukan 1439 22 JUNE 1967 1440 tugas2 Kerajaan di-dalam lapangan private sector.
Sa- patut-nya-lah benda ini di-masokkan sendiri—kita dalam memberi grant atau pun membuat apa2—di-masokkan di-bawah Perbelan- jaan Public Sector dengan terus.

Tuan Yang di-Pertua, sa-lain dari pada ini, sa-bagaimana saya katakan, masaalah rubber atau pun getah di- ini mempunyai berbagai2 Malaysia masaalah yang orang2 yang tidak pernah masok ka-dalam Dewan ini sa- bagai saya yang baharu masok ini, tentu-lah tidak dapat mengikuti asal usul-nya.
Yang saya tahu berkenaan dengan rubber atau pun getah, sa- bagaimana yang di-sebut di-sini ia-itu Rubber Producers' Council of Malaya, dengan ini sudah menjadi sa-kurang2- nya tiga badan yang telah di-kechuali- kan daripada chukai.

Ia-itu, yang per- saya—kalau tama, kalau maseh hidup lagi, apa yang di-nama- kan Lembaga Penyiasatan Getah Malaya, dan lagi satu kita ada Planter's Loan Fund—agak-nya.
Jadi ini, Tuan banyak Yang badan2 yang kita kechualikan daripada membayar chukai yang hanya kena- mengena dengan getah.

di-Pertua, amat-lah salah ta' tax, maka dia itu.
Sa-lain daripada Sa-lain daripada itu, Tuan Yang di- Pertua, kalau kita hendak katakan ini tidak dapat membayar persatuan income tidak payah membayar—tidak payah-lah kita ke dia daripada membayar chualikan chukai, sebab dia tidak sampai hisab, atau pun angka, atau pun kurang wang-nya untok kita membayar income tax itu, Tuan Yang di-Pertua, alasan-nya kita kata kan badan ini sudah terkena berat oleh kerana dengan ada-nya payroll tax itu, maka badan ini terpaksa kena bayar income tax, pada hal dia tidak patut membayar.
Ini, Tuan Yang di-Pertua, ia-itu satu alasan yang kalau kita hendak kechualikan badan ini daripada income tax dengan alasan bahawa dahulu-nya dia tidak mem bayar, tetapi oleh kerana ada sa-jenis taxation yang di-katakan payroll tax itu.

maka badan ini membayar, berapa banyak lagi badan2 yang lain atau pun pehak2 yang lain yang dahulu-nya tidak kena membayar tax, tetapi sudah terkorban di-bawah pay tidak sehat, income itu badan2 roll tax, mereka kena bayar.
Mengapa- tidak kah di-timbang satu alasan untok menge- sa-bagai chualikan daripada membayar tax?

Dan tiba2 kita memberi kapada Rubber Producers' Council ini sa-bagai satu peluang untok membela diri-nya dengan tidak kena tax sa-mata2 dengan alasan payroll tax itu memberatkan Council itu.
Tuan Yang di-Pertua, lagi satu ber (getah) atau kenaan dengan rubber pun tin (bijeh2) saya berasa, bahawa oleh kerana bijeh dan getah ini men jadi barang expot kita yang besar (major export) bagi negara kita, saya rasa kalau dia rugi di-dalam pasaran dunia, dia boleh meminta berbagai2 lagi daripada Kerajaan, tidak dengan jalan income tax ini, dia mengurangkan bayaran, sa-bagaimana kalau saya ta' salah, pehak lombong bijeh dia akan meminta supaya habuan dia membayar contribution kapada buffer stock itu di-kurangkan dan berbagai2-nya.
Maka Rubber Producers' Council ini pun juga dengan boleh membuat bagitu tidak payah kita kechualikan dia dari pada chukai.

Saya tidak nampak di- mana rahsia dan keindahan-nya maka pehak Kementerian ini memberi penge- chualian di-bawah Undang2 yang sa- macham ini, pada hal pehak2 yang lain tidak di-beri yang sa-macham itu.

Walau bagaimana pun.


Tuan Yang di-Pertua, saya bertambah segar lagi, Tuan Yang di-Pertua kerana hendak di-jalankan kuat-kuasa ini pada tahun 1965. ia-itu 1965, 1966, 1967—sudah dua tahun.

kita tidak tahu sama ada dia rugi atau pun untong.

Sebab pay roll tax ini, kalau ta' salah saya, boleh jadi dalam Jun tahun 1965 kita beri.

Jadi sa-belum daripada itu kita tidak tahu dia punya kira2 yang macham mana dan kita tidak boleh justify betul atau tidak mendapat ini keuntongan.
tidak dia sa-kali Perkara yang besar saya hendak meminta pehak Kementerian menerangkan, kalau-lah payroll tax itu menyebabkan Majlis Pengeluar2 Getah ini menanggong beban.

maka ada-kah Kerajaan kita akan menimbang badan2 yang lain juga, atau pehak2 yang lain yang terkorban kerana payroll tax itu 1441 22 JUNE 1967 1442 income di-kenakan kapada mereka.
Ada pun, Tuan Yang di-Pertua, kita hendak kata- kan ada perentah di-bawah Undang2 ini, bahawa mana2 pehak, jika pen- dapatan-nya itu kurang daripada kadar yang akan di-kenakan tax, maka badan itu hendak-lah di-kechuali kan daripada income tax.

Saya rasa pentafsiran itu berlawanan dengan apa ia-itu yang saya yang saya faham, tidak menchukupi faham, kalau dia income sharat dia tax, tidak di-kechualikan di-bawah undang2.
Maka saya dengar, kalau tidak silap tadi, pehak Kemen- terian Kewangan mengatakan dengan ini di- itu, maka badan perentah kechualikan daripada income tax.

tidak di-kenakan tetapi dia Tuan Ali bin Haji Ahmad: Tuan Yang di-Pertua, daripada uchapan saya tadi jelas-lah tentang sebab2 mengapa badan Rubber Producers' Council of Malaya ini patut di-kechualikan dari pada income tax.
Patut-lah kita ketahui ia-itu badan ini bukan-lah badan per- dagangan sa-bagaimana sharikat2 yang lain, mithal-nya sharikat2 biasa perda- gangan yang kerja-nya membuat per- usahaan.

Jadi, sa-bagaimana yang kita ketahui, ia-itu dalam masa perjalanan- nya badan tidak membuat ke- untongan dan oleh kerana itu tidak membayar chukai pendapatan.

Tetapi dengan mengenakan chukai jumlah gaji, ya'ani payroll tax ini, maka ter- kena-lah badan ini membayar chukai, dan dengan demikian memberatkan ini-lah kewangan-nya.
Dengan sebab kita hendak kechualikan badan ini daripada membayar chukai.

ini Yang kedua-nya, peranan badan ini ada-lah penting ia-itu di-dalam soal ekonomi negara kita tentang hal2 yang berkenaan dengan pengeluaran getah dan sa-bagaimana yang kita ketahui getah ada-lah memainkan peranan yang penting kapada ekonomi dan kapada nasib pembangunan negara kita, dan oleh kerana ini kita hendak kechuali kan ia daripada membayar chukai.
Yang kedua-nya, tentang kira2 bagai- mana yang di-katakan oleh Yang Berhormat Ahli daripada Bachok tadi kita tidak tahu, tetapi yang sa-benar- nya yang ta' tahu ini boleh jadi Ahli Yang Berhormat daripada Bachok itu tahu terutama sahaja, tetapi pehak2 yang lain tentu- lah sa-kali Penyata Kira2-nya sudah pasti-lah sa-bagai satu tentu-lah di-bentangkan pada badan tiap2 tahun.

Jadi, kalau sa-kira-nya Ahli Yang Berhormat itu hendak tahu boleh-lah datang pada bila2 masa untok meminta keterangan lebeh lanjut.
Kemudian tentang badan2 lain, kalau badan ini boleh kita bagi pengechualian oleh kerana mengalami kesusahan oleh tax atau sa-bagai-nya, sebab payroll mengapa, bagaimana-kah pula badan2 lain?

Kalau sa-kira-nya badan2 lain di-bawah Undang2 yang Chukai Pendapatan ini mengalami kesusahan, saya fikir perkara ini boleh di-timbangkan dan pehak Kementerian Kewangan boleh menimbangkan per kara ini, jika di-dapati sesuai dengan kehendak ya'ani terta'alok-lah di-bawah Undang2 Chukai Pendapatan yang ada.
terta'alok Tuan Haji Abu Bakar bin Hamzah: Soalan tambahan.

Ada satu pertanyaan tadi yang saya minta penjelasan sa- kurang2-nya untok pengetahuan saya, ia-itu benar-kah badan yang sa-macham ini sudah terta'alok di-bawah Undang2 Chukai Income Tax itu yang di-bawah undang2 itu berkehendakkan supaya ia di-kechualikan daripada chukai.
Kalau sa-kira-nya ia di-kehendaki di-bawah undang2 supaya di-kechualikan, sudah tentu-lah kita tidak payah bawa motion di-dalam Dewan ini untok di-kechuali kan, itu yang saya minta tadi.

Tuan Ali bin Haji Ahmad: Tuan Yang di-Pertua, kalau sudah di- kechualikan, ta' payah lagi perkara ini di-bawa ka-Dewan Ra'ayat.

Jadi, saya fikir perkara ini sudah jelas.


Sa-lama ini perkara—badan di- kechualikan, dan oleh kerana itu maka saya datang ka-Dewan ini untok me minta Dewan ini meluluskan supaya badan ini di-kechualikan dan penge ini di-buat mengikut, atau chualian di-bawah Undang2 pun Chukai Pendapatan yang ada.

terta'alok tidak ini Question put, and agreed to.


Resolved, That this House pursuant to the provisions of Section 102 (1) of the Income Tax Ordi nance, 1947, resolves that the First Schedule to the Income Tax Ordinance, 1947, be 1443 22 JUNE 1967 1444 amended by adding therein the following new item: 'The Rubber Producers' Council of Malaya" and that such amendment shall be deemed to have come into force on 1st January, 1965.
THE EMPLOYMENT ORDINANCE, 1955 (Amendment to Schedule) The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Labour (Tuan Lee San Choon): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move the resolution No.
3 standing in the name of the Minister of Labour which reads: That this House pursuant to the provisions of Section 2 (3) of the Employment Ordi nance, 1955, resolves that all the provisions of the said Ordinance, with the exception of the provisions of the said Ordinance men tioned in column (2) of the Schedule hereto to the classes of employees shall apply mentioned in column (1) of the said schedule.
Nothing in this Resolution shall entitle a woman who would not, but for this Resolu tion, be a labourer for the purposes of the Ordinance to receive a maternity allowance from her employer under Part IX of the Ordinance in respect of her pre-confinement allowance period or in respect of her post confinement period if during her abstention from work during such period she received from her employer wages equivalent to or in excess of the amount which she would be entitled to receive as maternity allowance for that period.
The resolutions passed by the Legislative Council on the 14th day of August, 1957, and published as Legal" Notifications Nos.

365 and 366 of 1957 are hereby revoked.


SCHEDULE a) Classes of Employees (a) Army person, other than: specified (i) a person Schedule to the Ordinance; in the First (ii) a person employed in a managerial capacity; (iii) a person employed in any vessel as defined in section 2 of the Merchant Shipping Ordinance, 1952. who has entered into a contract of service with an employer and whose wages, including commission, subsistence allow ance and payment for overtime, do not exceed $500 a month.
(b) Any person who has entered into a con tract of service with an employer in pursuance of which he is engaged in any capacity in any vessel registered in the States of Malaya, and who: (i) is not an officer certificated under the Merchant Shipping Act; (ii) is not the holder of a local certifi cate, as defined in Part VII of the Merchant Shipping Ordinance; (iii) has not entered into an agreement under the provisions of Part III of the Merchant Shipping Ordinance.
(c) Any person who has entered into a con tract of service with an employer and is employed as a domestic servant.
(2) Sections or Parts in the said Ordinance not applicable Sections 16 and 17, the proviso to section 10 (1) the phrase "being a period not exceeding one month" in section 12 (3) (a) and the words "or where the period so specified exceeds one month" in section 12 (3) (b) Part XII Sections 12, 22, 61, 64 and Parts IX and XII The Employment Ordinance, 1955, is the main phase of protective labour legislation in West Malaysia and has been in force since 1st June, 1957.
It is primarily designed to provide certain minimum protective measures relating to employment such as the form of contracts of service, period of notice for termination of employment, time and payment of wages, deduction from wages, limitation of hours and days of work, maternity leave and maternity allowance.
The Ordinance also em powers the Commissioner of Labour and his officers to hear and determine complaints arising out of any term in 1445 22 JUNE 1967 1446 a contract of service or out of the pro visions of the Ordinance and to make an order for the payment of any sum of money found due and payable.

that The present scope of the Ordinance is confined to labourers as defined in the First Schedule to the Ordinance, covering mainly persons engaged in manual labour and their supervisors and overseers.
The Ordinance also covers other categories of workers as specified in Legal Notification No.

365 of 1957, is persons employed afloat such as lightermen, ferrymen, fishermen, launch crew and crew of sailing vessels.

It also covers persons whose monthly wages do not exceed $400 and who are employed as shop assistants, waiters, ushers at cinemas, hairdressers, lift attendants and watch men.
It would be seen, therefore, that the benefits and protection provided by the Ordinance are not available to the mass of other workers such as clerks, stenographers, typists, office boys, messengers, salesmen, nurses, in journalists and persons engaged public entertainment.
The Commis sioner of Labour is unable to provide any assistance for these workers when they have complaints concerning non payment of wages, or termination of employment without notice, or wages in lieu of notice and the only relief available to them is the rather expen sive and time-consuming process of civil courts.
It is now considered that these categories of wage earners, not necessarily engaged in manual labour, should also be covered, as they appear to be in as much need of the protection envisaged in the Ordinance as manual labourers.

It is also proposed that the wage limit of $400 should be increased to $500 to bring it in line with the Employees Provident Fund Ordinance.

It would be necessary to exclude cer tain provisions of the Ordinance from being applied to these new categories of non-manual workers.
From the Schedule to this resolution, it would be seen that in respect of the class of employees listed in paragraph (a) of the Schedule, the following sections of the Ordinance will not apply: Section 16 of the Ordinance—This section deals with the minimum number of days of work for daily rated estate workers and is not relevant for "white-collar" workers.
Section 17—This section provided that when the contract of service of a worker terminates, the contract of the stores of such worker should also terminate.

The proviso to section 10 (1) prevents an employee from entering into a con tract of service for a period longer than six months.

This would be largely inapplicable to office and other "white- collar" workers covered by this part of the resolution.
The class of employees listed in paragraph (b) of the Schedule to the resolution are persons employed afloat.

It is proposed that Part XII of the Ordinance relating to days and to hours of work should not apply such persons as it would be impracti cable to comply with these provisions or to supervise these persons while they are at sea.

I now come to domestic servants referred the to in paragraph (c) of Schedule.
It is proposed that section 12 of the Ordinance dealing with termina tion of employment, should not apply to domestic servants as section 57 of the Ordinance, under which they are now covered, provides that the period of notice for such persons shall be 14 days.

It is felt that this should continue as this would be more appropriate.

Section 22 of the Ordinance which deals with limitation on advances to workers to a maximum of one month's wages is also not thought appropriate for domestic servants.
Section 61 of the Ordinance, which requires an employer to keep a Labour Register is also not to be applicable to domestic servants as this would be rather difficult.

Section 64 of the Ordinance requires the owner of any estate, mine or factory, with not less than five labourers, to erect a notice board.
I feel sure that Honour able Members of this House will agree with me that an employer of domestic servants should not be required to put up such a notice board to say that he has in his employ domestic servants.

Part IX of the Ordinance relates to a female labourer's right to abstain from work thirty days before and thirty days after her confinement.

It also provides for the payment of a female maternity allowance for a 1447 22 JUNE 1967 1448 labourer.
However, it is considered that this Part of the Ordinance should not apply to domestic servants, as it is felt that this would only tend to work to their own disadvantages.

Part XII of the Ordinance deals with limitation of days and hours of work and it is clearly difficult to apply to domestic servants.

I would like to offer some explana tion with regard to para.

(2) of the resolution.


Under the Ordinance, a female worker who comes within the definition of "labourer" as defined in the First Schedule of the Ordinance is entitled to abstain from work for thirty days before her confinement and thirty days after her confinement.

During this period she is entitled to receive as maternity allowance $3 a day for the duration of her absence from work.
"White-collar" employees, to whom it is intended to extend the provisions of this Ordinance under this resolution, are almost all employed on monthly rates.

Where such female employees are about they will to be confined, normally be entitled to leave for their confinement with full pay.
This resolution makes it clear that, if an employer continues to pay his female employee during this period of leave and if such payments are equiva lent to, or in excess of the amount which she would be entitled to receive as maternity allowance, then she shall not be entitled to receive further mater nity allowance as a result of this resolution.
This resolution has been extensively discussed and agreed to in the National Joint Labour Advisory Council consist ing of employers' and workers repre sentatives.

Sir, I beg to move.

Tuan Yang di-Pertua, dalam me- nyertai Kerajaan supaya kita mengada- kan Undang2 yang sa-macham ini, saya menguchapkan dukachita oleh kerana Undang2 yang sa-macham ini amat-lah lewat di-bawa ka-dalam Dewan ini.

Sa-patut-nya Undang2 yang baik yang sa-macham ini sudah lama di-bawa ka- dalam Dewan ini.
di-Pertua, Tuan Yang ini, saya rasa beliau kalau-lah memandang kapada wajah Setia-usaha ini—yang kita yang mengemukakan handsome ini maseh kechil lagi pada masa Undang2 Employment Ordinance ini mula2 di- buat ia-itu pada tahun 1955 boleh jadi dalam sekolah rendah lagi—kechil lagi.

Jadi, Tuan Yang di-Pertua, baharu- lah ini sudah jadi tahun 1967, sudah jadi dekat2 10 tahun lebeh sudah lebeh baharu-lah kita mengadakan Undang2 yang sa-macham ini.
lagi Tuan Yang di-Pertua, saya maseh jeritan2 atau pun ingat ia-itu ra'ayat tangisan, kelohan, daripada jelata telah di-buat dalam masa kita belum ada pilehan raya lagi ia-itu masa Mr Watson, Pegawai Pentadbir bagi Malaysia kita ini—Mr Watson kalau tidak salah saya.

Jadi, dengan demikian tergesa2-lah Majlis Undangan kita pada masa itu mengemukakan Employment ini dengan sa-mata2 me- Ordinance masokkan beberapa section yang sesuai pada masa itu.
Mithal-nya, Tuan Yang di-Pertua, pada motion atau pun usul ketetapan yang di-kemukakan ini pun saya maseh tidak puas hati satu lagi, ia-itu perempuan2 yang bekerja sa-bagai amah, atau pun domestic servant di- rumah2, orang2 tidak dapati di- ini jenis, atau pun masokkan ka-dalam jadual female workers, jadi dia tidak berhak dapat— tidak berhak menuntut elaun 30 hari sa-belum dia bersalin, atau pun 30 hari sa-sudah itu.

di-namakan yang Tuan Ali bin Haji Ahmad: Tuan Yang di-Pertua, saya menyokong.
Tuan Haji Abu Bakar bin Hamzah: Tuan Yang di-Pertua, dengan izin tuan, saya turut berchakap sadikit berkenaan dengan motion yang di-kemukakan oleh Kementerian Buroh baharu2 ini.

Tuan Yang di-Pertua, tidak ada beza female worker dengan domestic worker atau pun tidak ada beza perempuan sama perempuan, domestic worker bekerja juga chuma beza-nya dari segi Undang2 ia-itu female worker ini ada ini ta'rif-nya yang domestic servant tidak ada ta'rif-nya.
Maka ke'adilan 1449 22 JUNE 1967 1450 social—social justice—tidak dapat di- hukumkan dengan yang ini di-masok- kan ka-dalam angka ini, yang ini tidak di-masokkan.

Jadi itu saya nampak tidak adil.


Benar, Tuan Yang di-Pertua, pada satu segi saya bersetuju bahawa tukang2 masak, atau pun amah ini payah kita hendak kirakan elaun-nya, boleh jadi dia datang bekerja 5 hari, kemudian daripada itu, dia lari jadi kalau kita hendak bayar dia bekerja mithal-nya sa-belum 5 hari, kemudian dia lari pula 5 hari susah kita hendak bayar—saya bersetuju.
tuan rumah Tetapi ingat, yang kita tuntut ini sa- bulan sa-belum confinement dan sa- bulan sa-sudah confinement—erti-nya amah atau pun domestic servant itu sudah bekerja di-rumah itu sa-kurang2- nya 4 bulan baharu dia hendak sampai kapada keadaan yang sa-macham itu.

Tidak menasabah itu hendak menerima satu amah yang bila pergi, "tuan minta kerja" dan tengok2 sudah tidak nampak di-hadapan, kalau ada anak ayam lalu dia pun terpijak (Ketawa).
Jadi erti-nya sudah sarat bagitu tentu kita sa-bagai tuan rumah tidak dapat hendak menerima dia, sebab dia pun tidak boleh hendak men- jalankan kerja, maka nyata-lah orang yang ada peluang menuntut 30 hari sa- belum confinement dan sa-sudah itu orang yang sudah bekerja sa-kurang2- nya tiga empat bulan.

Ini, Tuan Yang di-Pertua, dapat menolong nasib orang2 ini, sebab female worker ada pembela- nya dan dia sudah menjadi buroh yang ramai terta'alok di-bawah Undang2— jadi erti-nya dia ada orang membela.
Ada pun tukang2 rumah ini tentu-lah tidak ada orang yang membela.

Saya rasa berkenaan dengan domestic servant ini patut-lah di-timbangkan, kalau tidak dapat dalam Undang2 ini sa-kali pun barangkali Yang Berhormat Menteri Buroh kita telah berjanji dalam tahun ini satu juga akan di-kemukakan Security Act bagi labourers atau pun bagi employees ini, kita harap di- masokkan dalam perkara ini.
Tuan Lee San Choon: Tuan Yang di- Pertua, point yang pertama Ahli Yang Berhormat daripada Bachok menyo- kong Bill ini, tetapi kata beliau duka- chita-lah lambat sangat.

Walau bagai- mana pun Ahli Yang Berhormat telah menyokong Bill ini, jadi tidak dapat saya jawab apa2-lah.

Point yang kedua berkenaan dengan domestic servant, sebab2-nya saya telah terangkan sa-masa saya beruchap tadi.
Kementerian saya sedar juga dengan tidak termasok-nya domestic servant ini ada juga domestic servant ini macham tidak adil, tetapi dengan termasok-nya domestic servant dalam Undang2 ini, boleh jadi macham Ahli Yang Ber hormat daripada Bachok sekarang ini rumah dia servant, dengan Undang2 ini dia tidak hendak lagi domestic servant, kerana kena membayar gaji dengan tidak bekerja langsong akhir-nya tidak dapat kerja terutama negeri Kelantan sekarang.

Jadi lepas fikir ini .

.. ada domestic lagi orang .


Dr Tan Chee Khoon: Untok pen- jelasan Tuan Yang di-Pertua, Yang Berhormat Setia-usaha Parlimen Ke menterian Buroh hendak menyatakan, di-Kelantan ada banyak orang yang kaya ada domestic servant.

Tuan Lee San Choon: Itu saya ingat Ahli Yang Berhormat daripada Bachok boleh menjawab-nya (Ketawa).

Jadi lepas kita berunding, saya ingat sementara hari ini elok-lah kita tidak usah masokkan domestic servant dalam Undang2 ini.

Terima kaseh.

to Question put, and agreed to.


Resolved, That this House pursuant to the provisions of section 2 (3) of the Employment Ordi nance, 1955, resolves that all the provisions of the said Ordinance with the exception of the provisions of the said Ordinance men tioned in column (2) of the Schedule hereto shall apply the classes of employees mentioned in column (1) of the said Schedule.
Nothing in this Resolution shall entitle a woman who would not, but for this Resolution, be a labourer for the purposes of to receive a maternity allowance from her employer under Part IX of the Ordinance in respect of her pre- confinement allowance period or in respect of her post confinement allowance period or in respect of her post confinement period if during her abstention from work during such period she receives from her employer wages equivalent to or in excess of the amount which she would be entitled to receive as maternity allowance for that period.
the Ordinance 1451 22 JUNE 1967 1452 The resolutions passed by the Legislative and published as Legal Notifications Nos.

365 Council on the 14th day of August, 1957, and 366 of 1957 are hereby revoked.
SCHEDULE (1) Classes of Employees (a) Any person, other than: specified (i) a person in the First Schedule to the Ordinance; (ii) a person employed in a managerial capacity; (iii) a person employed as a domestic servant; or (iv) a person employed in any vessel as defined in section 2 of the Merchant Shipping Ordinance, 1952, who has entered into a contract of service and whose wages, with an employer including commission, subsistence allow ance and payment for overtime, do not exceed $500 a month.
(b) Any person who has entered into a con in in in tract of pursuance of which he any capacity the States of Malaya, and who service with an employer is engaged in any vessel registered (2) Sections or Parts in the said Ordinance not applicable Sections 16 and 17, the proviso to section 10 (1), the phrase "being a period not exceeding one month" in section 12 (3) (a) and the period so specified exceeds one month" in section 12 (3) (b).
the words "or where Part XII (i) is not an officer certificated under the Merchant Shipping Act; (ii) is not the holder of a local certifi cate, as defined in Part VII of the Merchant Shipping Ordinance; (iii) has not entered into an agreement under the provisions of Part III of the Merchant Shipping Ordinance.

(c) Any person who has entered into a con tract of service with an employer as a domestic servant.

Sections 12, 22, 61, 64 and Parts IX and XII.
THE PARLIAMENT (MEMBERS' REMUNERATION) ACT, 1960 (Amendment to Schedule) Tuan Ali bin Haji Ahmad: Tuan Yang di-Pertua, saya mohon mencha- dangkan: That the House pursuant to the provisions (Members' the the of Section 4 of Remuneration) Act, 1960, resolved be made amendments following Schedule to that Act— the Parliament that to For items 5 and 6 of the Schedule sub stitute the following— and Secretaries (5) Travelling Allowance: Members (other than Ministers, Assistant Ministers, Par Political liamentary Secretaries) shall be paid a sum of one hundred and fifty dollars per mensem.
6.

(1) Travel by Rail: Members who are Ministers, Assistant Ministers, Parlia mentary Secretaries and Political Secre free taries shall be supplied with two class passes railway including (first sleeper) one for use by the member and the other for use by the wife or husband of the member or by any person accom panying the Member.

Other members shall be supplied with one free railway pass (first class for their own personal use.
including sleeper) (2) Travel by Sea or Air: Members may recover the expenses of any journeys made by sea or air for the purpose of attending meetings of the House or any Committee thereof.

Tuan Yang di-Pertua, usul yang saya kemukakan ini ada-lah berbeza sadikit daripada usul yang asal yang di- sampaikan kapada Ahli2 Dewan ini.

ini Pindaan kapada usul yang asal telah pun di-edarkan kapada Ahli2 sakalian.
Tujuan usul ini ia-lah untok mem- benarkan bayaran elaun perjalanan sa- banyak $150 sa-bulan kapada Ahli2 1453 22 JUNE 1967 1454 itu Parlimen kechuali Menteri2, Menteri2 Muda, Setia-usaha2 Parlimen dan Setia- usaha2 Politik bagi menggantikan satu daripada dua pas keretapi yang di-beri kapada mereka itu sekarang ini.
Tujuan memberi pas2 keretapi itu ia-itu satu bagi Ahli Yang Berhormat dan satu lagi bagi isteri, atau orang yang ber jalan di-bawah arahan Ahli Yang Berhormat ia-lah supaya mem- bolehkan Ahli2 Yang Berhormat, Ahli2 Parlimen, menjalankan tugas2 mereka itu sa-bagai Ahli Parlimen.
Akan tetapi saya dapati bahawa Ahli2 Parlimen tidak dapat menggunakan pas2 ini bagi semua perjalanan-nya dan kebanyakan urusan mereka sa-bagai Ahli Parlimen saperti menghadziri meshuarat pem bangunan luar bandar dan majlis pembukaan ranchangan2 terpaksa di- laksanakan dengan menggunakan ken- deraan terutama-nya motokar.
Pada masa ini Ahli2 Parlimen tidak di-bayar perbelanjaan perjalanan itu kerana Undang2 Parlimen—Members' Remuneration Act, 1960 hanya mem- bolehkan Ahli2 Parlimen menuntut per belanjaan kerana menghadziri me shuarat2 Parlimen.

Oleh hal yang demikian ada-lah di-fikirkan mena- sabah jika mereka di-bayar elaun per jalanan sa-banyak $150 sa-bulan dan di-tarek balek satu daripada pas kere tapi mereka.
Pas yang di-beri kapada mereka itu ada-lah di-hadkan bagi kegunaan mereka sendiri sahaja ia-itu pas itu tidak boleh di-gunakan oleh orang lain.

kerana perbelanjaan Tambahan bayaran elaun tidak-lah berapa ini banyak kerana satu daripada pas kere tapi mereka itu di-tarek balek.

Elaun perjalanan tidak-lah di-bayar kapada Menteri2, Menteri2 Muda, Setia-usaha2 Parlimen dan Ahli2 Parlimen yang di- lantek menjadi Setia-usaha Politik.
terus men- Oleh kerana itu mereka tetapi dapat dua pas keretapi, akan penggunaan pas keretapi ini ada-lah di-hadkan bagi kegunaan-nya sendiri isteri-nya, atau pun sa-saorang dan ini yang mengiring-nya.

Pas tidak boleh di-gunakan untok sa-saorang yang berjalan di-bawah kebenaran Ahli Yang Berhormat saperti yang ada pada hari ini.

Berkenaan dengan soal perjalanan tidak-lah ada laut, atau pun udara, apa2 pindaan.

Tuan Yang di-Pertua, saya dengan sukachita-nya mohon menchadangkan.
Tuan Lee San Choon: Tuan Yang di-Pertua, saya menyokong.

Dr Tan Chee Khoon: Mr Speaker, Sir, the Government has been pro claiming from time to time, and in His Majesty's Speech it has been stated very clearly, that we should try and cut down on expenditure.

Indeed, we should try and cut down on expendi ture to the bone to see that there is no undue expenditure, or waste of expen the Government, diture.
I see from time to time, very freely intro duces motions and the like to increase the privileges or this House.

I see that we are very quick in voting for ourselves all sorts of perks, and yet we want to remind the country that we are going through a time of grave financial stringency and that we should cut down on expenditure.
the perks of that the Now, the explanation given by the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minis ter of Finance for this $150 allowance is that the people sometimes have to to various Pembangunan Luar go Bandar meetings and like, and presumably, sometimes they cannot use the travel pass and therefore, they have to go by car and should be compen sated.

Now.

as a result of this perk of $150, the other pass that is given to Members of Parliament will now be drawn back.
The Member now has only one pass for his own use and the other pass would be taken back by the Government and cannot be used either by his wife or anybody else.
If I heard him rightly intention of Government, although it is not stated here, and from what I see here, if I may read the motion, paragraph 6 (1) says that: is the that "Members who are Ministers, Assistant Ministers, Parliamentary Secretaries and Political Secretaries shall be supplied with two free railway passes (first class including sleeper), one for use by the Member and the other for use by the wife or husband of the Member or by any person accompanying the Member.
Other Members shall be supplied with free pass (first class including sleeper) for their own personal use."
1455 22 JUNE 1967 1456 says, all If I read it correctly, if my understand ing of the English language is correct, it means that, despite what the Parlia mentary Secretary to the Minister of these Ministers, Finance Assistant Ministers, Parliamentary Secretaries and Political Secretaries as the other Members of Parliament, shall be supplied with one free pass—in other words, as a result of this perk of $150, the Member of Parliament now has only one pass.
Now, Mr Speaker, Sir, this is an amendment to the Parliament (Mem bers' Remuneration) Act.

When we introduced this category of officers known as Political Secretaries, now here were we told that these Political Secretaries also Members of Parliament.

I cannot see, for the life of me, how under an Act, which applies to those of us who are elected members, to people who are not elected members?
the privileges now go are The Minister of Justice (Tuan Haji Abdul-Rahman bin Ya'kub): Sir, on a point of clarification, "Political Secre taries" here means Political Secretaries who are Members of Parliament.

Explanation has already been given that there are Members of Parliament who have been appointed Political Secretaries.

if I have not understood Dr Tan Chee Khoon: Mr Speaker, Sir, it correctly, I stand corrected.
I see lots of people sitting opposite me who are Parliamentary Secretaries, and they are Members stand corrected, again—and here I would be the very glad for clarification from Minister of Justice, if he can mention to me which Political Secretaries are also Members of Parliament.

Parliament—I of Tuan Haji Abdul-Rahman bin Ya'kub: Tuan Aziz bin Ishak is now Political Secretary to the Mentri Besar of Johore.

He was the Political Secre tary to the Honourable Minister for Home Affairs.
Dr Tan Chee Khoon: I understand that Tuan Aziz bin Ishak is the Poli tical Secretary to the Mentri Besar of Johore.

I am Tuan Haji Abdul-Rahman bin Ya'kub: Aziz Ishak is a Member of Parliament.

He was also the Political Secretary to the Minister for Home Affairs.

There is nothing to prevent the Prime Minister from appointing even the Member for Batu to be the Political Secretary to the Prime Minis ter.

(Laughter).
(Laughter).

Dr Tan Chee Khoon: It is an honour that I do not covet, Mr Speaker, Sir, I am very grateful.

I know of one or two exceptions and I think the Minister of Justice is correct in saying that there is one person, one Member of Parlia ment, who has been appointed as Political Secretary.

All the others are not.

Well, properly speaking, then the Bill should read, "Political Secretaries who are Members of Parliament".
Tuan Haji Abdul-Rahman bin Ya'kub: The words in the brackets are meant to explain, to qualify the word "Members".

The correct reading of this Clause is, "Members other than Ministers, Assistant Ministers, Parlia mentary Secretaries and Political Secre taries".

It is clear that people who are not Members of Parliament cannot receive privileges which are accorded to Members of Parliament.

Dr Tan Chee Khoon: I am very glad for this clarification, Mr Speaker, Sir.
Perhaps, my understanding of the legal language that is down here is not as good as that of the Minister of Justice.

However, I wish to say that this House should be very careful in voting for itself any perks whatsoever, the while at the same time urging country to tighten its belt to cut down on expenditure.

perbelanjaan Tuan Haji Ahmad bin Said: Tuan Yang di-Pertua, saya bangun untok menyokong Bill ini.
Dan saya dapati dengan lulus-nya Bill ini tidak akan menambahkan kerana dalam peruntokan bagi Ahli2 Parlimen berjalan dengan menggunakan pas2 keretapi saya dapat peruntokan, kalau tidak silap saya, sa-banyak $250,000 sa-tahun.

Tetapi, dengan memberi-nya tambahan elaun sa-banyak $I50 bagi sa-orang Ahli Dewan Ra'ayat kita ada 1457 22 JUNE 1967 1458 144 orang berjumlah $21,600 sa-bulan dan sa-tahun sa-banyak $259,200.
Jawatan-kuasa Jadi, dengan chara yang sa-macham ini Kerajaan tidak menambah banyak chuma barangkali sadikit sahaja yang di-tambahkan.

Kalau tak di-bayar kapada Ahli Dewan Ra'ayat atau pun Ahli Parlimen wang itu mesti juga di- bayar kapada perkhidmatan keretapi.
Jadi, daripada itu-lah saya sokong Bill ini, oleh kerana tidak ada tambahan yang lebeh daripada yang patut, chuma bayaran yang patut yang di-terangkan oleh pembawa usul tadi bahawa Ahli2 semua-nya menjadi Dewan Ra'ayat Ahli Pembangunan Luar Bandar bagi tiap2 daerah khas- nya Ahli2 Dewan Ra'ayat dalam negeri itu manakala Pahang, menghadziri meshuarat jawatan-kuasa kena berjalan daripada rumah-nya sa- hingga 40 batu, 50 batu satu hari dengan tidak mendapat satu sen pun elaun bagi menghadziri meshuarat Jawatan-kuasa Luar Bandar dan Negara, walhal Ahli Negeri Jawatan-kuasa masing2 di-beri elaun untok meng hadziri meshuarat Jawatan-kuasa Pem bangunan Negara dan Luar Bandar bagi daerah.
Ini ada-lah satu per- ubahan yang sangat patut di-luluskan.

Sakian-lah sahaja, Tuan Yang di- Pertua, terima kaseh.

Pembangunan Kerajaan sa-orang Tuan Ahmad bin Arshad (Muar Utara): Saya hendak berchakap sadikit sahaja sambil menyokong usul yang di-bawa di-dalam Dewan ini.
Saya berasa lega dengan di-luluskan usul yang ada di-hadapan kita ini, kerana sa-lama ini bagaimana yang telah di- bangkitkan oleh rakan sa-jawat saya tadi, dan Tuan Yang di-Pertua sendiri pun merasa bila mana kita di-panggil meshuarat kerana ranchangan pem bangunan luar bandar dan negara dari negeri Johor beratus batu, maka elaun2 terima, maka itu dengan lagi ke- ini menambahkan legaan dan mengurangkan kepichekan ra'ayat kewangan pada yang menjalankan tugas-nya kerana tujuan negara dan tujuan ra'ayat dalam negeri ini.
tidak dapat kita tiap2 wakil Di-samping Pertua, gemar itu, Tuan Yang di- saya mengemukakan junjong ini kita satu pandangan, sama ada pandangan ini dapat di-terima, tetapi saya harap supaya dapat di-fikirkan oleh Kera jaan, ia-itu elaun, atau pun sara hidup yang patut kita fikir di-berikan kapada Menteri2 Muda dan Menteri2 penoh kita yang telah berkhidmat dalam negara ini tidak kurang daripada 12 tahun.
Hal tinggi khidmat Menteri2 kita sa-lama masa 12 tahun itu dia telah memberi khidmat kapada negara, tetapi bila mana dia berhenti dia tidak dapat sara hidup bagaimana yang telah kita dapat tahu bekas Menteri Keselamatan Dalam Negeri kita dia telah berkhidmat dalam negara ini sa-lama 12 tahun, tetapi bila mana dia berhenti dengan satu sagu hati pun beliau tidak dapat.
Jadi, saya harap dapat Kerajaan menimbangkan supaya Menteri2 kita yang berkhidmat 12 tahun itu di-berikan sara hidup-nya bila mana mereka berhenti demi kepentingan negara dan keselamatan dan kebajikan anak2 mereka yang telah memberi khidmat kapada negeri kita ini.

Terima kaseh.

Tuan Haji Abu Bakar bin Hamzah: izin sadikit Tuan Yang di-Pertua, dengan tuan, saya dalam hal ini.
turut berchakap Biasa-nya kalau ada usul, atau pun satu2 motion daripada Kerajaan, sudah tentu-lah saya bangun dan tidak ter- agak2 lagi menentang.

Tetapi usul ini saya tidak menentang, Tuan Yang di- sebab, Pertua (Ketawa)—ceasefire, untong-nya saya apabila kita tarek balek tiket Kelas (B) keretapi itu.
Tuan Yang di-Pertua, saya mengatakan saya untong bukan kerana dapat $150 itu sa haja, Tuan Yang di-Pertua, saya suka- sadikit lah hendak mencheritakan dengan saya perchaya izin Tuan, wakil2 ra'ayat pun tidak kurang susah- nya macham saya juga sa-bagai Mem ber of Parliament ia-itu masaalah pass keretapi yang (B) ini pun sudah me- meningkan ra'ayat.

Bangun pagi buka pintu, sudah ada orang tunggu hendak meminta-nya.

Itu amat-lah susah.
Itu amat-lah susah.

Ada pun masaalah $150, Tuan Yang di-Pertua, saya sa- bagai manusia biasa, orang yang humble, layman saya cheritakan, minta kepala wakil2 1459 22 JUNE 1967 1460 ma'af, Tuan, kalau saya hendak kata- kan, kalau saya tidak jadi Member of Parliament, saya lebeh senang daripada saya jadi Member of Parliament se- karang.

Saya sa-bagai sa-orang guru saya dapat kira2 $500 lebeh sa-bulan.

Saya bekerja sampai pukul satu, tidak tidak ada ada orang kachau saya, orang buat bagitu semua.
Chuti 3-4 bulan sa-kali chuti panjang, bagitu bagini.

Lagi lebeh senang, Tuan Yang di-Pertua, tetapi yang saya katakan untong saya ini bagini: Sekarang ini serangan parti politik terlampau kuat.

Pehak2 Perikatan pun mengirimkan orang2-nya pergi ka-Kelantan terutama pergi di-Bachok menyerang kawasan saya.

Kalau di-tarek tiket (B) ini orang2 Perikatan boleh menghantar orang dia pergi ka-Kelantan (Ketawa).

Jadi, terak hendak bawa itu tidak ada, tentera saya chukup lega dalam perkara ini.
Kalau dia pergi sendiri, dia banyak kerja.

Menteri hendak pergi, dia banyak kerja.

Hendak kirim orang lain, tidak boleh.

Member2 dia hendak pergi sendiri.

Jadi, kerana dia banyak kerja dia tidak pergi ka-sana, tiket (B) pun tidak ada, saya boleh lepas kawasan saya tidak payah terok sangat.

Jadi, ini-lah untong saya, Tuan Yang di- Pertua, yang saya kata saya sokong Kerajaan itu dan pehak Kerajaan di- samping hendak menyukakan Ahli2 dia dapat $150 maka dia sudah mengu- rangkan itu di-dalam pilehan raya.
lega umpama-nya jentera2 dia terak, tidak Tuan Yang di-Pertua, yang kedua ia-lah bagi Ahli2 yang banyak duit, mithal-nya duit tidak banyak, tetapi sa-bagaimana Ahli dari senang-lah pada Batu (Ketawa) Dr Tan Chee Khoon: Tuan Yang di-Pertua, mana-kah wakil daripada Bachok tahu saya ada wang atau tidak ada wang.

Saya sa-benar-nya sa-orang yang bekerja betul.

Saya tunggu untok hendak berchakap, dan lepas itu saya hendak pergi bekerja di-gudang ubat saya.
Tuan Haji Abu Bakar bin Hamzah: Tuan Yang di-Pertua, saya tidak dapat menentukan duit atau pun banyak, te tapi pada satu tahun saya di-jemput oleh Yang Berhormat itu makan malam di-sana, saya tengok motokar (Ketawa).

Saya besar, rumah besar pergi bersama2 dua tiga orang, Alex Josey pun ada (Ketawa) saya pergi dan saya tertarek hati, saya lewat balek sampai pukul satu melihat ada anjing besar2 di-rumah dia dan anjing2 ini semua makan daging2 belaka, Tuan Yang di-Pertua (Ketawa).
itu kalau dudok Jadi, Tuan Yang di-Pertua, sa-lain daripada itu kita dapati bahawa rugi Kerajaan kalau kita tidak membuat macham sekarang ia-itu kita nampak pada dzahir-nya kita bagi $150.

Kita boleh menambah wang kapada Mem ber2 of Parliament, tetapi kalau ma terasa rugi Kera cham dahulu kita sa-macham jaan, yang sa-benar-nya dahulu (B) tiket rugi, kerana itu boleh di-gunakan, Tuan Yang di- Pertua, kalau Member yang di-Kuala Lumpur saya tidak tahu.
Ahli di-Batu mithal-nya di-Kuala Lumpur, dia boleh menggunakan pass (B) itu di-beri kapada orang2 untok menjalankan kerja2 parti politik.

Mem ber2 Perikatan pun bagitu juga malam dia pergi ka-Singapura, patah balek.

Arti-nya sa-hari sa-malam sudah ada $80.00 Kerajaan bayar.

Pagi besok dia berhenti mandi di-Kuala Lumpur dan pergi Penang dia patah balek $60-$140.
Kalau dalam sa-bulan Tuan Yang di- Pertua, kalau orang active betul dekat sa-ribu sa-bulan dan ini yang me- nolong Perikatan dahulu chergas dalam jentera2 politik.

Dengan demikian, Tuan Yang di-Pertua, saya berterima kaseh kapada Kerajaan memotong jentera itu.

Tuan Ali bin Haji Ahmad: Tuan Yang di-Pertua, dengan usul ini tidak- lah berarti bahawa privilege, atau pun kemudahan yang di-berikan kapada Ahli2 Parlimen bertambah.
Yang sa- benar-nya pass (B) keretapi itu di-ambil balek dan di-gantikan dengan bayaran elaun perjalanan sa-banyak $150 tiap2 sa-bulan bagi Ahli2 yang berkenaan, kechuali Menteri, atau Menteri Muda atau Setia-usaha Parlimen atau pun Setia-usaha Politik.

Dari segi Kerajaan, perubahan tidak-lah melibatkan lebeh perbelanjaan wang.

Pada tahun yang lepas bayaran untok pass keretapi ini 1461 22 JUNE 1967 1462 ini sa-banyak kira2 $384,000.
Dengan pindaan yang ada ini ia-ini elaun per- jalanan sa-bagai yang sudah di-katakan tadi ia-itu $150 bagi tiap2 sa-orang ahli Parlimen sa-lain daripada Menteri, Menteri2 Muda, Setia-usaha2 Parlimen dan Setia-usaha2 Politik.

Elaun per- jalanan itu berjumlah $320,000.

Pass keretapi bagi Menteri2 dan sa-bagai- nya tadi $20,000 lebeh kurang, pass keretapi bagi Ahli2 Parlimen ia-itu yang selalu di-panggil pass (A) kira2 $40,000.

Jadi, jumlah semua-nya ia-lah kira2 $380,000.


ia-lah $384,000 Jadi, dengan chara lama ini, dengan chara tiap2 Ahli Parlimen di-berikan pass (A) dan pass (B) maka jumlah perbelanjaan bagi tahun lepas dan dengan pindaan ini, maka anggaran perbelanjaan ada-lah kira2 $380,000 dan dengan demikian tidak ada-lah tambahan perbelanjaan yang di-bebankan kapada Kerajaan sa- bagaimana yang di-da'awa oleh Ahli Yang Berhormat daripada Batu tadi.
Dan dengan ini berarti-lah bahawa tidak ada tambahan kapada privilege2 yang di-berikan kapada Ahli2 Parlimen sa-hingga memberatkan atau mem- bebankan perbelanjaan negara.

Ahli Yang Berhormat daripada Muar Utara mengshorkan supaya per- khidmatan Menteri2 yang telah bekerja sa-lama berbelas tahun di-timbangkan di-berikan sagu hati, atau elaun atau sa-bagai-nya.
Perkara ini ada-lah di- luar daripada usul ini dan walau bagai- mana pun saya menguchapkan terima kaseh kapada fikiran atau pandangan Ahli Yang Berhormat daripada Muar Utara itu.

pergi ka-Kelantan Ahli Yang Berhormat daripada Ba- chok, dalam pada menyokong usul ini, beliau menyatakan kalau di-tarek Pass (B) keretapi ini maka kurang-lah orang2 untok UMNO menentang PAS.
Yang sa-benar-nya, Tuan Yang di-Pertua, sa-panjang pe- ngetahuan saya, kechualikan Menteri2 tugas2 lain2 yang menjalankan dan rasmi-nya, maka orang2 UMNO yang itu ada-lah di- pergi ka-Kelantan tanggong perbelanjaan-nya oleh Ibu Pejabat UMNO dan tidak daripada (Tepok).
Dan perbelanjaan Kerajaan ia-itu saya kerap saya sendiri tahu pergi ka-Kelantan dan tiap2 kali pe- mergian saya ka-Kelantan ia-lah de ngan perbelanjaan Ibu Pejabat UMNO dan saya juga dengan perbelanjaan sendiri—tidak pernah satu sen saya menggunakan wang Kerajaan.

Jadi, dengan demikian dengan di-tarek Pass (B) ini tidak-lah pula berma'ana orang UMNO tidak ka-Kelantan, akan pergi juga ka-Kelantan dan akan juga pergi menyerang PAS di-Kelantan.
Chuma jaga2-lah Ahli Yang Berhormat dari pada Bachok itu (Ketawa).

Tentang sokongan yang lain2 itu, saya menguchapkan berbanyak2 terima kaseh.

Question put, and agreed to.

Resolved, That the House pursuant to the provisions of Section 4 of the Parliament (Members' Remuneration) Act, 1960, resolves that the following amendments be made the Schedule to that Act— to For items 5 and 6 of the Schedule sub stitute the following— 5.
Travelling Allowance: Members (other than Ministers, Assistant Ministers, Par liamentary Secretaries and Political Secretaries) shall be paid a sum of one hundred and fifty dollars per jmensem.

6.
6.

(1) Travel by Rail: Members who are Ministers, Assistant Ministers, Parlia mentary Secretaries and Political Secre taries shall be supplied with two free railway passes including sleeper) one for use by the member and the other for use by the wife or husband of the member or by any person accom panying the Member.

(first class (2) Travel by Sea or Air: Members may recover the expenses of any journeys made by sea or air for the purpose of attending meetings of the House or any Committee thereof.
BILLS THE FOREIGN REPRESENTA TIVES (PRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES) BILL Second Reading The Minister of Information and Broad casting (Tuan Senu bin Abdul Rahman): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move that a Bill intituled "an Act to enable certain Privileges and immunities to be con ferred on the basis of reciprocity of treatment, on representatives of foreign countries, being representatives who 1463 22 JUNE 1967 1464 are other than diplomatic and consular tives", be now read a second time.
those accredited as representa Mr Speaker, Sir, on 3rd April, 1967, Malaysia and the Soviet Union con cluded a Trade Agreement.

Under the terms of this Agreement, it was agreed that when the Union of Soviet Socia list Republics establishes a trade re the presentation in Kuala Lumpur, Trade Representative and his two Deputies shall enjoy all the immunities and privileges accorded to members of a diplomatic mission.
In International relations today, there are other types of representatives who are neither diplo types of matic nor consular.

These representatives are designated by differ ent names according to the practice of the countries concerned.

By mutual agreement, privileges and immunities may be accorded to these representa tives.

At the moment, Malaysian laws do not provide for the conferment of the privileges and immunities on re presentatives other than diplomatic and consular agents.
to It is necessary, therefore, to pass a new Act of Parliament conferring on His Majesty the Yang di-Pertuan Agong and powers immunities on foreign representatives other than diplomats and consuls, in order to be able to give effect to the terms of Trade Agreement between Malaysia and the Soviet Union.

privileges accord Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move.

Tuan Haji Abdul-Rahman to second I beg Ya'kub: Sir, motion.
bin the Tuan Haji Abu Bakar bin Hamzah: izin Tuan Yang di-Pertua, dengan tuan, sadikit pendapat berkenaan dengan undang2 yang baru kita ketahui di-negara kita ini.
suka memberi saya Tuan Yang di-Pertua, benar sa-buah undang2 yang sa-macham ini patut kita adakan di-negara kita ini, kerana per- kara yang sa-macham ini bukan-lah perkara baru bagi negeri2 yang lain, tetapi, Tuan Yang di-Pertua, saya dukachita kalau-lah sa-kira-nya negara kita dapat membuat rundingan dengan Negara Soviet atau dengan Russia supaya kita mengadakan perhubongan, maka ada lebeh baik-nya kalau kita mengadakan hubongan diplomatik itu terus dengan tidak payah mengadakan sa-orang pegawai, atau pun satu ke- dudokan yang bukan konsular dan bukan juga diplomatik.
Ini, Tuan Yang di-Pertua, ada-lah sa-mata2 satu Rang Undang2 yang benar2 merupakan satu Bill yang bersifat capitalistic, ia-itu satu Rang Undang2 hendak memboleh- kan taukeh2 untok membuat berniaga di-sini, bukan-lah orang itu datang untok membuat perhubongan diplo matik ia-itu merapatkan lagi hubongan sa-buah negara dengan sa-buah negara yang lain, pada hal dalam perhubongan diplomatik itu boleh di-lakukan per- niagaan dan berbagai2-nya, tetapi, kita pileh yang sa-macham ini.
taraf Tuan jadi ada diplomatik.

Tuan Yang di-Pertua, saya bimbang boleh ada negara2 luar yang sa-benar- nya tidak mahu hendak mengadakan perhubongan baik dengan Malaysia kita ini.
Tetapi mereka itu menchari sa- kesempatan mendapatkan bagai diplomatik atau pun konsular di-negara kita ini supaya ada kemu- dahan2 "free to move" ia-itu dapat kebebasan, kemerdekaan, untok ber- gerak sedang dia datang sa-mata2 untok menyiasat kedudokan ekonomi kita dan bagitu juga hendak menchari ke- kayaan kita di-sini pada hal hati-nya tidak-lah tertumpu untok hendak meng Yang adakan di-Pertua, boleh sa-buah negara yang bermusoh dengan kita dan dia hendak menchari rahsia2 di-negeri kita.
Dia hendak membuat kerja2 yang tidak baik itu dengan saloran diplo matik, maka dia akan di-tudoh satu negara yang tidak mempunyai' keperi- badian yang baik, atau akhlak yang baik dan kalau bagitu maka dia men dapatkan satu taraf yang sama dengan konsular atau diplomatik, maka dia menjalankan kerja2 yang sa-macham tuan2 tahu bahawa Russian ini dan ada-lah sangat pandai dalam perkara2 yang sa-macham ini.
Saya lebeh suka kalau Kerajaan kita meluluskan Undang2 ini buat sementara dan dengan sa-chepat mungkin, mithal-nya men jalankan hubongan diplomatik sa-chara langsong.

1465 22 JUNE 1967 1466 Wan Abdul Kadir bin Ismail: Tuan Yang di-Pertua, saya bangun menyo- kong Rang Undang2 ini dan saya sendiri berasa selalu pusing fikiran bila hujjah2 Ahli mendengar daripada Bachok yang, saya rasa, berchakap sa-bagai burong nuri tidak tahu apa maksud yang dia itu chakap dan butir2 perchakapan-nya itu.
Tuan Haji Abu Bakar bin Hamzah: satu peng- (Ketawa).

Dato' Yang di-Pertua, khianatan Minta jalan, Tuan Yang di-Pertua.

kapada saya Wan Abdul Kadir bin Ismail: Tuan Yang di-Pertua, saya maseh hendak berchakap satu dua minit.

Saya hendak menghabiskan sadikit sahaja.

Dengar dahulu, biar faham2.
Tuan Yang di-Pertua, soal meng- adakan kemudahan2 bagi wakil2 yang bukan bersifat diplomatik dan konsular ini, barangkali Ahli daripada Bachok itu sendiri bila sedar akan hakikat yang sa-benar-nya akan menyokong- nya, kerana ini memberi kesempatan untok kita memberi taraf layanan yang istimewa kapada wakil2 gerakan ke- merdekaan Aden, umpama-nya, yang hendak datang membuat Ibu Pejabat- nya di-sini dan meminta supaya di-beri layanan yang baik, juga boleh di- masokkan dalam kemudahan2 sa-bagai ini.
Dahulu Algeria mengadakan per- juangan kemerdekaan-nya, dan ada wakil2 yang di-tempatkan di-negeri2 yang telah merdeka.

Jadi dengan Rang Undang2 sa-bagai ini-lah mereka di- istimewa.

layanan yang beri Kalau tidak ada Rang Undang2 saperti ini bagaimana pejuang2 kemerdekaan itu dapat layanan istimewa daripada negeri2 di-tempat dia itu menempatkan orang-nya untok mendapatkan simpati dunia luar.
Jadi, oleh sebab itu, saya tidak nampak langsong jalan bagi tiap2 Ahli yang sioman fikiran-nya, yang faham apa yang di-terangkan di-dalam Rang Undang2 ini, untok membang- kang atau membantah Rang Undang2 tidak ada ini, kechuali orang yang fikiran yang sioman dan tidak tahu akan maksud apa yang di-chakapkan- nya itu, terima kaseh.
taraf daripada Tuan Senu bin Abdul Rahman: Tuan Yang di-Pertua, Ahli Yang Ber- Bachok hormat telah membuat chadangan ia-itu patut-lah di-adakan terus hubongan diplomatik dengan pehak Russia daripada meng adakan undang2 ini dengan kerana kata-nya undang2 ini ada-lah mewakili kapitalis.
Saya tak faham apa yang sa- benar-nya yang di-maksudkan oleh Ahli Yang Berhormat itu, tetapi me- mang-lah menjadi dasar Kerajaan kita pada had ini, ia-itu dengan kerana wakil2 trade yang akan di-berikan privilege ini bukan anggota2 diplomatik atau pun konsular, dan kita hendak mengadakan hubongan perniagaan de ngan Soviet Russia.

Jadi, dengan sebab itu-lah kita telah bersetuju dan apa yang kita chadangkan ini bukan-lah satu perkara baru, tetapi juga telah di- jalankan di-satengah2 negeri.
ini, sa-lama ini kita Berkenaan dengan hubongan diplo matik, itu ada-lah akan menjadi tujuan pada masa yang akan datang yang saya sendiri tak dapat-lah hendak memberi akuan di-dalam Rumah tetapi perjanjian perdagangan ini ada-lah sa- bagai langkah yang pertama yang saya perchaya Ahli daripada Bachok juga tidak ada faham hubongan langsong dengan negeri Socialist Russia.
Jadi, saya harap Ahli Yang Berhormat itu faham-lah akan sa-benar-nya tujuan Kerajaan yang sa-bagaimana itu bukan-lah kata Yang Berhormat, yang saya tak faham yang di-katakan ini ia-lah dasar kapitalis hendak menggalakkan ahli2 perniagaan dan sa-bagai-nya—saya tak faham langsong apa tujuan Ahli Yang Berhormat itu.
tujuan Tuan Haji Abu Bakar bin Hamzah: Tuan Yang di-Pertua, yang saya maksudkan ini ia-lah kalau kita meng adakan perhubongan taraf yang sa- macham ini bukan diplomatik dan bukan konsular, saya bimbang orang2 yang datang ka-negara kita ini boleh membuat kerja2 yang tidak di-ingini, tetapi kalau mereka itu sa-bagai diplo matik atau pun sa-bagai konsular tentu-lah tata-tertib-nya itu lebeh ter- ator.
Itu yang saya kata sa-bagai ber sifat kapitalistik ia-itu Rang Undang2 itu memberi peluang kapada orang2 1467 22 JUNE 1967 1468 yang menjalankan trade ia-itu orang2 yang menchari sa-mata2 interest atau daripada lebeh banyak kebendaan hendak mengadakan perhubongan ke- baikan antara satu negara dengan satu negara dan saya berpuas hati dengan jawapan yang di-beri oleh Menteri dengan lembut dan tidak biadab dan sopan yang sa-macham itu.

Tuan Senu bin Abdul Rahman: Terima kaseh.


Bagi Ahli Yang Berhor- mat daripada Kuala Trengganu Utara, saya menguchapkan terima kaseh atas sokongan Ahli Yang Berhormat itu.

Question put, and agreed to.

Bill accordingly read a second time.

Mr (Deputy) Speaker: Meshuarat ini di-tanggohkan hingga pukul 4 petang ini.

Sitting suspended at 1.00 p.m.


Sitting resumed at 4.00 p.m. (Mr Deputy Speaker in the Chair) THE FOREIGN REPRESENTA TIVES (PRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES) BILL Committee and Third Reading House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill.

Bill considered in Committee.

(Mr Deputy Speaker in the Chair) Clauses 1 to 4 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Bill reported without amendment: read the third time and passed.
THE KIDNAPPING (AMENDMENT) BILL Second Reading Tuan Haji Abdul-Rahman bin Ya'kub: Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move that a Bill intituled "an Act to amend the Kidnapping Act, 1961" be now read a second time.

Mr Speaker, Sir, since the coming into operation of the principal Act, experience has shown us the principal Act contains a few defects which, in the opinion of the Govern that ment it is essential to remedy.
For example, there is no provision in the principal Act to empower the court to order forfeiture of a vessel or a vehicle which has been used for the commis sion of an offence under the Act, whereas, for example, under the Cus toms Ordinance, any vessel, any vehi cle, used for the commission of certain offences under the Customs Ordinance must be forfeited.

Clause 2 of the pre sent Amendment Bill seeks to remedy this defect.
Mr Speaker, Sir, Clause 3 of the Bill seeks to provide statutory presump tions requiring the Court to accept the finding of money, or property, or any proceeds thereof, which has been delivered as ransom in the possession of a person as presumptive evidence that such person had knowledge that such money or property was delivered as ransom.
Again, this Clause is most essential in order to ensure that those, who have committed a very serious crime under the Act, do not go scot-free because of legal technicality.

One further change, introduced by Clause 4 of the Bill, is that it is pro posed to authorise a police officer to intercept any communication which is likely to contain any information rela ting to the payment of ransom and— this is the new innovation—to use such information as evidence in court.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move.


Tuan Senu bin Abdul Rahman: Sir, I beg to second the motion.

Question put, and agreed to.

Bill accordingly read a second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House.

House immediately resolved into a Committee on the Bill.

itself Bill considered in Committee.

(Mr Deputy Speaker in the Chair) Clauses 1 to 4 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Bill reported without amendment: read the third time and passed.
1469 22 JUNE 1967 1470 THE PRISONS (AMENDMENT) BILL Second Reading Tuan Haji Abdul-Rahman bin Ya'kub: Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move that a Bill intituled "an Act to amend the Prisons Ordinance, 1952" be now read a second time.
Under the existing provision of section 8, sub-section (2) of the Prisons lockup Ordinance, 1952, a police appointed as a place of confinement could only serve as a prison for the purpose of Chapter XXVII of the Criminal Procedure Code of the former Federated Malay States and also of Chapter XXI of the Criminal Proce dure Code of the former Straits Settle ments.

In other words only accused persons on remand and very short-term convicted prisoners can be held in such appointed lockups.
Civil debtors on warrants of arrest or commitment issued in civil processes cannot, there fore, be confined in such lockups.
In view of the very few and distantly located prison establishments that we have, difficulties have been experienced in regard to confining civil prisoners and in its search for a practical solu tion, the Government finds no alterna tive but to amend section 8, sub-section (2) of the Principal Ordinance in the manner outlined in the Bill, so as to make confinement of civil debtors in police lockups possible.

Sir, I beg to move.

Tuan Senu bin Abdul Rahman: Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to second the motion.
Question put, and agreed to.

Bill accordingly read a second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House.

House immediately into a Committee on the Bill.

resolved itself Bill considered in Committee.

(Mr Deputy Speaker in the Chair) Clauses 1 to 3 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Bill reported without amendment: read the third time and passed.
THE PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION (AMENDMENT) BILL Second Reading Tuan Haji Abdul-Rahman bin Ya'kub: Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move that a Bill intituled "an Act to amend the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1961" be now read a second time.

things, an reorganised providing, Sir, in order to provide for the more effectual prevention of corruption, the Government has constantly kept under review the existing set-up of the Anti- Corruption Agency as well as the existing relevant legislations.
Conse quently, it is decided that the Agency be amongst other increase by nearly 200% of officers to staff the Agency.

The reorganisation process is now under way.


In the light of difficulties expe rienced both by the law officers and also the Police Department connected with investigation and prosecution of corruption cases, it has also been to provide certain found necessary amendments to the existing legislation, namely, the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1961; and hence the Prevention of Corruption (Amendment) Bill which is now before this House.
The reasons for providing the amend ments, Mr Speaker, Sir, are clearly set out in the Explanatory Statement of the Bill itself, but I would like to take this opportunity to elaborate on a few other points.

to investigation, by I will take, first, Section 23 of the Principal Act.

This Section, Mr Spea ker, Sir, provides for special powers of investigation given to a Police officer of or above the rank of Assistant Superintendent on the authority of the Public Prosecutor.
These special powers are limited in scope in that they relate only the Police officers so authorised, into any bank account, share account, or purchase account of any person who, in the opinion of the Public Prosecutor, has committed an offence under the Act or under any prescribed offence.
It is to be noted that the Public Prosecutor the Principal Act can only under authorise these limited special powers, 1471 22 JUNE 1967 1472 when a written report has been made at a police station and when the Police have commenced investigation and the Public Prosecutor has considered from the evidence, or facts, produced in the investigation papers, that an offence has been committed.
The new Section 23, which is contained in Clause 4 of the Bill, seeks to provide the Public Prosecutor with general powers to authorise a Police officer of or above the rank of Assistant Superintendent to investigate into any allegation of cor that ruption or, when he is satisfied there for reasonable grounds suspecting that a corrupt offence has been committed by any person, even though no written report has been made at a police station.
This special authority given to the Pubilc Prosecutor is, in fact, in addition to the authority of the Police to investigate as provided under the Criminal Procedure Code.

I am sure Honourable Members of this House will agree that this is a great the principal legislation in that it provides a more effective and wider measure to stamp out corrupt practices.
improvement on are limits existing Again, Mr Speaker, Sir, Section 3 of the the legislation punishment of corruption to those who corruptly solicit or receive or corruptly give or offer any gratification as an inducement to or reward for or on account of any member, officer or servant of a public body doing or forbearing to do anything in respect of any matter or transaction in which the said public body is concerned.
It is now proposed to enlarge the scope by providing for the punishment of all those who are involved in corruption irrespective of whether the transaction was made on account of any person or any member, officer or servant of a public body; hence Clause 2 of the Bill.

It legal obligation to make a report of corrup tion for a promise of gratification be extended to Members of Parliament, or the State Legislative Members of Assembly, or a member of a public body.
The present law limits this legal obligation to public officers only.

Since the present also covers legislation offences relating to Members of Parlia is also proposed that the ment or State Legislative Assembly or members of a public body, it is felt that is necessary, hence the amendment Clause 3 of the Bill extending the legal obligation.
At the Committee Stage, I will move an amendment to this Clause as indicated in the circular which has been sent, I believe, to all the Honour able Members of this House.

Finally, Mr Speaker, Sir, Section 25 of the Principal Act gives the Public Prosecutor the power, in the course of any investigation or proceedings into or relating to an offence under the Act or any prescribed offence by any person in the service of any public body, to require such person to furnish information as required in the case.
Clause 5 of the Bill extends the power to obtain of information from any person in the course of investigation.

the Public Prosecutor With these amendments to the present law, it is expected that the difficulties experienced by the law officers and the connected with Police Department investigation and prosecution of cor ruption cases in the past would be overcome and that the new law would be a more effective piece of legislation to stamp out corruption.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move.


Tuan Senu bin Abdul Rahman: Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to second the motion.

Tuan Haji Ahmad bin Abdullah (Kelantan Hilir): Tuan Yang di-Pertua, saya suka hendak mengambil bahagian sadikit membahathkan Bill yang ada di-hadapan kita.
Tuan Yang di-Pertua, saya menyo- kong Bill yang ada di-hadapan kita tahu bahawasa-nya ini kerana saya tujuan Bill ini ia-lah untok hendak menchegah korapsi yang sedang ber- jalan dengan merebak-nya di-dalam tanah ayer kita ini, mudahan2 dengan di-sahkan Bill ini dapat-lah Kerajaan satu senjata yang besar dan kuat untok menchegah penyakit korapsi ini.
Tetapi, Tuan Yang di-Pertua, meng- ikut pengalaman kita semenjak prin cipal Bill ini telah di-luluskan, maka 1473 22 JUNE 1967 1474 chuma orang yang kechil2 sahaja atau pun small fry sahaja yang kita dengar, dari satu masa ka-satu masa, di- tangkap dan di-jatohkan hukuman ka- atas mereka itu tetapi big shark—ikan yang besar yang menelan dengan sa- chara besaran2—jarang benar kita dengar telah di-tangkap dan di-jatoh kan hukuman ka-atas mereka itu.
Ini boleh jadi kerana keehuaian daripada pehak Kerajaan mahu pun chuai dari pada pehak public dan ra'ayat jelata untok memberi keterangan2 dan kerja- sama kapada pehak Kerajaan.

Tetapi bagaimana pun saya berharap kapada pehak Kerajaan dengan mendapat sen- ikan jata yang kuat besar itu tidak berapa lama lagi kita akan dengar dapat di-hadapkan ka- Mahkamah2 dan di-hukum mereka itu mengikut jenayah di-atas perbuatan mereka itu.
ini mudahan2 Tuan Yang di-Pertua, di-sini suka- lah saya hendak sebutkan sadikit ten- tang perkara yang berlaku, tentang rumah2 murah.

ranchangan perkara Sunggoh pun perkara rumah murah ini telah di-sebutkan oleh wakil daripada Ipoh dan juga wakil daripada Batu, tetapi saya suka-lah mengambil baha- gian juga pada masa ini untok menye- butkan tentang perkara rumah murah di-Sungai Way.
Mengikut cherita yang saya dapat bahawasa-nya rumah murah yang di-Sungai Way ini ia-lah untok orang2 Melayu, baharu sahaja mereka itu mendudoki rumah ini sa-lama tiga bulan sahaja tetapi sekarang rumah itu sudah tiris dan pechah lantai2-nya dan dinding2-nya dan mereka itu telah berulang kali mengirim itu kapada pegawai yang bersangkutan dengan perkara ini tetapi mereka itu tidak dapat apa2 pun jawapan sa- hingga sampai hari ini, walhal mereka tiap2 bulan itu sa-banyak $46 dan mereka itu harus membayar instalment ini sa-lama 15 tahun, jadi harga sa-buah rumah ini jatoh-nya $8,282 tetapi baharu chuma mereka itu mendudoki rumah ini sa- lama tiga bulan mereka itu telah dapat ketahu'i bahawasa-nya rumah sudah roboh dan tiris pula.
Saya harap dari pada pehak Kerajaan mengambil lang- kah untok menyelideki sa-takat mana perkara aduan ini dan rayuan ini di- terpaksa membayar surat2 buat oleh tuan2 rumah itu benar-kah atau tidak.

Kerana saya fikir kalau benar, ini satu soal dan satu perkara yang tentu-lah bersangkut paut dengan korapsi juga.
bahawasa jawatan mereka Dan satu lagi suka-lah saya hendak menchadangkan banyak pegawai2 yang besar2 ia-itu sa-bagai ex-Minisiter juga apabila mereka itu berhenti daripada Minister dan pegawai besar2 juga apabila mereka itu ber henti daripada itu, mereka itu di-jadikan sa-bagai Penga- rah atau pun Pengurus, Director, dan bermacham2.
Saya fikir ini pun satu perkara yang boleh membawa kapada korapsi dan rasuah kerana sa-lama mereka itu menjadi Menteri tetap-lah hubongan mereka dengan Kebinet Minister dengan kawan sa-jawat-nya tetap-lah itu rapat, dan mereka itu mempunyai influence—dan pengaroh untok mendapat apa2 juga keuntongan kapada kompeni mereka itu.
Oleh sebab yang demikian kalau sa-kira-nya Kerajaan mengadakan satu Undang2 ex-Minister atau pun orang yang besar2 kemudian daripada sa-lama tiga tahun lepas daripada mereka itu meletakkan jawatan mereka jangan di-bagi itu itu—jangan di-benarkan me mereka reka itu menjadi Pengarah-kah atau Director-kah atau sa-bagai-nya.

Saya fikir dengan jalan bagini sahaja baharu- lah kita dapat menghapuskan korapsi atau sa-kurang2-nya dapat di-kurang- kan korapsi.
Tuan Tajudin bin Ali (Larut Utara): Tuan Yang di-Pertua, saya dengan sukachita bangun menyokong Rang Undang2 Menchegah Korapsi atau pun rasuah yang telah di-kemukakan oleh Yang Berhormat Menteri Kehakiman.

Saya menguchapkan tahniah kapada Kerajaan kerana mengambil langkah yang bagini bijaksana mengetatkan lagi Rang Undang2 berkenaan dengan ra suah.
Saya ingat Ahli Yang Berhormat daripada Kelantan Hilir tadi mengata- kan rasuah ini berjadi2 sangat di-tanah ayer kita, dia mengaku hendak bawa perkara big fish, shark.

Rumah bochor tidak ada kena mengena dengan korapsi atau pun rasuah.
1475 22 JUNE 1967 1476 sa-lagi chuma Tuan Yang di-Pertua, saya berpen- dapat hal-ehwal rasuah ini, saya kata- kan dengan ada tegas-nya bintang dan bulan rasuah ini mesti ada, daripada pehak Kerajaan saya mengata- kan rasuah memang ada dan akan berjalan, bagi kita Kerajaan yang ber- tanggong-jawab dapat kita menahan, menjaga perkara ini supaya jangan merebak.
Tuan Yang di-Pertua, saya berpendapat ada-lah rasuah ini bangkit-nya berputar dengan dua per ia-itu pertama-nya kara yang besar, pentadbiran kita barangkali longgar sadikit dan ada juga kena mengena dengan hal-ehwal buroh, barangkali Undang2 Buroh kita kurang ketat sa dikit dan disciplin daripada pejabat2.
Tuan Yang di-Pertua, sangat dukachita baharu2 ini Kerajaan Perika- tan telah pun memberi kuasa kapada pegawai2 atasan dalam segala pejabat mengambil tindakan yang tegas, chepat dan wajar kapada kaki-tangan pejabat yang tidak menjalankan kewajipan-nya dengan betul dan elok.

Rasa saya sa dikit sa-banyak-nya hal-ehwal rasuah itu dapat di-kawal oleh pegawai2 kanan di-dalam pejabat2 itu.
saya Tuan Yang di-Pertua, sa-lepas kita mendapat kemerdekaan ini saya nam- pak kerani2 muda yang maseh dalam bahasa Inggeris di-katakan green horn lagi peon2 sudah pun memakai moto- kar, scooter dan sa-bagai-nya.

Ini baik kapada ra'ayat jelata kita, tetapi saya takut2 orang2 ini fasal apa, kita memi- kirkan dalam masa penjajah dahulu saya rasa kalau umpama-nya negeri saya, Perak, seluroh negeri Perak kita hendak menchari lebeh daripada enam tidak orang peon memakai motokar, ada.
Tetapi sekarang sudah banyak.

Saya takut orang2 ini gaji-nya pun tidak berapa banyak kerana mereka selalu merungut mengatakan gaji tidak berapa tetapi dapat menggunakan banyak motokar, makan besar (dinner) dan sa-bagai-nya.

Barangkali juga perkara2 yang tidak baik ada mereka ambil champor tangan.

Oleh sebab itu saya shorkan kapada pehak yang berkenaan ia-itu Corruption Agency ini memer- hatikan hal-ehwal ini.

Tuan Yang di-Pertua, corruption ini chukup pandai di-jalankan oleh orang2 pehak atasan.
Saya ada mendengar tetapi kalau pehak Agency tidak men dengar, saya rasa tidak patut, kerana ini di-chakapkan di-merata2.

perkara Boleh-lah kita katakan mengapa-kah tidak orang2 itu mendatangkan report kapada pehak Agency ini atau pun kapada pehak Polis report Tuan Yang di-Pertua, itu senang sahaja bagi pehak Agency sen- diri.

Pada pendapat saya, Tuan Yang di-Pertua, hendak membawa sa-saorang itu ka-Mahkamah mengambil masa yang panjang.
Umpama-nya pehak Corruption Agency ini hendak menchari sa-orang dan dia terpaksa mengikut daripada sa-bulan, dua bulan, tiga bulan enam bulan.

Umpama-nya, sampai kalau dia hendak menangkap, hendak memberi duit daripada satu orang ka pada pegawai Kerajaan umpama-nya, duit itu di-buboh tepong dan sa-bagai- nya, mengambil photography dan mem bawa satu saksi.

Ini saya rasa tidak patut.


Saya mendatangkan shor ini untok menyenangkan Kerajaan, Tuan Yang di-Pertua, chadangkan, mengapa tidak kita buat lain sadikit.

Saya chadangkan adakan umpama-nya adakan Arbitration Court, orang salah itu menerangkan kapada Court um pama-nya dia dapat sa-tengah juta ringgit.

Di-mana dia dapat sa-tengah juta itu.

Peon, di-mana dia dapat sa- buah motokar itu, di-bawa dia, suroh dia proof, bukan kapada pehak Agency atau kapada pehak Polis menchari kesalahan dia.
saya Selalu-nya, Tuan Yang di-Pertua, umpama-nya kalau kita tanya di-mana kamu dapat rumah baharu ini, dia kata mertua aku bagi.

Bila tanya pula dan ka-sana pula, berdolak dalek, Tuan Yang di-Pertua.

Jadi susah sangat.

Saya bersimpati dengan pehak Corruption Agency ini.

Kalau kita ikut undang2 yang lama payah sangat kita hendak bawa orang yang salah yang terlibat dalam perkara ini ka-Mahkamah de ngan jaya dan memuaskan hati.
Tuan Yang di-Pertua, satu lagi per kara yang saya hendak beri pandangan dalam Dewan yang mulia ini ia-itu di- pehak Pejabat2 kita nampak perkara2 yang tidak berguna dan tidak berfaedah kapada kakitangan pejabat dan juga kantin.

jelata umpama-nya ra'ayat 1477 22 JUNE 1967 1478 Kantin ini tidak ada faedah kapada siapa2 terutama sa-kali kapada kaki- tangan pejabat dan di-sini-lah tumboh- nya corruption kechil, corruption sa- chara kechil di-beri oleh orang ramai kapada pegawai2 pejabat.
Jadi saya shorkan kapada Kerajaan menerusi Yang Berhormat Menteri Kehakiman memikirkan, ada-kah patut kita pan- jangkan kantin ini sa-lama2-nya atau kita hapuskan saya fikir, Tuan Yang di-Pertua, kalau kita ini tidak ada siapa akan hapuskan merungut dan tidak ada siapa yang rugi dan lagi satu perkara, Tuan Yang di-Pertua, macham petition writer, orang yang menulis surat.
Ini pun yang dudok bertaboran di-merata tempat di-satengah2 pejabat itu menjadi ejen kapada pegawai2, sa-tengah2 pegawai Kerajaan, mengambil duit daripada orang ramai beri kapada pegawai2.
sahaja, kerana Jadi saya shorkan, Tuan Yang di- Pertua, supaya petition writer ini pun di-jauhkan daripada sa-tengah2 pejabat, bukan semua pejabat, pejabat2 yang mengeluarkan lesen, atau pun yang kita fikirkan akan menimbulkan rasuah dan sa-bagai-nya dan juga kedai2 umpama kedai ice, kedai kopi—ini pun menjadi ejen, atau pun kakitangan sa-tengah2 pegawai2 yang menerima duit daripada orang ramai untok pegawai Kerajaan yang tertentu.
Jadi perkara2 ini saya rasa, Tuan Yang di-Pertua, kalau dapat kita jauhkan, maka sadikit sa-banyak- nya rasuah dapat kita jauhkan.

Akhir-nya, Tuan Yang di-Pertua, rasuah selalu-nya bukan dia keluar terus daripada satu orang hendak beri ka pada pegawai2.
Kita tengok terutama- nya hari Sabtu, Tuan Yang di-Pertua, sa-tengah2 orang itu pergi mengambil rasuah, umpama-nya di-Perak, dia tidak pergi mengambil di-Perak, dia pergi ka-Pulau Pinang, dia terbang ka-Singapura, yang besar lagi dia pergi ka-Hong Kong dan ada juga duit2 ini yang menerima duit2 itu barangkali di- London, orang yang pandai-lah, Tuan Yang di-Pertua.
Jadi saya harap sangat- lah shor saya, Tuan Yang di-Pertua, ia-itu kita memikirkan kesusahan ma cham Court hendak bawa orang ini ka-pejabat jadi saya susah sangat, shorkan Court ini kita ambil di-jadikan satu Arbitration Court supaya orang salah itu menerangkan di-mana-kah dia dapat rumah baharu ini, di-mana-kah dia dapat motokar Jaguar ini.

Kita tengok baharu2 ini, Tuan Yang di-Pertua, di-negeri Perak satu lori lalu sahaja dan driver lori itu mengeluarkan $70 bagi kapada sa-kumpulan mata2.
Ini, dia kata, $70 ini untok bulan ini.

Nasib baik kita, Tuan Yang di-Pertua, pegawai polis itu yang sangat bertang- gong-jawab dan di-bawa orang yang berkenaan itu ka-Mahkamah.

Saya rasa perkara ini terjadi bukan itu sahaja bahkan banyak lagi.
Jadi itu-lah per kara2 yang dapat saya terangkan dalam Dewan ini yang patut menjadi fikiran kapada Corruption dan Agency ini dan saya ulangi sa-kali lagi, kalau tidak ada keberatan bagi pehak Kerajaan, sangat-lah saya berharap supaya Arbitration Court ini di-adakan ia-itu berlainan sadikit.
Kalau-lah kita memakai juga undang2 British, chukup susah, 6 bulan hendak mendapat satu case yang baik chukup susah, jadi kita pakai sa-balek-nya lagi, kita chari sa- balek lagi, ubah sadikit undang2 kita untok bawa orang ini banyak lagi ka- Mahkamah, orang2 yang terlibat dalam hal-ehwal rasuah ini.

panduan Sekian, terima kaseh.


Datin Hajjah Fatimah binti Haji Abdul Majid: Yang Berhormat Tuan Yang di-Pertua, saya bangun mengambil kesempatan untok menguchapkan sa- tinggi2 tahniah kapada pehak Kerajaan yang telah membentangkan Rang Undang2 Rasuah di-Dewan yang mulia ini untok di-luluskan.

Kita sunggoh berasa bangga dengan ada-nya undang2 sa-kurang2-nya menchegah dapat-lah Kerajaan membasmi rasuah yang di-katakan berleluasan di-dalam negeri kita ini.
rasuah rasuah Juga kita berharap mudah2an tidak- lah hanya undang2 tinggal dengan undang2 sahaja, malah rasuah sa-makin menjadi2 yang mana akan merosakkan pentadbiran dan pereko- nomian di-negara kita dan jangan-lah pula undang2 yang di-gubal dengan bagitu susah payah akan menjadi kertas yang beku daripada segala tindakan Kerajaan terhadap sa-siapa juga yang melanggar peratoran2 yang di-kanunkan 1479 22 JUNE 1967 1480 di-dalam Undang2 Rasuah.
Demikian jangan-lah undang2 juga hendak-nya ini terhad di-gunakan sa-mata2 untok menghukum ikan2 bilis sahaja, sedang- kan ikan2 yang besar yang senentiasa mengganas berleluasan menekmati segala kesempatan peluang kapada-nya di-kechualikan daripada tindakan yang segi undang2 sewajar-nya daripada rasuah itu.

Kerana sa-chara yang demi kian sangat-lah tidak 'adil dan selalu berlaku dan pernah di-lakukan.
ra'ayat peruntokan wang Yang Berhormat Tuan Yang di- Pertua, apakala hukuman2 yang mena- sabah itu hanya di-kenakan kapada pekerja2 yang berjawatan rendah sahaja sedangkan pegawai2 yang berjawatan sawenang2 meran- tinggi di-biarkan changkan, beranikan chara untok men- dapatkan diri masing2.

Ini ada-lah perkara biasa yang menjadi amalan di-pejabat2 yang banyak mempunyai tugas2-nya dengan kepen- hubongan tingan ramai.
Umpama-nya, katakan-lah Kerajaan telah membenar- kan sa-banyak $50,000 kerana satu2 ranchangan pem- bangunan luar bandar dan negara.

Maka wang yang sa-jumlah itu tidak-lah kesemua-nya pergi kapada kepentingan2 ra'ayat sama ada Kerajaan sedar, atau tidak, namun perkara ini tetap berlaku dari sa-masa ka-samasa.

Yang demikian di-mana-kah sangkut-nya sa-bahagian besar daripada wang peruntokan itu.
Ini kita tidak-lah menghairankan kalau satu2 pembenaan yang berhubong dengan ranchangan2 itu di-siapkan sa- menggah keadaan-nya.

Maksud saya arti-nya tidak munasabah dengan per- belanjaan yang kita untokkan kerana- perkataan nya, atau bahawa jambatan2 kechil yang di-bena itu tidak berapa telah merupakan satu bangunan atau jamba tan yang burok, pechah, rosak di-sini.
Pada hal kalau semua wang yang di- untokkan itu di-gunakan 100% kerana- nya tentu-lah tidak demikian keadaan lain2 pembenaan bangunan yang di-bena di-atas ranchangan pem- bangunan luar bandar itu.
bangunan masjid, lama di-gunakan atau dengan luar bandar itu, atau dapati tidak kita lain Oleh yang demikian sa-muga dengan ada-nya Undang2 Rasuah ini maka akan berseh daki yang telah berkurun lama- nya merachuni jiwa kakitangan2 yang berkenaan dengan kembali-lah pula suasana kemudahan yang di-harapkan2 oleh segala bidang yang di-perlukan oleh mereka ranchangan2 menerusi pembangunan negara dan luar bandar.
jelata di-dalam ra'ayat Tuan Kam Woon Wah (Sitiawan): Mr Speaker, Sir, this is a very delicate matter, because it touches on corrup in our country.

Sir, I always tion support any Bill of this nature but the question remains, will this amendment achieve the objective to stamp out or in our country?

prevent corruption is "No", because Sir, my answer whatever is passed by this House, I think it would not be sufficient unless two more Clauses are added to this Corruption Act.
I think, if we do that, then we will come to a certain stage where we can say, "Well, we have done some thing for our people".

is written or whatever Sir, I find that one of the Clauses is not in here.

What I would like to suggest is that inefficiency should be another ground of suspicion of corrup tion.
Sir, many civil servants con veniently just ignore their work and sit on their work: sometimes letters took months to reply, sometimes registration of titles took months to be registered, but if something happens under the it can be done within 24 counter, hours!

Sir, if the Honourable Minister would care to check at any Land Offices, I am quite sure, he will get all the evidence he wants.
I am sure many people in this country have experienced this: if one person, say Mr "A", presents his transfer to the Land Office in the normal course of business, he might not get back his title for the next if few months; at another person, Mr "B", goes there know—something and—we do not happens, the morning at 10.00 o'clock, he gets back in the afternoon at 2.00 o'clock his title.

So, if that is not corruption, what is corruption, may I ask?
It smells very strongly corruption; there otherwise, if the officer concerned does not know, say, Mr "B", why should if he goes the same time, there that in is 1481 22 JUNE 1967 1482 he go out of his way to oblige Mr " B" and not Mr "A"?

Sir, on this point there should be included discrimination.

Further, sometimes some members of the public cannot get their work done.

Another example, which is frequently the quoted is getting payment from P.W.D.

or from some Government bodies.


Some poor contractors have to wait and sometimes go on their knees just the to get their cheques from they are lucky Government and, if enough, time; in otherwise, they have just got to wait.
they will get it Sir, another Clause which, I think will be effective, as has been suggested, is that any person who is convicted of any charges under the Corruption Act, should have all his unexplained assets forfeited to the State, and that includes not only his own personal unexplained assets but also the unexplained assets of all those who are very closely related to him.

Sir, I think, all of us know how some people manage or carry on with their nefarious activities.
Suddenly, you will find that So-and-so's wife, or So-and-so's brother becomes a millionaire overnight.

Here, I think, it is pertinent for the Government to insti tute an inquiry as to why, how, and from where, suddenly he gets the money—it cannot be from the races everyday, and neither can it be from the Social Welfare Lottery tickets.

Sir, these are actually the facts which are happening daily in our country and, as I have said before, there is no use of saying, "Well, let us prove it".
If that is the question, then my answer will be, "Well, proof is not required, because it is written all over the wall".

Sir, again, I would also like to say, let us not pretend like Lord Nelson putting his telescope to his blind eye on his battleship.

We all can see that it is there.

Sir, why do I say this?

I think it is good for our people and for our country, because corruption must be stamped out and the time has come for us to do so, otherwise, it will drag on and on.
Let not the country slide, then it would be very difficult for us to come back again.

Sir, I hope our Honourable Minister of Justice will consider these two sug gestions, and I am quite sure that if something in that direction is done, we will come a long way.

Thank you, Sir.

Dr Tan Chee Khoon: Mr Speaker, Sir, corruption is like cancer.

Once it spreads in the body politic, then we might just as well say habis to the country.
Like cancer, Mr Speaker, Sir, corruption, if detected early, and if radical surgery is adopted, then you can save the life of the person con cerned.
For example, if there is a nodule in a woman's breast, you sus pect that it is cancer; you do a radical mastectomy, you cut off the whole of the breast including up to taking all the glands from the axilla and the survival rate is very high if it is considered that if one survives for five years, it is a good thing; but I have known of women with a survival rate of more than 20 years.
If one's cancer is detected too late, then whatever therapy that one applies—for example, if one does radi cal surgery plus deep X-ray therapy, then no amount of treatment can cure the person—likewise, with corruption.

If we detect it early, if we take active steps to stamp out corruption, then there is a chance that we may be able to curb it radically.

I am not like the Honourable Member for Sitiawan—he seems to think that we can stamp out corruption.
I think man being what he is, and nobody has suggested that we can wipe out the world's oldest profes sion, whatever you do that profession will be with us for as long as man has his biological desires.

Likewise with corruption, one can try not to stamp it out completely—I am not that opti mistic—but one can curb it drastically and see to it that it does not pay to either to the giver or indulge in corruption.
the receiver Mr Speaker, Sir, many a time I have talked to foreigners, to foreign corres pondents in particular.

They have, in the first place, gone to Singapore and then they come here and they openly tell me that there is a vast world of difference between Singapore and here.
They say that down there it is easy to get things done; if you want a telephone and you have a good cause for it, you get it tomorrow; if you want to get 1483 22 JUNE, 1967 1484 things done and if you are a foreigner, you go to an office things are done for you straightaway—likewise with the citizens of that country.

They say that when they come to Kuala Lumpur, they cannot get things done, and that people expect their palms to be greased.

That shows that we must not fool our selves.


The keen observer, the foreign observer, knows straightaway that there is a world of difference in the matter of corruption between Singapore and here, because Singapore makes it known clearly that it does not pay for a civil servant or a member of the public to indulge in corruption.
While we have this Bill with us, let the Minister, at the end of his speech, when he winds up this debate, make it clear that it does not pay anyone—be he the Prime Minister, a Minister, a Member of Parliament, a civil servant, or the general public—to indulge in corruption.

To my mind, corruption can only exist if there is an umbrella of protec tion for those who receive.

Now, it is well-known that unless there is some sort of a protection from people in high places, then corruption cannot exist.
By this, I do not mean to insinuate that people in high places are corrupt—they are not.

People in high places are made use of without their knowledge.

To give one instance, at the last State Council Meeting, the Mentri Besar took great pains to show the pressmen: "Look here, this is happening is, I write a letter, the people down there cut off that letter and put another letter of appeal on it, cyclostyle it and presto—that is my signature— there is an appeal asking me to give the person money".
Now, the Mentri Besar of Selangor knows that he is an innocent victim of unscrupulous people who want to make use of his name.

Likewise, people who are corrupt, naturally, try their best to make use of the names and positions of people in very high places.

is my signature; what I shall give one example—the Government Servants' Co-operative Housing Society.

It is well-known that the Treasury officials have been very unhappy in giving money to this co operative society.

They feel that it is not justified.


Well, if the Minister of Justice wants to challenge me on that point, privately I can tell him that this is so.

I do know, officials have come and told me that they have been very unhappy over the allocation that they have to give.

But what happens?

Along comes a letter from the Prime Minister's Depart ment.

The Prime Minister's Department is the fountain of authority in this country.

What is the poor Treasury official to do?

He has to write out the cheque.


This is what 1 mean that people who are unscrupulous, who want to make money on the sideline, make use of people in very high places in order to indulge in corrupt practices and such people in every high places need not be Ministers, need not be Government servants, but may well be people outside in political circles.

That is one instance.


Sir, I do know that on an occasion like this one has to be very careful, particularly when one has a very sharp Minister of Justice sitting there listening very carefully.

It is not my intention to besmirch the name of any person, but I feel it is my duty to bring to the attention of the Minister of Justice and through him to the Attorney-General, to look into the acts of two persons in particular.

It is well-known that the Planning Department in Selangor is not that well- run.
I have indicated yesterday about how in Petaling Jaya a green belt has been converted into a residential area.

In terms of money, it means literally hundreds of thousands—hundreds of thousands of dollars.
I will be very grateful if the Minister of Justice notes this down and find out, during the past four or five years, how many areas of green belts in the State of Selangor have been converted from green belt to resi dential areas and, also in the process of this conversion, who is the architect connected with the development of these green belts once they have been con verted into residential areas.

It will be very revealing, because this Government servant has since retired.
I merely point out, and I must be very careful to measure the words that I say—I say to if the Minister really wants that stamp out corruption, he must look into 1485 22 JUNE 1967 1486 this case of conversion of green belts into residential areas and to look into the assets of the said official.

Just now, the Member for Sitiawan has gone so far as to say that the State should forfeit not only the assets of the person con cerned but also of the relatives and others.

I will not go so far as that.


I will the Attorney-General only say should the assets of the said officer, of his relatives, of his wife and the like and see how a Government servant, although he is admittedly, perhaps, Superscale "H", can come by such huge assets.

look very carefully into that left that the contractors make Another person that I wish to ask the Minister of Justice to ask his Attorney- General's Department to look into is another high official in the University of Malaya.
In times past, the Member for Ipoh has pointed out the troubles that had happened in what is known as the Koko Mess, where he alleged that contractors had been going there and seeing Ministers and civil servants.

Since then, this high official of the University of Malaya has the Koko Mess and has a mess of his own, and it is shared also by other information civil servants; but my their is pilgrimage to this mess.

The inference is what?


Why should contractors see civil servants or high officials of the Univer sity in a mess?

After all, if they have business to transact that is open and perfectly legal, it should be done in his office and not in the mess.

Perhaps, there are other delectable things to transact other than what business that he wants to do.

I am also told that the modus operandi this.


This high is official has nothing to do with contracts, and I do know because I sit on the Tenders Board of the University of Malaya.

The decision of the Tenders Board is made; "X" gets the contract; now this high official, although he has nothing to do with Contracts or what is known as the Bursar's Department, he pulls high weight, he finds out who the successful tenderer is.
What happens I can well imagine, although this is a prophesy that may well be true; it is for the Attorney-General Department to investigate.

I know that "X" has got a contract of $2 million; I can go and tell "X", "Apa macham Enche?

You have tendered for this project in the Univer sity; you know sometimes it is very difficult, you know that Tan Chee Khoon chap, very difficult chap, you know he is very difficult; he creates plenty of trouble, but you know I can shut his mouth up".

So what happens?
So what happens?

He tells the contractor, "I can get the contract for you, but you know the price is this".

Of course, he can get the the person, because a contract for decision has already been made that the contract.

The "X" should get is what?

He gets his inference "cut".

Now, we the Tenders Board know about it, and we have insisted now that nobody should know anything about the decision made by the Tenders Board, except the Bursar himself and he writes straightaway to the successful tenderer.
So, if there is any to pinpoint whom—the Bursar himself.

leakage, we know in forth these I have brought two instances, because this person concerned also has left University of Malaya.

He has resigned.

He has been called the greatest tax collector in the University of Malaya, not by me, but by an expatriate who now lives in Hongkong.
I do hope, and I think, that in both instances the Anti-Corruption Bureau has opened there are its eyes and stirrings in that direction, and I believe that both these persons are connected with persons in very high circles.
For example, the person in the University of Malaya, he calls the Ministers by their first names; he pats the Ministers; when these chaps go to his mess, he says, "Hello, Tan Sri", and it does impress the contractor if he finds this chap—My god, here is a Minister, and this chap is patting him on the back; he must be very important.

This person, I must say, is very important, he knows everybody".
Tuan Haji Abdul-Rahman bin Ya'kub: Mr Speaker, Sir, do I know this the so-called high official of University of Malaya?

Dr Tan Chee Khoon: As I said, I do not wish to bandy names around.

I will give it to the Minister in due course.

But, as I said, the Anti-Corrup tion Bureau, I think, is already on his 1487 22 JUNE 1967 1488 trail.

So, the Minister needs only to check up.

I am told that he is a very worried man, because the Anti-Corrup tion Bureau is on his trail.
If I am not mistaken he has already seen the Minister about it—there you are, I am told Tuan Haji Abdul-Rahman bin Ya'kub: I do not know what he is talking about.

Dr Tan Chee Khoon: I will not mention the names.

In confidence I will tell the Minister of Justice after this debate, because he knows that I do not bandy names around, it is not fair, and I do not say things out of spite, I have proof if he wants, since I have been connected with the Uni versity of Malaya.
The Lady Member for Johore Barat, I think, has mentioned "Do not look after the small fries, the mata2 who takes 20 cents, or 50 cents, from the person in the market, it is not worth it.

The big fries, where do they transact their business".

They do not transact their business in this country.

They fly to Hongkong, and there, they transact their business.

Where do they put their money?

They do not put their money down here, but in a numbered bank in Switzerland.
I do hope that in these two instances, the Minister of Justice will order his Attorney-General to look into.

Now, Mr Speaker, Sir, I wish to point out a different type of corruption in 1960, it is this time.

Way back well-known the new that amongst villages, those in control of the new villages fiddled with the funds of the new villages, and I regret to say that this Government has done nothing.
Way back in 1964, when I was a freshman in this House, I brought to the Prime Minister the attention of the new village of himself in Jinjang, what had happened is this: there was $20,000 in the new village in Jinjang; those in control put in a post-dated cheque, took the $20,000, and they roll it around.

When the time for the post-dated cheque was up, they withdrew the post-dated cheque and there put another post-dated cheque that the Auditor-General and so it went round.
I have drawn the attention of to this—and this has been proved.

I have asked the Prime Minister to give me a copy of the report of that investiga tion.

Although he has solemnly, not once but twice in this House, promised to give me a copy of that report, but up to today I have not received a copy of that report.

That shows the intention of the Government as regards corrup tion in this country.
Not only that Mr Speaker, Sir, I have raised the matter in the State Council, and I have told the Menteri Besar exactly what has till now I have not happened.

Up received—I re ceived—a copy of the report where the Auditor-General made a surprise check of the funds of the Jinjang New Village.

Exactly, the same thing happens in most New Village Councils.

I have here with me the accounts; and if the Minister wants, I can hand over this although now the Police know all about this case.
repeat—I have not I shall read, Mr Speaker, Sir—I have here with me the accounts—the statement of receipts and Payments for January, February and March 1967, the and they are very revealing.

At end of this account, it reads: "Balance as on 31st January, 1967— Cash in hand Cash in Bank $18,161.38 162.83."

the big disproportion One can see between cash in hand and cash in bank.

"In February— Cash in hand Cash in Bank In March— Cash in hand Cash in Bank $18,808.87 136.83 780.76 19,114.68.''
Now, I hope the Minister of Justice can draw his own inference, as indeed the Police officers, whom I reported to, have drawn their own inference.

I am told that the District Officer had gone and made a surprise check and found out the records there should be cash in hand $18,000, the kitty is empty.

But you know the M.C.A.

tycoons, to say the least, they are a very loyal lot.

Imme diately they close ranks and put the that whereas, according to 1489 22 JUNE 1967 1490 money into the bank.
There you are, money appears in the bank.

This is not corrupt practice, but this is C.B.T., and it has been reported, I am glad, by the said District Officer to the Police.

Now, this is a thing that happens, I am fairly certain, in quite a number of New Villages where the super vision is lax.

I am glad that in Jinjang, at least they do not keep cash there.
They know that Tan Chee Khoon will raise it up, if they keep cash there, and the civil servant there periodically sees that whatever money that is in hand, straightaway goes into the bank at the end of the day—and that is what it should be.

Money that is collected from the taxpayers, in this case, from the new villagers, be banked immediately the next day, and nobody should have any cash in hand, and much less making use of the money and you know how "John Chinaman" can roll his money.
In Tanjong, which is just opposite Sumatra and he can roll his money across to Sumatra and, perhaps, double it when it comes back.

This is one aspect of corruption that I commend to the attention of the Minister of Justice.

should it if is in the legislation The Government, really serious in its intention to stamp out, or to reduce, corruption in this country, should bring that Singapore has brought—that is what the Member for Sitiawan has advo cated.
Any civil servant having assets, for in excess of what he should have by way of his honest labour should account for, he cannot account for it, then it must be forfeited.

I commend this to the Minister of Justice to bring in legislation that will put the fear of the the minds and God into into hearts of the the civil servants, or the civil servants, who minority of may well want to engage in corrupt practices.
Now, Mr Speaker, Sir, I think it was way back the Budget in 1965, in Session, I had the audacity to make the suggestion the Prime Minister should get all his colleagues to declare their assets.

I believe there is a ruling on this point, but instead of com mending me on it, the Prime Minister that than castigated me for making such a sugges tion.

I do not know why.
I do not know why.

I do hope that this practice of Ministers declaring their assets not at the beginning of their term of office and at the end of their term of office, because between then many things can happen, but to declare their assets every year.

That will set a good example to the rest of the country.

More that, Mr Speaker, Sir, I hope the Government will pass legislation, or see to it that our Members of Parliament, or State Assemblymen, also declare should their assets from year to year.
I have just been talking to some of the Mem bers from UPKO, and they told me that in the recent election there, some candidates spent as much as $100,000 in contesting a State election.

Now, in this country, I do know that quite a number of candidates spend a con in contesting elec siderable fortune tions.
Now, Mr Speaker, Sir, I really cannot believe those who invest so much money in fighting an election, where it is so very chancy when it comes to Batu, that they really want to serve for the next five years— to give to their heart and serve the people.

I regret to say, and this is common knowledge, that quite a number of them having invested so much in winning an election, naturally, want to recoup it many times over.
Consequently, I make this suggestion to the Minister of Justice, that not only should Ministers declare their assets but Members of Parliament and Mem bers of the State Assembly should also declare their assets, so that people will know, "Oh, yes, these legislators, they not only preach but they practise what they preach", and then it will set a good example right at the very top and then the people lower down will think twice before they indulge in corrupt practices.
that all soul Finally, Mr Speaker, Sir, I wish to make the suggestion to the Minister of Justice that the Anti-Corruption Bureau is an effete body at the moment—effete in the sense that I do know many a time they have worked very carefully in their investigations and then, some times, somebody drops a hint, "You know, it is not too good to pursue this 1491 22 JUNE 1967 1492 think line of action", and so that line of action it is dropped.
Now, I should be taken away from the hands of the Police and placed under the con trol of the Attorney-General.

Then, it must be strengthened, people of the utmost integrity only should be posted to that place, so that we can have quick, swift, action whenever a report is made.
This much I will say: the few cases of corruption that I have reported to the Anti-Corruption Agency in Selangor, I have found them to be most co-operative, and I have found them to have taken vigorous action, whenever I have reported the few cases that I have come across.

But I believe this is not the experience of a large number of people.
Hence, I commend the to the Minister of Justice Anti-Corruption Bureau should be taken out of the hands of the Police, it the should be placed directly under Attorney-General, who has far more powers, who can initiate prosecution, and people of the utmost integrity and honesty should be placed to it; there by, we hope we can minimise and reduce incidence of corruption, which I believe is like cancer, spreading slowly but steadily throughout the body politic in this country.

Thank you.
Thank you.

that the Tuan Haji Mohamed Yusof bin Mahmud (Temerloh): Tuan Yang di- Pertua, saya menguchapkan sa-tinggi2 tahniah kerana kapada Kerajaan membentangkan satu Rang Undang2 untok menchari bagaimana hendak mengurangkan perkara rasuah dalam negeri ini.

jalan sangat2 Tuan Yang di-Pertua, rasuah ia-lah satu perkara, sa-bagaimana uchapan daripada rakan2 saya, ia-lah perkara sa-mula jadi.

Jadi dengan perkara itu tentu-lah susah untok kita menghapuskan.
Perkara rasuah ini— perkara Undang2 yang ada di-hadapan kita ini, rasa saya, yang besar-nya ia- lah bagaimana hendak melaksanakan Undang2 ini.

Kita ada—sa-belum-nya ini—banyak Undang2 ada Undang2 berkenaan dengan rasuah telah kita bentangkan di-Dewan ini, tetapi per- laksanaan-nya tidak memuaskan hati.
Umpama-nya, me- mang telah berchatit dalam General itu yang sangat segala hendak harta2-nya Orders, Chapter D bahagian 8 (2) di- mana ada menyatakan tiap2 pegawai tinggi hendak-lah menyatakan kapada Kerajaan untok pengetahuan Kerajaan.

Tetapi ada-kah berjalan?

Kita ada Undang2 di-hada pan kita.

Jadi, ini-lah rasa saya, bukan kita hendak membuat Undang2, tetapi bagaimana melaksanakan Undang2 yang kita ada dan yang akan kita adakan.
Saperti juga kita tahu perkara2 yang ra'ayat tengok, umpama- tidak nya mengapa perjalanan yang lori2 yang melalui Undang2 saperti tidak berlesen melalui raya, separoh jalan2 itu, mengikut Undang2, tidak boleh di-lalui, tetapi boleh di- lalui oleh lori2 ini dengan tidak ada tindakan.

Jadi ini-lah yang saya kata- tadi, perlaksanaan Undang2 kan itu yang sangat2 mustahak.

jalan2 Rasuah, Tuan Yang di-Pertua, pada pandangan saya, ada tiga chara me ngapa jadi-nya rasuah.
Pertama, tiap2 manusia perkhid- berkehendakkan matan dia itu dengan senang—tidak ada galangan, tidak ada lambat.

Ini telah kita dengar tadi dalam uchapan daripada wakil2, baik daripada Pem- bangkang atau pun daripada pehak Kerajaan.

Yang kedua, Tuan Yang di-Pertua, perkara itu perkara yang di-ingini sangat oleh manusia supaya dia senang hidup.

Dan perkara2 itu tidak banyak, masing2 berkehendakkan benda dia kesenangan.

boleh memberi berebut yang Yang ketiga, ia-lah perkara meng- elakkan daripada hukuman.
Maka dari ketiga2 ini-lah kejadian2 rasuah yang rasa saya di-mana pangkal-nya yang supaya patut kita menchari usaha2 menyenangkan tiga perkara ini tadi.

dalam jalan perlaksanaan satu, untok Lagi Undang2 tentu-lah ini kita berasa susah, kerana jikalau pada pemerentah atau pun orang besar di-katakan persembahan, pada hal persembahan itu mengapa di-adakan persembahan?

Kita chari latar-belakang-nya.


Kalau taukeh2, orang2 besar, umpama-nya orang2 kaya membuat satu persem bahan yang beribu2 kapada sa-suatu 1493 22 JUNE 1967 1494 pehak—mengapa?

Ada-kali mereka itu dengan sa-suka hati-nya hendak memberikan persembahan itu?

Jadi, pada orang besar di-katakan persem bahan.

Kapada orang yang pertenga- tetapi han di-katakan hadiah, jika di-katakan di-bawah pada rasuah.

Jadi, tidak sama Undang2 ini.


hendak mengadakan Kalau Undang2, ketiga2 peringkat ini di- samakan—tidak kechuali-nya.

Maka perlaksanaan ini-lah yang saya kata sangat2 susah.
orang kita ada ini ini, kerana satu kompeni, tahu bagaimana orang2 Sebab saya kata bagitu, pehak raja2 sendiri sekarang pun sudah mengambil bahagian chergas dalam perdagangan lagi satu dan perusahaan, dan perkara yang boleh masok perkara tiap2 satu orang rasuah menjalankan perusahaan dan per dagangan dengan niat mahu men- chari untong, bila perkara barang2 yang boleh memberi keuntongan yang besar—saya tidak-lah hendak menye- but di-mana tetapi kalau Yang Berhormat Menteri me- nyelidek daripada sharikat2, Pendaftar Sharikat ini menubohkan kompeni2, dengan sebab dia ada di-atas itu, sebab penaong berkuasa boleh mendapatkan perkara2 yang saya sebutkan tadi.
Jadi perlak- sanaan-lah—saya balekkan tadi, Tuan Yang kita di-Pertua, yang patut usahakan.

Jadi untok menyedarkan pada soal ini, rasa saya, kita sekarang ia-itu ada bureau berkenaan rasuah untok men jalankan dasar2.

Alang-kah molek-nya, Tuan Yang di-Pertua, rasa saya, kita adakan di-Parlimen satu Standing Committee Khas berkenaan dengan rasuah ini, kerana sa-bagai- mana wakii dari Batu kata, rasuah ini ada-lah satu penyakit cancer.
satu badan satu benda executive, sa-bagai juga ini Jadi, rasa saya ada elok-nya Parli- men ini sendiri mengadakan Standing Committee sendiri membinchangkan dengan sa-halus2-nya bagaimana kita boleh menjalankan untok menghapus- kan rasuah ini.
Saya berkehendakkan Committee jangan di-champori oleh mereka2 yang ada bersangkut- paut dalam hal perkhidmatan2, pen- tadbiran2 dan supaya sa-bagai-nya ini boleh memberi Jawatan-kuasa ini ini tadi saya saya boleh detail orang dalam kerana lambat Jawatan-kuasa fikiran, pertimbangan dan di-jalankan, di-laksanakan dengan tidak ragu2 lagi.
Jadi, rasa saya, Tuan Yang di- Pertua, perkara ini saya tidak hendak menitek-beratkan bagaimana hendak menjalankan, kita pulangkan ini meminta kapada ramai mengapa daripada sebab2-nya mendatangkan satu2 perkara.

Sa- rasuah itu umpama saya kata jadi satu perkara.


Mengapa boleh lambat, ada sendiri pengalaman, Tuan Yang di-Pertua, dalam perkara ini, saya juga mentad- birkan perusahaan2, tetapi oleh sebab tidak masokkan perkara dalam—boleh memberi rasuah, segala pekerjaan saya itu semua-nya lambat, bahkan pada masa ini, Tuan Yang di- Pertua, pekerjaan saya yang patut di- hapuskan—sudah siap pada masa sa- tahun dahulu sampai pada masa ini ta' dapat di-hapuskan.

Surat di-hantar berkali2.

Sa-paroh-nya ta' berjawab.


Kalau Yang Berhormat Menteri hen dak keterangan, saya boleh beri, sebab saya berchakap ini, sebab saya ada interest di-dalam ini, saya ada baha gian di-dalam perkara ini, tetapi ini- lah chara-nya, satu saya tunjokkan jikalau kita tanya ada kalau Jawatan- ini kita minta orang kuasa ramai fikiran2-nya, memberikan saya per- chaya beribu2 orang hendak memberi laporan, atau memberi fikiran2 me ngapa sebab-nya.
saya tetapi itu, saperti saya kata Jadi, rasa saya, pendek-nya dalam hal undang2 ini, saya sunggoh bersim- pati, sunggoh berterima kaseh kapada Menteri, berdukachita perlaksanaan-nya besok yang menjadi undang2 ini di-kanunkan sahaja—ta' berjalan.
Jadi, rasa saya chara men jalankan tadi, saya memberikan pandangan, kita mengambil satu chara langkah, jikalau sesuai Kerajaan mengadakan Standing Committee dari pada Parlimen ini, kerana saya tahu kita di-Parlimen ini yang di-pileh oleh ra'ayat yang masa kita chuma 5 tahun.

Ini akan boleh mengurangkan, tetapi untok menghapuskan rasa saya meng ambil masa yang panjang.
dengan fikiran Jadi, rasa saya, Tuan Yang di- Pertua, pandangan2 daripada saya ini 1495 22 JUNE 1967 1496 di-fikirkan mudah2an dapat saya berdo'a yang undang2 ini di-sini dapat di-betulkan, di-laksanakan bagaimana tujuan2 kita di-sini.

the fact Tuan C. V. Devan Nair: Mr Speaker, Sir, I shall lake only a very short time.
I was distressed, Sir, that this Bill had not gone far enough especially in view in His Majesty's of that, Gracious Address the earlier on, Government had expressed very great determination to come to grips with this problem, and I had expected more than half-measures to amend the Prevention of Corruption Act of 1961.
It seems to me, Sir, that while all this is desirable—what this Bill contains is desirable—the Govern ment is still only tinkering around the problem instead of coming to grips with the problem.

In order to come to grips with the problem, Sir, I think certain measures clearly indicated.
in any Bill are very to to countries, that you use for corruption, and First of all, the agency, the instru eradicate ment, corruption must be an effective instru ment and the point has been repeatedly made that the Anti-Corruption Bureau must not be tied to the apron strings of any particular Ministry.

In this case, it is tied to the Police Department.


In most anti-corruption the bureaus are autonomous bodies, not tied to the Police, because very often it is the Police who are being investi I would gated seriously submit the Government that it consider really strengthening the Anti-Corruption Bureau, give it an institutional independence of action, which will make it ultimately respon sible only to the Cabinet.
Second, Sir, the example, the point, has been extremely well made by the Honour- amle Member for Batu.

The power of example will be supreme, if we are to go anywhere to eradicate in order corruption in public life: and, here, the example has got to be set by those at the very top, by the political leader ship of the country, by the Cabinet.
When something imaginative like that is done, i.e., every Member of the the Cabinet, every Government, of Member of Parliament and every Member of the State Assembly, every Head of Department, and every senior official, declares his assets, and these assets are declared year by year, then the top will set the example and the precept.

That, Sir, will be the only way it would seem to me that ulti mately you can influence the chap at the bottom, the peon, who swipes the 10-cents stamp.
There are many levels of corruption, the Minister of Justice will agree.

At the top the big sharks, and there are other small fish, and this power of example must be exploited and utilised to the maximum by the Government, if it really wants to come to grips with the problem.
Sir, this is the only brief point that I wanted to make, because I must confess that I was very much apprecia tive of the points made by the Honour able Member for Batu, although he belongs to the wrong party as far as I am concerned (Laughter); but never theless, Sir, the man did speak with a great deal of conviction and I fully endorse the point that he has made— to reiterate the power of example, and the example must start from the top— the image at the top must be com pletely altered and changed; whether it can be changed only God knows.
Probably it is a difficult matter, but I think with all the goodwill for this Government and for the country, I say it must be attempted, at least, and please do make your Anti-Corruption Agency Bureau an autonomous body, not tied to any one string at all, ulti mately responsible only to the Cabinet and, through the Cabinet, to the Parlia ment.

Thank you, Sir.

Mr (Deputy) Speaker: Persidangan ini di-tanggohkan.

Sitting suspended at 5.30 p.m.


Sitting resumed at 5.45 p.m. (Mr Speaker in the Chair) our Government Tuan Geh Chong Keat (Penang Utara): Mr Speaker, Sir, I must really for compliment coming up with this Bill to reinforce the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1961.
In doing this, perhaps, I must the Alliance back also compliment this Bill, benchers for motivating 1497 22 JUNE 1967 1498 because the Alliance back-benchers too have shown signs of concern over this problem of corruption and of how to curb it from taking root further.

Mr Speaker, Sir, corruption is just like cancer, as explained by the Honourable Member for Batu, and, if allowed to carry on unchecked, will eventually kill the contracting parties, and in this case will destroy our nation.
Our nation is now in the process of investors industrialisation, and many and industrialists have come over to our country to see for themselves the possibilities to invest on hearing the good news from the other previous investors that Malaysia is a fast pro gressing nation and is a sound country to invest in.

to grease However, Sir, many that have come and gone have also expressed fear that the economy of our nation may be destroyed by corruption.
From what we have heard, it is becoming a sort of common practice the palms of officials concerned with the relevant sections for services rendered, or to prevent undue delay in proce dural action in respect of applications.

Sir, it is up to us in this august House to make our Government a govern ment of law and not of men only.

Therefore, we must have the deter mination and the guts to eradicate this monstrous incidence of corruption.
is is to free rampant is determined Sir, corruption from what we hear from the common men at the lowest level.

We hear it repeated at many places, even in coffee shops and offices, and it looks as if it is going to be part of our life, unless inter Government cept.

It is also the philosophy that none this cancerous from disease.

It is also too good to be true that we have virtuous Members of Parliament, Councillors, Ministers and responsible officers.
As had been said, it is a question of price—whether the price is big enough for one to sell one's integrity.

Therefore, by the introduc tion of this Bill, I am sure our Govern ment is going to gain the confidence of the people.

Sir, we have quite often heard people condemning corruption and yet there are many who indulge in it—perhaps, as I said, it is for the easy passage of one's schemes and of one's business, but one can be sure that those who paid had paid with contempt.
our law Sir, we have quite often heard a lot of allegations against the Police Force.

I too have heard them, but I am very proud of a case which occurred recently and which, if we could take it, is too good to be true; it is quite encouraging to have such an honest officer of the Road Transport Department as Police Sergeant Mohamed Yusof bin Abbas and also there is the case in Penang where the Police officers, the Police enforcement Constables, officers take pride in their responsibi lities.
Sir, this has brought to light that we have good officers among our Police Force and among the various com ponents of our Government Depart ments.

However, we are still quite concerned to note that this fact has come out, namely, that lorry drivers have to pay for protection, and it is because they assume that it has been a habit that they even throw the money to traffic cops.
It is disgusting to hear that even the policemen, wearing the Crown, had to bow on the roadside just to pick up a cigarette box con taining 50 cents or a dollar.

It is a the most disgusting policemen may not second thoughts that in picking up and in bowing down, the Crown which he wears also bows down to the cancerous disease of corruption.

thing.
thing.

Perhaps, have Sir, in going round Kuala Lumpur, we also heard that taxi drivers had to pay between $30 to $50 per month per taxi and that the Traffic Section has their headquarters at a High Street coffee shop a few yards away from the High Street Traffic Police Station.

Sir, I only hope that this is not true.


I had many encounters with our Honourable Minister of Justice, in that whenever cases of corruption were brought up in this House he had emphasised that he was determined to exterminate all these malpractices.

Further, it is really very disgusting to hear of Customs officers at the Airport making use of porters to the easy collect even 50 cents for luggage.
passage of bags and other 1499 22 JUNE 1967 1500 Therefore, Sir, as long as the Govern ment is aware and concerned over these malpractices and is making efforts to strengthen the law, the future is quite bright for Malaysia.

that at that even Sir, we must really compliment the civil servants or the Civil Service as a whole.

It may be times, through no fault of the senior officers and the majority of the civil servants, transactions of corruption were that in their names.
We have negotiated in the Ministry of heard Commerce and Industry, the peons were involved in a lighter scale of con sideration in regard to renewing rice permits—and, here, we must compli the Honourable Minister of ment Commerce and for being Industry sharp enough to detect it before it has spread further.
However, Sir, as I said, if Government is determined to exter minate corruption, we must study the allegations at all levels—the Council lors, the civil servants, the Ministers and the Civil Service as a whole—for if we allow these allegations to drag on, whether we like it or not, we will be stained just because of the greediness of a few operators, big-time operators, perhaps big political operators and sharks.
Sir, it is quite interesting to recollect that when you attend parties, how this thing reflects on to you: the movements of those who have axe to grind, how they organise parties, how they drag our Ministers, how our Councillors unconsciously yield.

It is quite interest ing to find out what are the motives.

Therefore, I say it is sometimes pitiful that the names of our Councillors, the names of our Ministers and Members of Parliament are being dragged into such talks and allegations.
Sir, we must remember that Govern ment too has its rules and regulations.

I understand that there is an outstand ing Treasury regulation that lays down that Members of Parliament, senior officers and Government servants must hand over whatever gifts that have been offered by the public, and that if they have the interest of getting the gifts them.
back, Speaking on this issue, I remember an they have redeem to incident, where a senior World Bank official was invited to a function; at that function a present was handed to him and he said, "Much as I would like to have this present as a momento of my visit to your prosperous and beautiful and very wonderful country, it is with great regret that I cannot accept it, no matter how you put it.
Although the way it has been put is that it is from your wives to my wife, no matter whichever way you do it, it is still that I am indirectly concerned, and as such you are making it difficult for me.

I have got to go back to the United States, hand the Treasury and my only hope is that it is not priced or that the price is just of a value which I will be able to redeem or purchase the Treasury.

Therefore, if the prize is of great value, then I have got to save to buy it".
it over from to it Therefore, Sir, we can see how strict are the instructions or orders issued and carried out in the country, in that even though the officer is a few thou sand miles away from the country, he still remembers the General Orders and the law forbids him to receive any gift in any form.

Mr Speaker: May I know how long more you will take?

Tuan Geh Chong Keat: Five minutes, Sir.

Mr Speaker: Even five minutes is too precious now, as time is getting on.
Tuan Geh Chong Keat: Just three the minutes, Sir.

I am coming interesting part, Sir.

to Mr Speaker: Come straight to it, will you?

Tuan Geh Chong Keat: Sir, the Government must be efficient and show signs of determination; and if heads must roll, Sir, let it be from the highest to the lowest with no impartiality, or exemption of status.

This will only protect the integrity of this House and the country and the faith of the voters they have in their councillors.
It is, Sir, sometimes quite disgusting to hear how successful applicants, or tenderers, 1501 22 JUNE 1967 1502 were exploited by some officers.

If a successful applicant receives a letter of good news that he has been successful in his application for a certain licence or a certain registration, the next day he may get a phone call saying for that he may have got to pay.

Some times, the demand is for $20,000 or $50,000.


If Councillors are going to be of any help and are determined to uphold this Corruption Act, they too must lend support and get themselves involved, because from being clear quite inevitably sometimes, whether knowingly or unknowingly, the names of Members of Parliament, State Coun cillors, Executive Council Members, are being dragged in.
Then sometimes we hear that if one is successful in a contract or tender he might even have to pay 3% on a big project costing about a million dollars.

Sir, you can be assured that our citizens, our con tractors, our businessmen, as they have their axe to grind, even if they have to pay, they pay it very unwillingly and with contempt.

Therefore, I propose, in order to strengthen this Act, we must have a watchdog committee under the Attorney- the chairmanship of General.
This watchdog committee should advise our Mentri2 Besar and our Chief Ministers because, as we say, "to err is human".

The Minister may have no intention, but business men study all the angles, they are even much sharper than the computers.

They drag in the Ministers, they occupy the Ministers' time, and the Ministers may sometimes find that he has many, many long lost relatives.

Therefore, my sug gestion the Attorney-General have efficient men and to form his watchdog committee with men of inte grity.
Thank you, Sir.

is, let Dr Awang bin Hassan (Muar Selatan): Mr Speaker, Sir, as an Alliance backbencher, I am as much concerned with the extent of corruption that is prevailing as the members in the Opposition.

the I shall not points that have been raised already by the Members of the House, but I would just touch on one point.
The Alliance Government, Sir, is a strong and stable Government backed by an is in a overwhelming majority and repeat position to deal drastically with cases of corruption and not just take half- measures.

It is only a weak and un stable Government that usually seeks compromise with bribery and corrup tion in order to stay in power.
I am sure the Alliance Government will emerge with greater strength and vigour after perging the services of corrupt officials, and one way, Sir, to eradicate corruption is that the honest officials must be sufficiently rewarded and the dishonest and corrupt ones must be properly punished and not be put in positions of trust and responsibility.

That is all.
That is all.

Tuan Haji Abdul-Rahman bin Ya'kub: Tuan Yang di-Pertua, saya menguchapkan berbanyak2 terima kaseh atas sokongan2 yang telah di-beri oleh beberapa orang Ahli kapada Rang Undang2 ini.

Ahli Yang Berhormat daripada Kelantan Hilir telah menyentoh masa- alah perkara rumah murah di-Sungai Way, konon-nya, untok orang Melayu.
Saya telah chuba dalam tempoh satu jam yang lalu tadi untok mendapat penjelasan sama ada ranchangan ini di-jalankan oleh Kementerian Kerajaan Tempatan dan Perumahan atau pun di-jalankan oleh Kerajaan Negeri.

Saya belum lagi dapat penjelasan.

Harus juga ini satu daripada scheme yang di- jalankan oleh Kerajaan Negeri dan jika yang demikian masaalah ini ada-lah tanggong-jawab yang besar oleh Kera jaan Negeri.
Kita memang selalu dengar sama ada di-sini atau negara yang lain kadang2 perkara ini berlaku, rumah itu bila mula2 di-dudoki nampak chantek, baik, tetapi sa-telah beberapa bulan di-dapati bochor di-sini, dan bochor di- sana.
Ini kadang2 menimbulkan shak wasangka bahawa harus ada korapsi telah berlaku di-antara pehak con tractor dan pegawai2 yang berkenaan, tetapi dalam masaalah yang di-bangkit- kan oleh Ahli Yang Berhormat ini dukachita-nya oleh kerana masa-nya sangat pendek, saya tidak dapat mem- beri penjelasan yang terang kapada Ahli Yang Berhormat itu.

Bagaimana pun perkara itu tidak-lah tinggal di-sini sahaja.

Saya telah memberi perentah 1503 22 JUNE 1967 1504 untok menjalankan penyiasatan yang lebeh Ianjut lagi.
Kita memang banyak mendengar bahawa daripada sa-masa ka-samasa, tudohan korapsi di-lemparkan dengan sa-chara umum kapada pegawai2 Kera- jaan dan pehak2 yang lain.
Sa-kali lagi saya suka-lah mengatakan di-sini, ia- itu sunggoh pun pehak Kerajaan menyangka bahawa korapsi ada ber- jalan di-dalam negara kita ini, saya rasa tiap2 satu tudohan itu elok-lah di- sokong dengan kenyataan2 dan pehak2 yang memberi tudohan itu hendak-lah bekerjasama dengan sa-penoh-nya de ngan pehak Kerajaan untok mendapat- kan orang2 bersalah yang berkenaan itu.
oleh peguam2, Beberapa orang Ahli Yang Ber hormat telah menegaskan ia-itu walau pun bagaimana ketat-nya undang2, bagaimana baik-nya satu undang2 itu di-gubalkan namun jikalau undang2 itu tidak di-laksana- kan dengan sempurna, maka undang2 itu akan tinggal sa-bagai undang2 atas kertas sahaja.

Ini saya bersetuju.
Ini saya bersetuju.

Kita sakalian mengetahui bagitu juga di- dalam ugama kita hukuman Tuhan dalam Quran, dalam semua Qur'an, di-katakan ajaran2 yang mela- rangkan manusia supaya jangan ber- buat jahat, tetapi manusia tidak ikut, maka ajaran itu tinggal sa-bagai tulisan atas kertas sahaja.

Tetapi banyak dari pada faham2 yang telah di-kemukakan merupakan bahawa sa-mata2 menjadi tanggong-jawab Kerajaan sahaja untok melaksanakan undang2 itu.

Ini tidak bagitu.
Ini tidak bagitu.

apa Jika kita mahu negara kita dengan sa-berapa boleh-nya berseh daripada penyakit korapsi ini, maka bukan sahaja Kerajaan, bukan sahaja polis, bukan sahaja pegawai2 di-dalam Anti- Corruption Bureau, tetapi juga ra'ayat jelata mesti memikul beban dan memi- kul tanggong-jawab bekerjasama mem- bawa orang2 yang bersalah kapada polis dan kapada mahkamah dan mem beri keterangan dengan takut siapa-kah yang membuat kesalahan itu.
Hanya dengan chara yang demikian sahaja pehak polis, pehak ahli2 Anti- Corruption Agency, dapat melaksana Rang kan sa-penoh2-nya dengan tidak Undang2 ini.

Chuma dengan chara bagitu sahaja ikan2 yang besar, buaya2 yang besar, naga2 yang besar, yang telah melakukan kesalahan korapsi ini dapat dan dapat di-hukum oleh mahkamah jika di-dapati salah.
ka-mahkamah di-bawa Saya suka menegaskan sa-kali lagi bahawa tanggong-jawab untok menen- tang dan menghapuskan korapsi dalam negeri bukan tanggong-jawab Kerajaan tetapi tanggong-jawab ra'ayat sahaja, jelata.

Jikalau korapsi berluas2 di- dalam negeri, ini akan berarti bukan pehak Kerajaan yang harus telah chuai, tetapi ra'ayat jelata pun harus juga clan mesti menerima bersalah hukuman daripada pehak yang ber- kuasa lagi di- lebeh daripada kita kemudian hari kelak.
Saya tidak akan membuang masa, Tuan Yang di-Pertua, untok menyentoh soal2 dan chadangan2 yang baik yang ada di-masokkan di-dalam undang2 sekarang ini dan juga chara2 di-masa yang akan datang.

Saya suka untok menjimatkan masa dan menyentoh masaalah2 besar yang telah di-bangkit- kan oleh Ahli2 Yang Berhormat.
Ahli Yang Berhormat daripada Larut telah menchadang supaya di- Utara adakan sa-buah mahkamah yang di- chadangkan beliau di-gelar dengan nama Arbitration Court yang berkuasa memaksa pehak yang di-tudoh itu memberi keterangan sendiri-nya menge- nai harta2 yang di-simpan, atau yang di-dapati oleh-nya, kapada mahkamah itu.

Dengan chara demikian Ahli Yang Berhormat itu berharap kita dapat mengatasi kelemahan2 yang sekarang kita hadapi menerusi undang2 kita.
Tuan Yang di-Pertua, chadangan ini bertentangan sunggoh dengan perinsip asasi di-dalam pentadbiran undang2 di-dalam negara kita.
Ini bukan sahaja undang2 yang kita pusakai daripada British bahkan undang2 Islam pun berkata bagitu, ia-itu jikalau sa-saorang itu telah di-tudoh membuat satu kesa lahan, maka hendak-lah kenyataan2 yang jelas di-kemukakan kapada pehak pengadil, dan jika pehak pengadil perchaya kapada kenyataan2 yang telah di-keluarkan oleh saksi2, maka baru- lah sa-saorang itu boleh di-dapati salah.
1505 22 JUNE 1967 1506 sa-saorang Untok memaksakan itu memberi keterangan menentang dia sendiri, untok menggantong leher dia sendiri, untok memasokkan dia sendiri dalam penjara, kerana Kerajaan telah telah membuat satu menyangka dia sunggoh bertentangan kesalahan, dengan perinsip ke'adilan yang telah di-amalkan kita di-dalam beratus2 tahun.
negara ini lain tetapi sendiri pejabat, maka Tentang petition writer dan tentang tiap2 ketua perkara2 yang pejabat boleh mengambil tindakan jika di-dapati bahawa petition writer itu akan mengganggu kerja2 di- dalam boleh-lah hukuman di-beri supaya mereka jangan terkadang2 berbuat demikian, ada juga kebaikan, ada petition writer untok membantu mengisi form, bebe- rapa form, yang kebanyakan-nya orang biasa itu tidak mengetahui.
Mereka ini ada pengalaman sadikit dan mendapat telah faedah daripada mereka beri kapada orang ramai.

Jikalau mereka ini ya'ani petition writer rasuah ini, chuba hendak memberi kapada mana2 satu pegawai, itu ada- lah bertentangan dengan undang2 kita pada masa sekarang.

tenaga yang kita longgar, Rasuah bukan yang ada, sama ada di-negara kita, atau pun di-negara2 lain, bukan mesti-nya kerana yang pentadbiran kerana undang2 buroh kita longgar, kerana itu kurang disiplin di-dalam pejabat ketat.
Ini boleh menjadi satu daripada factor yang menyenangkan korapsi, tetapi bukan sa-mata2-nya walau pun longgar, undang2 tidak pentadbiran longgar, disiplin dalam tidak buroh pejabat tetapi kita ada-lah juga dapati bahawa korapsi itu berlaku.
itu kuat The Honourable Member for Siti- awan has suggested the addition of two Clauses to the Bill: firstly, that ineffi ciency should be a ground for suspicion of corruption; secondly, that all assets of persons convicted should be for feited, even the assets of close relations of such persons.

Mr Speaker, Sir, even if the first suggestion is accepted and is embodied in the Bill, in my opinion it will not help a bit to detect corruption.
Ineffi ciency, without even a provision in the if a Bill, can raise suspicion and suspicion is raised, then the authority concerned will begin to look into the problem, provided the officer concerned has got the initiative and is public- spirited, and so forth.

Therefore, I do not see how the first suggestion could in any way strengthen the present pro visions of the law, including the pro vision which I hope this Dewan will approve.
the that trained the relevant Secondly, I am surprised that the for Sitiawan, Honourable Member learned the in law, in English Bar, should have come forward to suggest that all the assets of persons convicted under legisla tion and also all the assets of close relations of such convicted persons should be forfeited.

Surely, is contrary to the basic human principle, to the freedom, liberty of a person to own his own property without inter ference, unless it is authorised by law.
The Constitution specifically provides that you cannot take people's property without adequate compensation, that you cannot confiscate property unless the property is involved in the commis sion of a crime.

His suggestion goes far, far, beyond what can be accepted by ordinary human commonsense.
If his suggestions go to the extent of suggesting that all the properties which were the subject of the commission of the crime under the Principal Act and under the new Bill, then this suggestion is redundant, because that exists in existing provisions under, think, section 13 and to a certain extent section 30 of the Principal Act.

He has also said that the time has come for us to stamp out corruption as if suggesting that, before, the time had not yet come.
There is always time there; whenever corruption crops up, it must be stamped out immediately forthwith, if we are not going to allow it to develop into a cancer beyond remedy.

I Furthermore, Mr Speaker, Sir, on the question of contractors taking a long time to get payment from the P.W.D., and so forth, this need not be dealt with under the Bill.

It can be tackled administratively.


1507 22 JUNE 1967 1508 compared The Honourable Member for Batu has compared Singapore and Malaysia, and he has said that in Singapore one can get things done very very expedi tiously, whereas in Malaysia, it will take a very, very long time.

There is a lot of difference between Singapore and Malaysia in area alone.

What is Singapore to Malaysia?

Malaysia is a federal system of Govern ment.


What can be done by a unitary state of Government in a matter of two hours, may take the federal form of Government a few days, or even a few weeks.

The vastness of the area must be taken into consideration.

One cannot say just because in one State it can be done in one minute, therefore in Russia it should also be done in one minute.

That is not logical.

I agree that there is room for improvement.


I am not saying that our administrative machinery is perfect.

The Government has been to smoothen or streamline the administra tion in this country.

We have set up the Development Administration Unit; we engage experts to study the admi nistration in this country; and we hope that with real, sincere, true determina tion from all those concerned, from time to time we will perfect, perhaps not 100%, our system of Government in this country.
its very best trying terms In regard to his suggestion and the suggestion by the Honourable Member for Bungsar that all Ministers should declare their assets, and so should Government servants, the Honourable Member for Temerloh, if I remember correctly, has already read out a portion of the General Orders which sets out that certain in no uncertain categories of are servants public required to declare their assets.
The Honourable Prime Minister has a few times, I think, in this House, stated clearly that all Ministers on appoint ment are their assets to him.
I have declared my assets to the Prime Minister and I am not ashamed to declare it once again to the Honourable Member: my assets consist of eight children, no house, no land, one small Mazda motor-car, bank balance red and I am trying to get a loan to tide over during the next to declare required innocently, without couple of weeks; and I think he is very much richer—very much well to do—than I am.

At least he does not have, perhaps a red bank balance in his account.
Even if Ministers declare their assets every year, and civil servants do likewise, if they are bad, they can get round it.

The crux of the problem is, are those persons them selves bad?

If they are bad, they can declare falsely, and I do not really see by declaring their assets, we will stamp out corruption in the country.

It may help a little bit.

He, himself, already admits that people right at the very top are not corrupt.

They have been their knowledge, used by other people.
I thank for having such confidence in us and, as he has got the Alliance Ministers, he should also have confidence that we are doing everything the possible to reduce to curb, minimum, corrupt practices this country.

I am very thankful to him for having disclosed the names of the persons he referred to in his speech.
I promised him and I am keeping that promise, I will not disclose those names in the Dewan, because to do so might prejudice investigations, which are now being carried out by the Police under the direction, close supervision, of the Attorney-General himself.

the Honourable Member that confidence to me today to in in The suggestion that the Anti-Corrup tion Bureau should be reorganised, that it should be turned into an inde pendent body, is agreed in principle by the Government.
The Government, in fact, has been considering this thing for a long time; as the Honourable Member knows more than I do, we have engaged someone from Pakistan to advise us on this point, and several months ago, I think it was in 1966, the then Honourable Minister of Home Affairs, Tun Dr Ismail, spoke on the Television and on the Radio on the Cabinet Sub-committee which was set up to review and to make recommenda tions on the reorganisation of the Anti- Corruption Agency.
Now, Sir, I am glad the Honourable Member that as a result of the recommendations of the Working tell to 1509 22 JUNE 1967 1510 is be eventually to detach practicable at it completely Committee appointed by the Cabinet Sub-Committee and also the recom mendation of the Cabinet Sub-Com mittee under the Chairmanship of the Honourable Tun Dr Ismail the first step to taken by Government introduce this Bill, and the other step, as I have mentioned when I introduced this Bill, is to reorganise the Agency and the process is now underway.
The increase in staff will be something about 200% over the present strength.

We have also agreed that there will be a review of the workings of this Agency within two years from the moment of its operation, and it is the view of the this that Government Agency will be detached from the that because of Police.
We believe it staffing difficulties, and so forth, this will not from stage the Police, because we need Police officers, and so forth, but the Attorney- General, being the person under the Constitution invested with powers to investigate, institute proceedings, and so forth, in criminal court, is the person who will have the close supervision over this Agency.
We hope that one of the Attorney- General Chambers, perhaps, a senior counsel will be this Agency, in order to ensure that the workings of this Agency are smooth and according to the law.

And, there fore, we have not really been keeping quite on this point.
We have been very much alive to what is going on in the country to the suggestions by all the Honourable Members—the Alliance Members, the members of the Opposi tion; and, in this respect, I can say that we are ahead of the Honourable Members on the Opposite Bench.
the members of seconded to in his speech The Honourable Member for Batu also mentioned the question of funds of New Villages—as he himself the subject admitted comes properly under the criminal breach of trust rather than corruption— I tried during the few minutes that I had after his speech to find out the true state of the affairs.

Unfortunately, I am unable to give him a definite reply.
He saw me outside in the lobby and tomorrow I will get in touch with the Prime Minister's Department again on this very question.

I do remember that the Honourable Prime Minister did say something about furnishing the report to the Honourable Member.

I think he did also say that, perhaps, it was a State matter, and I was advised just now that this question of account of the Jinjang New Village is really a State matter, it is not a Federal matter.
Be that as it may, because the allegation is an allegation of criminal breach of trust, the com mission of a crime, I will have a word with the Attorney-General tomorrow, and see what he has got to say on this.
to by thank all I think that is all I need say, Mr Speaker, Sir, in my reply to all the observations the Honourable Members, and once again I would the Honourable like Members for having taken such a lively interest in the discussion on this Bill and also for having offered constructive criticisms, and I would like to impress upon them not simply to ask the Government to ensure that the Bill, or rather the Act, will be implemented to the fullest extent, but rather they themselves should, when they visit their constituencies, advise the voters, advise the ra'ayat, to come out and help the Government in our endeavour to curb corruption in our country (Applause).
Question put, and agreed to.

Bill accordingly read a second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House.

House immediately into a Committee on the Bill.

resolved itself Bill considered in Committee.

(Mr Speaker in the Chair) Clauses 1 and 2 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 3— Tuan Haji Abdul-Rahman bin Ya'kub: Mr Chairman, Sir, I beg to move that an amendment as indicated in the Amendment slip that has been circulated to all Honourable Members 1511 22 JUNE 1967 1512 and which reads as follows be agreed to: Immediately after the words "State Legis lative Assembly" insert the words "a member of a public body."

Amendment put, and agreed to.

Clause 3 as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clauses 4 and 5 ordered to stand part of the Bill.


Bill reported with amendment: read the third time and passed.

THE SUPPLEMENTARY SUPPLY (1965 AND 1966) BILL Second Reading Tuan Ali bin Haji Ahmad: Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move that a Bill intituled "an Act to apply sums out of the additional Fund Consolidated expenditure for the service of the years 1965 and 1966 and to appropriate such sums for certain purposes" be now read a second time.
for in the past, As has been done on a few occa sions this Bill seeks authority for expenditure in regard to two separate sets of Supplementary Estimates, one for the year 1965 and the other for 1966.

This method, as has been stated before, simplifies the procedure for considering two sets of Supplementary Estimates at the same meeting of the House.
for additional section of Clause 2 of the Bill provided autho rity expenditure of $322,293 for the service of the year 1965, and this is itemised in the First Schedule to the Bill and also in the Supply Expenditure the Fourth Supplementary Estimates, 1965, which are tabled as Command Paper No.

20 of 1967.
20 of 1967.

Of this amount, $32,000 for Head S. 5—Public Services is Commission, to meet payment of arrears of salaries and allowances of the Commission's staff as a result of the upward revision of salary scales rates of housing allowance of and officers, clerks and typists.
Head S. 19— Education Grants and Subventions, requires a sum of $280,000 to cover in the payment of statutory grants the respect of secondary schools for transport and year 1965, and Head S. 22—Pilgri mage—requires a sum of $10,293 for travelling the cost of allowances incurred on 10 additional officers sent to Mecca with the Malay sian Medical Mission the pilgrimage season of 1965. total appropriation in 1965, The three previous supple including ments and supplement, the present amounts to $1,736.1 million, but the actual expenditure was $1,628.8 million.
during the an expenditure, the Second Schedule Clause 3 of the Bill seeks authority for additional expenditure of $712,620 in respect of the year 1966 as itemised in to the Bill and also in the Supply Expenditure section of the Third Supplementary Estimates, 1966, which are laid before the House as Command Paper No.

22 of 1967.

Of the sum required as addi amount of tional $583,485 has been advanced from the Contingencies Fund and this amount has now to be recouped.
As Honour able Members will observe, of the in total sum of $6,840,060 included the Third Supplementary Estimates, 1966, a sum of $6,127,440 is to meet the "charged" expenditure services which are not required to be authorised in the Supply Bill.
The two big items of "charged" expenditure are a payment the State of Sabah in respect of a grant, equivalent to 40% of the growth of Federal revenue derived in the State for the years 1965 and 1966 as pro vided in Article 112c (1) (a) of the Constitution, and in respect of 30% of customs revenue collected in 1966 by the Federal Government as provided in Article 112c (1) (b) of the Consti tution.
financing cost of to As regards the additional expendi ture for which authority is sought in the Bill, by far the largest items are in respect of: Prime Minister Inland Revenue Printing Judicial The reasons ... ... ... $100,560 137,550 115,075 144,673 ... requesting these for additional monies have been given in some detail in the Treasury Memoranda 1513 22 JUNE 1967 1514 on the two sets of Estimates which are tabled as Command Paper Nos.
21 and 23 of 1967 respectively, and it is unnecessary for me to elaborate on them.

The Ministers concerned will probably deal on the various items in the Committee greater detail during stage.

Sir, I beg to move.

Tuan Cheng Wing Sum: Sir, I beg to second the motion.

Tuan Haji Ahmad bin Abdullah (Kelantan Hilir): Tuan Yang di-Pertua, saya mengambil sadikit untok membahathkan Rang Undang2 Perbelanjaan Tambahan yang ada di- hadapan kita ini.
bahagian Tuan Yang di-Pertua, Rang Undang2 untok menambahkan per belanjaan pertama-nya ia-lah menam bahkan perbelanjaan bagi tahun 1965 tahun dahulu sudah di- yang dua belanjakan maka baharu sekarang Parlimen ini di-minta untok melulus- ia-lah Rang kan, dan yang kedua Undang2 Perbelanjaan Tambahan bagi tahun 1966 sa-banyak $712,620.
lagi akan bulan lebeh2 Tuan Yang di-Pertua, kita sekarang yang di-dalam ini berada keenam, tetapi nampak-nya Undang2 untok menambahkan perbelanjaan sudah masok kali yang ketiga pada Undang2 ini.
Kita tidak tahu berapa- kah Rang Undang2 untok menambah kan di- perbelanjaan kemukakan di-dalam Rumah yang mulia ini di-dalam berapa bulan yang akan datang, tetapi ini menunjokkan kapada kita bahawa sa-nya ada-lah pehak Kerajaan, lagi pehak Kementerian Kewangan, tidak mem- buat suatu atoran yang dapat meng- anggap dengan jelas-nya berapa-kah banyak-nya perbelanjaan yang perlu di-belanjakan pada ter- sebut ketika mengemukakan Budget di-dalam Rumah ini.
Ini ada satu perkara yang pelek, Tuan Yang di- ia-itu mengikut Command Pertua, Paper 23 di-muka yang ke-9 di-bawah Kementerian Tanah dan Galian, per- untokan mula2 di- dalam Rumah ini ia-lah $4,260 tetapi akhir2-nya pada Rang Undang2 untok menambahkan perbelanjaan pada kali di-kemukakan tahun yang ini yang pertama $10,000 telah di-minta kemudian $7,000 dan sa-terus-nya.
Pendek-nya, tambahan yang telah di- minta oleh Kementerian yang tersebut di-atas perbelanjaan di-bawah Head S. 52 lebeh banyak daripada peruntokan asal yang telah di-kemuka kan di-dalam Rumah ini.

Ini menun jokkan bahawa sa-nya ada-lah perkara meminta ketika Kementerian tersebut membuat dan meminta perbelanjaan bagi Kementerian-nya di-bawah Head ada mem- ini, nampak-nya punyai satu dasar yang dengan dasar itu dapat di-kemukakan, atau pun dapat di-minta wang dengan sa-kadar yang dia berhajat.
tidak out right grant Pula di-sini, Tuan Yang di-Pertua, suka-lah saya hendak sebutkan sa- bagaimana yang tersebut di-dalam muka ke-4 ia-itu Prime Minister ada- lah wang yang di-minta untok di- tambahkan ia-lah sa-banyak $100,560.
Ini telah menimbulkan satu soalan dari saya baharu2 ini ia-itu kita tengok bahawa kita dengar Yang Teramat Mulia Perdana Menteri telah memberi satu di-Kangar di-sana $10,000 banyak-nya untok membuat satu golf course dan dahulu daripada itu ada juga grant daripada sa-banyak $35,000 pehak Kerajaan untok padang golf yang tersebut juga.
Ini menunjokkan bahawa pehak Kera jaan tidak mengambil berat ketika memberi satu2 grant lebeh2 lagi pada masa yang kita sekarang ini mengha- dapi kesusahan dan kesulitan ke wangan, maka grant2 yang sa-bagitu banyak-nya jangan-lah hendak-nya di- beri kapada project yang tidak produc .

.

.. tive, yang tidak akan membawa dengan Tuan Ali bin Haji Ahmad: Untok di-Pertua, penjelasan, Tuan Yang ini tidak ada S. 7—Prime Minister kena-mengena pemberian padang golf di-Kangar atau pun di- mana.
Di-sini di-sebutkan untok Government Hospitalities Fund dan di-sini terang juga kerana lawatan pemimpin2, atau tokoh2 dari luar atau sa-bagai-nya, jadi tidak ada di-sebutkan mengenai perkara pemberian golf dan Ahli Yang Berhormat terkeluar daripada perkara yang di-dalam ini.

terang2 itu Mr Speaker: Saya tahu itu, tetapi dia hendak memberi ibarat, mithal-nya, 1515 22 JUNE 1967 1516 jadi di-sebutkan di-sana sini, biarkan- lah.
Tuan Haji Ahmad bin Abdullah: Tuan Yang di-Pertua, saya tahu yang bahawa sa-nya soal yang saya keluar- kan itu tidak bersangkut paut dengan ini, tetapi Mr Speaker: Tetapi saya minta jangan-lah panjang2 sangat ibarat itu (Ketawa).

Tuan Haji Ahmad bin Abdullah: Tetapi ini bersangkut-paut pula lagu mana yang saya katakan tadi, per- belanjaan tidak kena pada tempat-nya.
Kerajaan kita sekarang sedang meng- kesulitan atau mengalami hadapi, kewangan, maka hadiah2 dan jamuan2 yang di-berikan kapada tetamu2 yang datang ka-negeri kita, hendak-lah di- sa-boleh2-nya.

kechilkan Jangan-lah kita menjadi bagitu boros sa-hingga sampai bagitu banyak wang yang kita keluarkan untok menjamu dan mem- beri hadiah2 kapada tetamu yang datang daripada luar.
Wan Abdul Kadir bin Ismail: Tuan saya suka hendak Yang di-Pertua, sadikit dalam mengambil bahagian perbahathan Anggaran Tambahan Perbelanjaan Biasa ini dan saya hendak menyentoh satu perkara, ia-itu tentang Talivishen di-dalam Head S. 43 dan saya merasa bahawa akhir2 ini banyak semenjak perubahan2 yang baik telah berlaku kapada programme talivishen yang patut di-beri dan di-sebut di-beri kepujian.
tersebut yang yang Tetapi berbanding dengan radio, Tuan Yang di-Pertua, ada satu perkara yang berlaku baharu2 ini yang saya suka hendak menarek perhatian Dewan ini atas perlu-nya di-segerakan usaha mengadakan master bulletin dalam bahasa Melayu yang telah saya serukan beberapa kali dalam Dewan ini.

Per kara ini berlaku pada masa sidang ini juga dalam mana saya yang membawa usul untok menguchapkan terima kaseh kapada Titah di-Raja telah membawa beberapa chadangan dalam uchapan saya itu.
Pada hari itu saya membuka radio pada pukul 1.30 dan tiba-lah berita tentang usul itu dan butir2 ten saya tang uchapan saya itu, tetapi barang- kali nasib saya terlalu baik pada hari di-siarkan itu, warta berita yang dalam telah itu bahasa Melayu melantek saya menjadi Yang di- Pertuan Agong sa-kejap, kerana ucha pan uchapan itu di-katakan Agong, barangkali sebab-nya kesalahan ini, kerana original-nya berita itu ia- lah dalam bahasa Inggeris, dan tersebut dalam bahasa Inggeris, "He said", itu dalam bahasa Melayu "Baginda ber- titah", atau "saya bertitah", dapat di- bedzakan apabila dia kata, "He said", dalam bahasa Inggeris, penterjemah- nya daripada bahasa Inggeris ka-bahasa Melayu tidak dapat membezakan, sama ada ini daripada saya pembawa usul, atau daripada titah di-Raja sa-malam.
Di-terjemahkan-oleh penterjemah itu bahawa uchapan saya itu ia-lah titah Yang di-Pertuan Agong.

"Baginda sa-imbang, bertitah, keadaan penuntut2 universiti hendak di-hapus- kan dan sa-terus-nya."

Segala uchapan saya titah Yang di- Pertuan Agong.


Maka ini satu perkara perkhidmatan yang menchachatkan Radio sendiri dan yang memerlukan bahawa kalau sekarang sudah di-jalan- kan langkah2 permulaan untok menga dakan master bulletin dalam bahasa Melayu, patut di-segerakan lebeh che- pat lagi daripada itu supaya kesalahan bagini lagi banyak Ahli2 Dewan ini di-angkat oleh warta berita Radio Malaysia menjadi Yang di-Pertuan Agong pada sa-tiap kali Dewan ini bersidang.
tidak berlaku dan itu di-katakan tidak tidak Jadi saya merasa ini perlu kerana perbezaan jalan bahasa antara bahasa Inggeris dan bahasa Melayu itu jauh sa-kali dan lebeh dekat kita kalau bahasa asal-nya bahasa Melayu dan warta berita asal di-tulis dalam bahasa Melayu lebeh dekat kapada maksud yang sa-benar-nya dalam menchapai dua tujuan: (i) tujuan kita hendak menguatkan, menegakkan bahasa kebangsaan, dan (ii) tujuan kita hendak memberi perkhidmatan yang lebeh baik dari segi radio dan dari segi penyiaran kapada orang ramai.
Sekian, terima kaseh.
1517 22 JUNE 1967 1518 terutama jangan membelanjakan Tuan Senu bin Abdul Rahman: berkenaan di-Pertua, Tuan Yang dengan tegoran yang di-buat oleh Ahli Yang Berhormat daripada Kelantan Hilir tadi, ia-itu tentang perbelanjaan yang di-minta oleh Pejabat Perdana Menteri dan Ahli Yang Berhormat itu telah mengatakan atau menegor supaya ter- Kerajaan lalu banyak wang sa-kali dalam Jamuan2 Negara, saya suka-lah mengingatkan kapada Ahli Yang Ber itu ia-itu sa-bagai kewajipan hormat Kerajaan, tanggong-jawab Kerajaan, kita terpaksa-lah mengadakan Jamuan2 Negara terutama sa-kali manakala ada lawatan2 luar negeri, kerana memang itu-lah menjadi adat resam sa-sabuah negara yang merdeka, kerana kalau sa-kira-nya kita sendiri pun kalau Yang Amat Berhor mat Perdana Menteri, atau pun wakil2 daripada Malaysia ini keluar negeri, kita juga akan di-jamu, pendek-nya akan di-beri sambutan dan di-beri berbagai2 oleh negara2 yang tersebut.
Jadi itu ada-lah sa-bagai timbal balas atau pun reciprocity pembesar2 daripada itu Sa-lain daripada itu, Ahli Yang Berhormat daripada Kuala Trengganu berkenaan Utara menchadangkan dengan indok berita dalam bahasa kebangsaan.
Saya perchaya bukan-lah kali yang pertama Ahli Yang Berhor mat itu membawa perkara ini di-sini, ingatan saya, sa-tiap kali sa-panjang persidangan ini berjalan Yang Berhor telah membawa berkenaan mat dengan indok berita dalam bahasa kebangsaan ini dan saya menguchap- kan sa-tinggi2 terima kaseh dan saya suka menyatakan di-dalam Rumah yang berbahagia ini, ia-itu pehak Radio Malaysia memang menchari jalan dengan sa-berapa chepat yang boleh berita hendak mengadakan dalam bahasa kebangsaan ini, bukan sahaja pada pukul 11 pagi, tetapi akan di-jalankan tiap2 kali warta berita yang di-siarkan oleh radio dengan sa-berapa chepat yang boleh, tetapi semua-nya ada-lah berkehendakkan masa, kerana pegawai2, atau pun pemberita2 itu ter- paksa di-lateh daripada satu masa ka- satu masa, tetapi saya suka memberi penjelasan dalam Rumah yang ber bahagia ini ia-itu indok berita dalam indok bahasa kebangsaan itu akan dapat di- jalankan, saya berharap dengan sa- berapa chepat yang boleh.
Tuan Ali bin Haji Ahmad: Tuan Yang di-Pertua, Ahli Yang Berhormat daripada Kelantan Hilir mengatakan ia-itu pehak Kerajaan membuat Ang- garan Perbelanjaan tak pernah yang tepat dan oleh kerana itu selalu datang ka-Dewan ini meminta anggaran tambahan.
tahun tiap2 di-dalam Tuan Yang di-Pertua, perkara yang hendak berlaku sa-suatu tahun itu adakala-nya tidak dapat di- jangka dan oleh kerana itu tidak dapat- lah di-sediakan terlebeh dahulu ang garan perbelanjaan dan oleh kerana itu daripada sa-masa ka-sa-masa, apa- bila berlaku sa-suatu perkara yang memerlukan perbelanjaan, maka Kera jaan terpaksa-lah mengeluarkan perbe lanjaan daripada Contingencies Fund, atau pun sa-bagai-nya dan kemudian datang ka-Dewan ini untok meminta di-luluskan perbelanjaan yang tersebut.
Yang kedua-nya, ia-lah dalam usaha Kerajaan hendak menjimatkan perbe lanjaan, maka Kerajaan chuba menu runkan perbelanjaan, khas-nya, Kemen terian Kewangan chuba menurunkan sa-berapa yang boleh, perbelanjaan tetapi, dalam masa berjalan-nya sa- suatu tahun itu maka di-dapati ter- paksa juga di-belanjakan lebeh dari pada yang di-anggarkan pada mula2- nya dan ini-lah dua sebab yang besar mengapa tiap2 tahun Kementerian Ke terpaksa datang ka-Dewan wangan yang mulia ini untok mendapatkan Tambahan Anggaran Perbelanjaan.
Yang ketiga-nya, Ahli Yang Berhor mat daripada Kelantan Hilir meng- harapkan supaya Kerajaan berjimat tentang hadiah2, jamuan2 dan sa-bagai- nya.

Patut-lah juga saya memberikan jaminan di-sini pehak Kerajaan, khas- nya Kementerian Kewangan, memang- lah sentiasa memerhatikan bahawa sa- tiap perbelanjaan yang di-keluarkan itu ada-lah tidak membazir dan sa-berapa jimat yang boleh.

Question put, and agreed to.

Bill accordingly read a second time.


The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee of Supply.

1519 22 JUNE 1967 1520 (Mr Speaker in the Chair) FIRST SCHEDULE Head S. 5 and S. 22— Tuan Senu bin Abdul Rahman: Tuan Pengerusi, dengan izin tuan, saya suka mengemukakan serentak Kepala2 S. 5 dan S. 22 di-dalam Schedule Yang Pertama dan S. 5, S. 7, dan S. 21 .

.

.

.

Mr Chairman: Itu belum sampai lagi—itu Jadual Yang Kedua.

Tuan Senu bin Abdul Rahman: Oh, masok Jadual Yang Pertama dahulu.
Tuan Yang di-Pertua, saya suka mengemukakan sa-rentak Kepala2 S. 5 dan S. 22, ia-itu S. 5—Surohanjaya Perkhidmatan Awam, peruntokan tam- bahan yang di-pohonkan ia-lah di- bawah Pechahan-kepala 1—Gaji, untok membayar gaji, elaun sara hidup dan elaun kebelakangan pegawai2, kerani2 dan juru2 taip dalam pejabat itu di- sebabkan pindaan2 di-atas elaun rumah pegawai2 dan gaji serta elaun2 sara hidup kerani2 dan taip yang telah di-luluskan oleh Kerajaan.

Dan bagitu juga wang tambahan sa-banyak $10,293.


Wang tambahan ini ada-lah di-kehendaki untok membayar tambang balek mengikut laut dari Malaysia ka- Jeddah bagi 10 pegawai tambahan per- wakilan perubatan Malaysia ka-Mekah dan juga untok pembayaran kenderaan dan biaya perjalanan mereka.

Perbe- ter- lanjaan nampak pada masa itu apabila ang- garan 1965 di-siapkan.

tambahan di-atas, tidak juru2 Keempat bagi tahun 1965 menjadi sa- bahagian daripada Jadual.
Tuan Pengerusi, keterangan bagi per untokan tambahan yang di-kehendaki itu ada di-berikan pada muka dua Memorandum Perbendaharaan ber- kenaan Anggaran Perbelanjaan Tam tahun 1965 yang di- bahan bagi Titah dalam Kertas kemukakan Bilangan 21 Jumlah 1967. tahun wang yang mula2 di-sediakan bagi bantuan untok Sekolah2 Menengah di- bawah Pechahan-kepala 19 dalam Anggaran Perbelanjaan tahun 1965 ia- lah $47 juta.
Angka ini kemudian-nya telah di-tambah sa-banyak $2.2 juta ini meluluskan Bill apabila Dewan peruntokan tambahan tahun 1965 dan 1966.

Ada-lah di-ketahui bahawa wang sa-banyak $1,337,196.04 lagi ada-lah di-kehendaki memileki dan mengatasi jumlah sa-banyak $49.2 juta yang telah di-sediakan bagi bantuan kewangan kapada Sekolah2 Menengah bagi tahun 1965.

Wang sa-banyak $1,058,640 yang telah di-jimatkan daripada Kepala 19 ada-lah di-tawarkan.
Dan oleh hal yang demikian peruntokan tambahan sa-banyak $280,000 ada-lah di-minta sekarang.

Tuan Pengerusi, saya mohon men- chadangkan.

Question put, and agreed to.

The sum of $280,000 for Head S. 19 the First to stand part of ordered Schedule.

SECOND SCHEDULE Tuan Pengerusi, saya harap dapat di-luluskan jadi sa-bahagian daripada Jadual.

Question put, and agreed to.

The sum of $32,000 for Head S. 5 and $10,293 for Head S. 22 ordered to stand part of the First Schedule.
Head S. 19— Tuan Lee Siok Yew: Tuan Penge rusi, saya bangun untok menchadang- kan supaya Kepala peruntokan 19— Bantuan dan Pemberian Pelajaran dan Pechahan-kepala 2—Bantuan kapada Sekolah2 Menengah, $280,000 dalam Tambahan Perbelanjaan Anggaran Heads S. 5, S. 7, S. 21 and S. 43— Tuan Senu bin Abdul Rahman: Tuan Pengerusi, dengan izin tuan, saya suka mengemukakan sa-rentak Kepala2 S. 5, Surohanjaya Perkhidmatan Awam ($15,499), S. 7, Jabatan Perdana Men- ($100,560), S. 21, Kementerian teri Luar Negeri ($23,252) dan S. 43, Jabatan Talivishen ($10).
supaya di- luluskan dan di-jadikan sa-bahagian daripada Jadual.

Tuan Pengerusi, peruntokan2 tam bahan sa-banyak $15,499 yang di- pohonkan di-bawah Lain2 Perbelanjaan Tiap2 Tahun ia-lah untok di-belanjakan saperti berikut, 1521 22 JUNE 1967 1522 Pechahan-kepala telah di-tukarkan 13—Pengangkutan dan Perjalanan sa-banyak $12,254 dan Pechahan-kepala baru 13 (a), Elaun Pakaian sa-banyak $1,250 ia-itu bagi pengambilan dan kakitangan di-Pejabat Pesuroh Jaya Tinggi Malaysia di- London.
Peruntokan2 ini ia-lah untok membayar tambang dan elaun pakaian sa-orang pegawai dan keluarga-nya yang ka-London dalam bulan Disember, 1966.

(b) Per untokan sa-banyak $1,995 di-bawah Pechahan-kepala 18 ia-lah bagi cha- wangan Surohanjaya Perkhidmatan Awam Persekutuan Sarawak dan Sabah untok membayar sa-orang pegawai dan keluarga-nya yang telah di-tukarkan ka-Kuching untok me- megang jawatan sa-bagai Setia-usaha Chawangan Surohanjaya Perkhidmatan Awam Sarawak dan Sabah.
tambang S. 7, peruntokan tambahan sa-banyak $64,000 ini di-kehendaki ia-lah oleh kerana peruntokan sa-banyak $95,000 yang telah di-luluskan dalam Anggaran Perbelanjaan tiada menchukupi di-sebabkan bertambah- nya telah di-adakan untok mera'ikan pembesar2 dan orang2 kenamaan dari negara2 asing yang telah melawat Malaysia di-hujong tahun 1966. tahun 1966 telah jamuan2 yang ini ia-lah Pechahan-kepala (6)—Hadiah2 Ras- sa-banyak mi, $36,560.
Tambahan $36,560 juga di-sebabkan untok membeli chendera2 mata bagi di-hadiahkan kapada pembesar2 dan orang2 kenamaan dari luar negeri yang telah membuat kunjongan ka-Malaysia dalam tahun 1966.

S. 21 perbekalan sa-banyak $23,252 ada-lah untok perbelanjaan berhubong dengan perundingan damai dengan Indonesia di-Bangkok yang di-hadhiri oleh Yang Amat Berhormat Timbalan Perdana Menteri yang mengetuai rom- bongan daripada Malaysia dari 28 haribulan Mei hingga 2 haribulan Jun, 1966.
Perbelanjaan yang di-bayar dari ini ada-lah untok pada perbekalan kediaman di-hotel, kenderaan dan biaya hidup, dan kera'ian dan perbelanjaan runchit.

Bagi S. 43 peruntokan tambahan ini di-perlukan oleh tiga sebab.

Pertama oleh sebab desakan2 yang di-terima dari pendudok2 di-negeri2 yang meng- amalkan hari Juma'at sa-bagai hari kelepasan, maka pehak Talivishen merasa perlu mengadakan ranchangan2 untok mereka pada petang hari Juma'at sa-lama dua jam pada tiap2 minggu.
Kedua-nya oleh sebab pengambilan kakitangan2 tetap untok jawatan2 sa- bagai Pemberita, Penyunting Berita, Juru Kamera, dan Juru Kamera Kanan telah tergendala, maka terpaksa-lah di- ambil kaki2 tangan sementara di-bayar gaji-nya dari peruntokan ini.

Akhir-nya ia-lah di-sebabkan oleh harga sewa filem2 Melayu yang lebeh tinggi dari filem2 barat.

Di-sapanjang tahun 1966 Jabatan Talivishen telah menayangkan tiap2 sa-buah minggu.

Tuan Pengerusi, saya mohon menchadangkan.


filem Melayu pada Question put, and agreed to.

The sums of $15,499 for Head S. 5, $100,560 for Head S. 7, $23,252 for Head S. 21, and $10 for Head S. 43 ordered to stand part of the Second Schedule.

Heads S. 18 to 20— Tuan Lee Siok Yew: Tuan Penge rusi, saya bangun untok menchadang kan supaya Kepala2 peruntokan 18, 19 dan 20 di-dalam Anggaran Perbelan jaan Tambahan yang ketiga tahun 1966 di-jadikan sa-bahagian daripada Jadual.
Tuan Pengerusi, wang ini ada-lah di-kehendaki melebehi dan mengatasi jumlah sa-banyak $352,779,390 yang di-sediakan di-bawah tiga Kepala di- bawah peruntokan dalam Anggaran Perbelanjaan tahun 1966.

Keterangan2 bagi peruntokan tambahan yang di- kehendaki itu ada-lah di-berikan dengan lengkap-nya di-muka surat 4, 5 dan 6 Memorandum Perbendaharaan ber- kenaan Anggaran Perbelanjaan Tam bahan yang ketiga di-kemukakan sa- bagai kertas Titah Bilangan 23 tahun 1967.
Ini-lah sahaja, Tuan Pengerusi, saya mohon menchadangkan.

Question put, and agreed to.

The sum of $30 for Head S. 18, the sum of $10 for Head S. 19, the sum of $59,710 for Head S. 20 ordered to stand part of the Second Schedule.

22 JUNE 1967 1524 1523 Head S. 29— Tuan Ali bin Haji Ahmad: Tuan Pengerusi, izinkan saya mengemukakan wang sa-banyak $137,550 untok lima Pechahan-kepala di-bawah Kepala S. 29—Hasil Dalam Negeri—di-luluskan.
tambahan Pechahan-kepala 1—Gaji, berkehen- dakkan wang sa-banyak $108,000 untok membayar gaji dan elaun kapada Kakitangan2 Bahagian juga Pegawai2 Baha Computer dan gian I yang baharu di-ambil di-dalam Jabatan Hasil Dalam Negeri itu.
Untok Pechahan-kepala 2—Pentad- biran, wang sa-banyak $5,650 ada-lah di-kehendaki untok membayar perbe- lanjaan tambahan kerana bertambah- nya penggunaan kuasa letrik di-sebab kan oleh pemasangan Computer Elek- juga alat2 hawa dingin tronik dan (air-conditioning) untok Pejabat Baha gian Computer itu.
Sa-banyak $2,000 daripada di-bawah jumlah wang pechahan-kepala ini ada-lah untok bayaran talipon di-sebabkan oleh pe- ngenaan bayaran panggilan2 talipon dan juga sambongan talipon tambahan di-Pejabat Hasil Dalam Negeri di- Kuala Lumpur dan di-Pejabat2 cha- wangan di-Johor Bahru dan Ipoh.

ada-lah di-sebabkan kes2 yang Tambahan yang di-kehendaki di- bawah Pechahan-kepala 4—Bayaran Mahkamah dan Guaman dan Pechahan- kepala 10—Pengangkutan dan Per- jalanan, oleh di-bawa bertambah-nya ka-mahkamah.
Wang tambahan ini juga ada-lah di-kehendaki untok membayar belanja perjalanan pegawai2 yang di- kehendaki menghadhiri perbicharaan di-mahkamah2 di-luar Kuala Lumpur untok menuntut balek tunggakan hasil.

Tugas2 yang di-jalankan itu ada-lah langkah2 menchegah berkait dengan pelarian chukai.

Untok Pechahan-kepala 7—Penche- takan dan Alatulis, tambahan sa-banyak $19,500 itu ada-lah di-kehendaki bagi membayar belanja menchetak borang2 baharu yang di-perlukan akibat per- ubahan kapada sistem computer.
Tuan Pengerusi, saya mohon men- chadangkan.

Question put, and agreed to, The sum of $137,550 for Head S. 29 ordered to stand part of the Second Schedule.

Head S. 37— The Parliamentary Secretary to the Deputy Prime Minister (Tuan Chen Wing Sum): Mr Chairman, Sir, I beg to move the sum of $115,075 shown under Head S. 37 be approved.

The reason for the said sum required in Command Paper No.

that is given 33/1967.

Sir, I beg to move.

Question put, and agreed to.


The sum of $115,075 for Head S. 37 ordered to stand part of the Second Schedule.

Heads S. 46, S. 52 and S. 59— Tuan Haji Abdul-Rahman bin Ya'kub: Tuan Pengerusi, dengan per- setujuan Tuan Pengerusi, saya mohon menchadangkan supaya peruntokan di- bawah S. 46, Kehakiman, sa-banyak $144,673; di-bawah S. 52, Kementerian Tanah dan Galian sa-banyak $6,280; dan di-bawah S. 59, Hal Ehwal Orang Asli sa-banyak $25,006; menjadi sa- bahagian daripada Jadual.
Penjelasan terkandong di-dalam Command ada Paper No.

23 muka 8, muka 9 dan muka 10.

Question put, and agreed to.

The sums of $144,673 for Head S. 46; the sum $6,280 for Head S. 52 and the sum of $25,006 for Head S. 59 ordered to stand part of the Second Schedule.

Heads S. 65 and 71— Tan Sri Haji Sardon bin Haji Jubir: Tuan Pengerusi, benarkan saya meng- ambil Kepala S. 65, Kementerian Pengangkutan ($26,300) dan Kepala S. 71, Pejabat Kenderaan Raya ($1,665) supaya menjadi sa-bahagian daripada Jadual.
Keterangan2 ada di-nyatakan dalam Command Paper No.

23 tahun 1967.

Question put, and agreed to.

The sum of $26,300 for Head S. 65 and the sum of $1,665 for Head S. 71 ordered to stand part of the Second Schedule.

22 JUNE 1967 1526 1525 Head S. 72— The Minister for Welfare Services (Tuan Haji Abdul Hamid Khan): Tuan Pengerusi, saya mohon menchadang- kan peruntokan tambahan sa-banyak $57,000 di-bawah Kepala S. 72— 'Am, Pecha- Kementerian Kebajikan han-kepala 1 (Gaji 1966) di-luluskan.
Keterangan2 terkandong di-dalam Treasury Memorandum, Command Paper No.

23 tahun 1967 di-muka 11.

Ianjut ada Question put, and agreed to.

The sum of $57,000 for Head S. 72 ordered to stand part of the Second Schedule.

Clauses 1 to 3 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Bill reported without amendment: read the third time and passed.

Mr Speaker: Persidangan di-tempoh- kan hingga pukul 8.30 malam ini.

Sitting suspended at 7.30 p.m.


Sitting resumed at 8.30 p.m. (Mr Speaker in the Chair) THE CUSTOMS LAWS (MALAYSIA) (AMENDMENT) BILL Second Reading Tuan Ali bin Haji Ahmad: Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move that a Bill intituled "an Act to amend the laws relating to Customs in Malaysia" be now read a second time.

the term "customs duty" Under the present Customs legisla tion in force in West and East Malaysia, i.e.

Customs Ordinance No.

42 of 1952 of the States of Malaya, the Customs Ordinance, Cap.
33 of Sabah and the Customs Ordinance Cap.

26 of Sara wak, is defined as "including import duty, export duty, surtax or cess imposed under the various customs laws and includes in royalty lieu of an export duty".

The terms "import duty" and "duty" also appear in these laws and these terms do not cover the surtax which was imposed on 19th January, 1967, in the 1967 payable any is Budget.
In order that the same term, "customs duty", may be that uniformly applied in the various cus toms laws, amendments to the Customs Ordinance, 1952, the Customs Ordi nance the Customs and Ordinance (Sarawak) are necessary to provide, where appropriate, for the inclusion of surtax for the purposes of revenue collection, refunds and draw back.

The Bill, which is before the House, will provide for this purpose.

(Sabah) Sir, I beg to move.


Secretary Parliamentary the Minister of Labour (Tuan Lee San Choon): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to second the motion.

to Question put, and agreed to.

Bill accordingly read a second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House.

House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill.

Bill considered in Committee.

(Mr (Speaker in the Chair) Clauses 1 and 2 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Schedules 1 to 3 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Bill reported without amendment: read the third time and passed.

THE INCOME TAX (TIN BUFFER STOCK CONTRIBUTIONS AND REPAYMENTS) BILL Second Reading Tuan Ali bin Haji Ahmad: Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move that a Bill intituled "an Act to make provision for the treatment for income tax purposes of repayments under contributions and the Tin Control (Buffer Stock) Regula tions, 1966" be now read a second time.
Mr Speaker, Sir, as Honourable the Tin Members will be aware, Control (Buffer Stock) Regulations, 1966, which are now in force, provide, inter alia, for the payment of contri butions to the Buffer Stock Fund by a person who is engaged in the working 1527 22 JUNE 1967 1528 of a tin mine in West Malaysia.

Such contributions are made either as a direct contribution by the miner, or by way of a deduction from the sale price of the tin ore sold by such contributor.
These contributions are in the nature of loans to the Buffer Stock Fund for the purpose of assisting the Fund in maintaining the floor price of tin and are, the therefore, liquidation of the Fund.

As such.

these contributions cannot be regarded as expenses incurred in the production of income from the business of the contributor and are not allowable de ductions in computing the contributor's taxable tax purposes.
refundable on income income for for income income The Bill before this House seeks to provide a certain measure of immediate relief to the contributor by allowing him the option of electing to have the contributions allowed as deductions in ascertaining his taxable income.

Re funds of his contributions to the con tributor, who has exercised this option, must then necessarily be treated as his tax taxable purposes.
Where the contributor has not elected to have his contributions allowed as deductions in ascertaining his taxable income, then the refunds of his contributions will not be liable to tax.

Honourable Members may recall in this connection that the treatment of contributions and repayments under the previous Tin Control (Buffer Stock) Regulations, 1961 were governed for income tax purposes by the Income Tax Act, 1962.

The Bill before this House is designed to meet the same objective.

Sir.

I beg to move.


The Assistant Mini!ter of Education (Tuan Lee Siok Yew): Sir, I beg to second the motion.

Question put, and agreed to.

Bill accordingly read a second time and committed to a committee on the whole House.

House immediately resolved itself into a Committee of the Bill.

Bill considered in Committee.

(Mr Speaker in the Chair) Clauses I to 6 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill.
THE (MALAYSIA) INCOME TAX LAWS (AMENDMENT) BILL Second Reading The Minister of Finance (Tun Tan Siew Sin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move that a Bill intituled "an Act to to amend further income tax of Sabah, Sarawak and West Malaysia" be now read a second time.
the laws relating the The object of the Bill is to introduce respective into a new section Ordinance of Sabah, Sarawak and West Malaysia governing income tax, so as to allow certain fiscal incentives to be given in order to assist in the promo tion of industries in Malaysia and of exports of manufactured goods from Malaysia.
The incentives will take the form of a grant of a further deduction in respect of certain specified outgoings and expenses incurred after the end of the year 1966 the taxable income or profits of a person from his business.
in ascertaining The Bill empowers the Minister of Finance to make rules prescribing the outgoings and expenses in relation to which the further deduction is to be allowed, the conditions for allowing such further deduction, and the ratio to be applied to the amount of any out goings and expenses so allowed.

.
.

It is proposed to publish, as soon as this Bill receives the Royal Assent, the rules which will specify the outgoings and expenses in respect of which the further deduction may be allowed and the extent of the further deduction.

The that only rules will also provide resident com approved Malaysian panies may be considered for the further deduction.
Companies engaged in the business of export of primary commodities will not be covered by these rules, which are merely designed to encourage the promotion of exports of domestic manufactures in keeping 1529 22 JUNE 1967 1530 with the Government's policy to en courage industrialisation and the diver sification of the economy.

Sir, I beg to move.

Tuan Lee Siok Yew: Sir, I beg to second the motion.

Question put, and agreed to.


Bill accordingly read the second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House.

House immediately resolved into a Committee on the Bill.

itself Bill considered in Committee.

(Mr Speaker in the Chair) Clauses I and 2 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

First Schedule, Second Schedule and Third Schedule ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Bill reported without amendment; read the third time and passed.
THE INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS BILL Second Reading of Labour The Minister (Tuan V. Manickavasagam): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move that a Bill intituled "an Act to provide for the regulation of the relations between employers and workmen and their trade unions and the prevention and settlement of any differences or disputes arising from their relationship and generally to deal with trade disputes and matters arising therefrom" be read a second time.
On previous occasions, I have indi cated in this House that the Govern ment was reviewing the legislation and practice industrial relations.

The Industrial Relations Bill now before the House is the result of this review.

field of the in The voluntary system of industrial relations which we have so long adopted in this country has worked with a reasonable degree of satisfac tion.
Th:s system had the support of both employers' and workers' groups in the National Joint Labour Advisory Council and an atmosphere of "good" industrial relations had been built up, with parties willing and able to meet together to discuss and settle their grievances · and claims by themselves, sometimes with the assistance of the conciliatory efforts of my Ministry.
One of the basic requirements of the voluntary system is that both parties should recognise the public and the nation are affected by any industrial dispute and this con sideration should weigh in the minds of the parties in dealing with such disputes.

The parties should always have cognizance of the fact that the public have a vital interest the manner in which parties to a dispute resolve differences that arise amongst them.

the fact that in During recent years, however.


a number of factors or trends have been developing which necessitated a review of this system of industrial relations and to reinforce this system with addi tional mechanisms and safeguards for the more orderly and expeditious settlement of industrial disputes, espe cially where these affect the public and national interests.
The accelerated pace of industrial expansion and the increasing growth of trade union organisations and activity have focussed attention on a number of issues governing employer employee relations which have not been effectively provided for under the voluntary system of industrial relations.

These issues have increasingly become the cause for strained relationships among the parties and sometimes led to strikes or lo::k-outs.
Where legisla tion or the parties themselves had not provided effective procedures for set tling these matters, ad hoc methods were adopted to iron out the problems.

These matters concern such questions as the procedure and conditions for the recognition of trade unions, the position of managerial and supervisory staff in union activity and alleged anti-trade union activities or victimization by employers.
Past experience has shown that the the complete reliance on willingness and ability of the parties themselves to settle these matters is both unsatisfactory and unwise.
1531 22 JUNE 1967 1532 The increasing insistence of the parties on their respective legal rights and prerogatives, even sometimes in the face of the fast changing colour of these rights and prerogatives, their unwillingness to use normally accept ed procedures to resolve contentious issues and, sometimes their uncompro mising attitude to issues in dispute, have shown up the inadequacy of our present system of industrial relations.
The experience has been that where one party or the other is in a strategic position, by virtue of its organisational strength or market position, that party has depended on its own strength to press or pursue its particular stand, the irrespective of consequences of such action.

the merits or inability These attitudes of the parties and resolve amicably to their arise that the problems many of between themselves have tended sharp ly to affect the public and the security and economy of the nation.
the convenience of it has not Even when the parties are aware of the effect of their action on the nation or the public or the economy of the country, always been possible for amicable steps to be taken to settle the issues.

It is because of such the Government has had, on occasions, to introduce specific measures to alleviate the situation.
factors trends that and It now seems quite apparent that a completely voluntary system of indus trial relations would be quite incom patible with the demands of a develop ing economy and the dictates of nation- building in our region.
The unrestricted exercise of the rights and prerogatives of employers or trade unions are likely to damage the economic and political besides stability seriously affecting the climate required increasing pace of capital for the attraction of accumulation and sizeable local and foreign.

investment, both nation, our the of The Industrial Relations Bill before this House, Sir, seeks to continue the present system of industrial relations and to consolidate the practice and law this regard.
throughout Malaysia in but contains a number of provisions not only to safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of employers and workers or their trade unions but also to ensure the speedy and just settle ment of industrial disputes, so that the ever-present public and national inter the ests are not prejudiced while parties promote their own particular interests.

Part I of the Bill, Sir, sets out the definition of some of the terms used in the Bill.
I would draw particular attention to the definition of "strike" on page 3 of the Bill which has been.

of necessity, drafted in a broad manner the more damaging to encompass forms of industrial action.

It is only right that if limitations are to be set on the circumstances under which strikes may take place, the definition of the term "strike" should include the more widely used forms of industrial action, such as a physical strike itself and what lias normally been termed as "go-slow".
Care has been exercised to ensure that the definition is not unduly wide so as to make it unworkable or to take away a normal right vested in the workers either by legislation or by contract.

in relation generally Part II of the Bill, Sir, contains new provisions to matters such as anti-trade union activity and victimization.
Existing legislation, such as the Trade Union Ordinance and the Employment Ordinance, contain some provisions in this regard but these have not, in practice, been found to be satisfactory to define the actual right of workmen, employers and their trade unions.

I would draw particular atten tion to Clause 5 of the Bill which, in sub-section for certain (2) provides existing rights of employers not to be tampered with.
These rights are indeed not absolute rights in today's context of industrial relations practice and are not beyond the purview of discussion with workers or their trade unions.

It has been necessary to provide for the matters now contained in sub-section (2) of Clause 5 as these have been found to be a source of constant conflict, especially in the more deve loped sectors of our economy.
1533 22 JUNE 1967 1534 the rights provided Clause 7 of the Bill provides that any complaint regarding the exercise of in this Part may be reported to the Minister who may the Industrial Court for hearing and settle ment.

such complaint refer to in the settlement of Part III of the Bill, Sir, deals with the question of recognition of trade unions.
This matter has been a source of constant problem, especially in the new and growing sectors of our economy, where trade union organisations are just beginning to establish themselves.

This matter of recognition has been raised in this House on a number of occasions, and I hope that the pro visions in this Part of the Bill are satisfactory to meet this problem.

This the Bill, at present merely Part of provides the basic procedure which could be followed in the determination of a claim for recognition.
We have thought it not advisable to try to spell out detailed or precise criteria to be adopted the question of recognition.

We believe that the provision of these procedures in the Bill itself would be sufficient to resolve any question that might arise concerning recognition of trade unions.

It would be more proper for us to accumulate sufficient expe these rience of procedures the desirability of providing specific cri teria and considerations on this issue.
I think that it is indeed a pity and sheer waste of energy and resources for disputes on the question of recog nition to develop into trials of strength, leading either to a lock-out or a strike.

Recognition of a trade union is, after all, the primary basis for the parties to deal with each other and is unnecessary that disputes should be allowed to sour up the relationship between the parties at this basic step itself.
Provision has, therefore, been made in Clause 8 (4) of the Bill for all disputes concerning recognition to be referred to the Industrial Court for a decision, where the matter is not other wise resolved.

the operation of before considering the it Clause 41 the Bill also (e) of provides that there shall be no strike or lock-out in respect of any dispute over the claim for recognition of a trade union of workmen.
to for the Part IV of the Bill sets out the pro cedures to be followed in the submis sion of claim and collective bargaining and form and content of collective agreements.

Clause 14 of the Bill requires that all collective agree ments reached by the parties shall be deposited with the Industrial Court for the Court take cognizance of such agreements.

Clause 15 makes all collective agreements taken cognizance of by the Court binding on the parties in the same manner as an award of the Court.
I am hopeful these remove clauses of frequent complaints that one party or the other has flagrantly breached the provisions of an agreement previously reached between the parties and that this Part of the Bill will introduce an element collective stability bargaining and collective agreement.

the Bill would that of in invite Part V of the Bill deals with conci It liatory efforts of my Ministry.
provides that either party to a trade dispute may the conciliatory services of my Ministry or, where for some reason such an invitation is not so the public given and requires, my Ministry may intervene on its own motion to promote and expeditious settlement of the dispute.

Clause 17 contains certain reserve powers in the face of a situation where one party or the other may unduly prolong the settlement of a trade dis pute or refuse to be co-operative.
interest this Part, three panels of Part VI of the Bill, Sir, contains some of the most crucial provisions of the Bill.

It in is under Clause 18, that an Industrial Court is established consisting of a permanent inde President and pendent persons, persons representing employers and persons representing workmen.
In dealing with a particular trade dispute referred to the Court, however, the Court will consist of the President and a member from each of the three panels of independent persons and employers' and workers' repre sentatives.

Clause 20 of the Bill enables Divisions of the Court to be set up to expedite the hearing of trade disputes 1535 22 JUNE 1967 1536 relating or to cater for the greater convenience of the parties.
Clause 23 of the Bill has to the operative provisions reference of disputes to the Industrial Court.

This Clause provides that the parties to a trade dispute may jointly request the Minister to refer the trade dispute to the Court or the Minister may, on his own motion, refer that dispute to the Court under the circum stances specified in Sub-clause (2) of Clause 23.
It has been found necessary to provide for both these alternatives, the past difficulty has been as in experienced in persuading one party or the other to agree to a reference of the dispute to a third party, where all other means of settlement have failed or every other effort has been exhausted.
The proviso (2) of Clause 23 provides that the Minister may refer a trade dispute in a Govern ment service to the Industrial Court only with the consent of His Majesty, if the dispute concerns a Federal Service, or the Ruler or Governor of a State, where the dispute concerns purely that State.

Sub-clause (3) of Clause 23 contains an to ensure that all existing means of settle ment of a trade dispute are used to promote the Minister may refer that dispute to the Industrial Court.
important provisions settlement, before to Sub-clause a that the opinion As stated in Clause 49 of the Bill, the provisions of Part VI would apply to both the Government sector as well as the private sector.
The Government is of it would be preferable for all disputes, whether they are in the Government sector or the private sector, to be dealt with by the same Industrial Court as this would promote the adoption of uniform standards and considerations and lead to the more equitable adjudication of trade disputes.

It has been necessary to provide for the consent of His Majesty to be obtained as the position of the Public Services is constitutionally different from the private sector.
I may state here, however, that this is merely a reserve power to meet this constitu tional requirement and would be used only in the most exceptional circum stances.

The Government would shortly be entering into consultations with the in Staff Side of the National Whitley Council concerning the discontinuance the Civil Services Arbitration of Tribunal.
Sub-clause (3) of Clause 23, however, would ensure that the Whitley Machinery now in existence for the Public Services would continue to be used as the vehicle and medium for consultation with the staff on matters of mutual interest and for discussions to take place on terms and conditions of service.

The Whitley Machinery has sufficient flexibility and provision for the settlement of most disputes that might arise the Public Services.
Where such settlement is not achieved, the provisions of this Clause of the Bill may be used to refer that dispute to the Industrial Court.

Clause 29 of the Bill provides that any award of the Court shall be final and conclusive and shall be binding on any employer or workman or his trade union who are parties to the dispute and their succes sors.
Clause 24 of the Bill enables officials of trade unions or other organisations approved by the Minister or, with the permission of the President, legal practitioners to appear before the Court.

It has been found necessary to permit to appear before the Court as some parties to a trade dispute before the Court may be seriously handicapped and the interests of justice subverted if such representa tion is not permitted.
It is realised, however, that it may not be necessary for representation by legal practitioners in all cases and discretion is vested in the President of the admission of such legal practitioners.

legal practitioners the Court on Clause 28 of the Bill seeks to ensure that, as trade far as possible, all disputes are settled by the parties them selves and this Clause permits the Court to consider the terms of an agreement reached even during the proceedings before the Court itself.
Clause 30 of the Bill provides for the manner of settlement of disputes over the interpretation or variation of awards and agreements, if necessary, by reference to the Industrial Court.
Clause 41 of the Bill provides that there shall be no strike or lock-out where a trade dispute has been referred 1537 22 JUNE 1967 1538 to the Industrial Court or where His Majesty has withheld his consent to the reference of a trade dispute in the Public Services to a Court, or in respect of any matter covered by a collective agreement taken cognizance of by the Court under Section 14 of the Bill or on any matter on which the Court has made an award.
Part VII of largely re- enacts the existing provisions of the Industrial Courts Ordinance, 1948, concerning and functioning of committees of investiga tions and boards of inquiry.

Such pro visions have been made to cater for issues or disputes which may not be amenable forms or methods of settlement and are con sidered useful in the promotion of good employer-employee relations.
establishment the normal the Bill the to Part VIII of the Bill generally re- enacts the present provisions of the Trade Disputes Ordinance concerning lock-outs trade disputes, strikes and and matters connected with these.

Clause 37 of the Bill is being further the amended, and I have circulated form of the to these amendments Honourable Members.
This Clause, as amended, seeks to ensure that picketing is conducted in a peaceful and orderly manner and that it is confined to the place of work and not extended to the streets and private residences, as these are the preservation of peace and public order.

Clause 40 of the Bill requires that at least 2 weeks' notice is given before a strike or lock-out is declared in any of the services listed as Public Utility Services in the Schedule to the Bill.
The remaining Clauses in this Part of the Bill provide for penalties.

to gravely prejudice likely in this regard contained in the General Orders and the Whitley Machinery are these sufficient and satisfactory purposes.

for under Clause 55 contains the general penalties for contravention of the pro visions of the Bill but stipulates that contraventions of Parts II, III or IV or other than Section 14, shall not be deemed offences this Part.
Parts II, III and IV of the Bill provide separately for the method of settling complaints or problems that arise in their operation, and it is felt that it would be unworkable to make the non compliance of any provisions of these Parts penal offences.
I might, how ever, point out that where any dispute concerning the provisions of Parts II, III or IV are referred to the Industrial Court, and if awards of the Court in these matters are contravened by any then person or party, become offences under Clause 55 of the Bill, as these would then become awards of the Court for all intents and purposes.

they would punishable relations industrial Clause 58 of the Bill repeals the various existing legislations in the field of throughout Malaysia.
It also repeals the Essential Regulations passed in 1965.

The pro visos to this Clause of the Bill ensure that all Acts commenced or done under the various this Clause of the Bill continue to have effect for all purposes.

This saving Clause is necessary to ensure stability and also to avoid duplication of work, especially where Tribunal or Court established under existing laws have completed a good part of their work but have not finally disposed of the matters before it.
repealed by laws Clause 48 of the Bill is being further amended, and I shall move this in Committee.

Copies of these amend ments have already been circulated to Honourable Members.
Part IX of the Bill, Sir, contains miscellaneous provisions, but I would draw particular attention to Clause 48, which excludes the provisions of Parts II, III, IV and V from being applied in the case of the Public Services as it is considered that existing procedures The Schedule to the Bill contains the list of Public Utility Services, for the purposes of which giving of notice is required under Clause 40 of the Bill.
Every care has been exercised in drawing up this schedule to keep it to a bare minimum but it must be agreed that this list cannot be final or complete, as the importance of any service from the national or public point of view could vary under different circumstances.

1539 22 JUNE 1967 1540 is not intended Sir, the Government considers this Bill as a fair and balanced one.
The Bill has been drafted with a careful eye on not only the rights and prero gatives of employers, workers or their trade unions, but also with the consi deration of the growing economy of our country and our stability in mind.

This Bill to be repressive legislation on either emplo yers or workers, and we have endea voured to be both fair and impartial respect of both employers and in workers.
I am aware, Sir, that neither the employers nor workers' trade unions are entirely satisfied with all the provisions of this Bill.

Indeed, in drafting the Bill, my Ministry has had full discussions with the employers' and workers' groups of the National Joint Labour Advisory Council.

The Government has earnestly and exhaus the various views tively considered raised by both groups and, where possible and necessary, suitable modi fications have been made to meet the desires of both groups.
The Draft Bill was amended in a number of instances to meet the wishes of both groups, but, quite naturally, the Government could not accede the entire wishes of either the employers or the workers.

As I said earlier, Sir, the interests of the nation and the requirements of our continued growth and progress have been the predominant consideration in our minds in drafting this Bill.
And I this House and both can assure employers and workers that the opera tion of it becomes law, would be carefully watched and studied, so that any amendment that to be necessary or might prove desirable could be made at a later stage.

It is in the nature of things, Sir, that we cannot anticipate every conceivable problem or that we could have provided for every eventuality to the satisfaction of the many parties concerned with relations.
We have genuinely tried to meet the needs of our own situation, and we present this Bill to this House with the full confidence the fact that one group or the other may consider portions of the Bill to be the Bill, as a whole, unsatisfactory, this Bill, when that, despite industrial to would be welcomed as fair and reason able.

Sir, I beg to move.

(Applause).

Tuan Senu bin Abdul Rahman: Sir, I beg to second the motion.
Tuan C. V. Devan Nair (Bungsar): Mr Speaker, Sir, I had expected, on the basis of promises given several times in this House, to welcome a construc forward-looking piece of tive and legislation to govern the conduct of industrial relations in this country.

I regret, Sir, that I am unable to do so or to do anything of the kind.

With the best will in the world, Sir, I find it impossible to say kind things about some of the astounding sins, both of omission as well as of commission, contained in this Bill.
that "the Bill seeks The Explanatory Statement in the to Bill claims strengthen and continue the voluntary system of industrial relations."

This, Sir, is a piece of euphemism, which I had the Minister of Labour could never bring himself to be guilty of.

thought that The truth is that the enactment of this Bill will have nothing in common with any kind of voluntary system.
On the contrary, it will serve to regulate labour relations, in the public as well as private sectors, in an astoundingly unjust and thorough-going fashion.

to seeks regulate Let me explain, Sir, that I have no quarrel whatsoever with any legislation which industrial relations in a civilised community.

I am aware that an unregulated and so- called "Voluntary" system is a sacred cow in the eyes of certain labour circles in the country.
It seems to me, however, impossible, particularly for any deve loping country, as the Minister has pointed out, to do without a set of laws to regulate and govern the conduct of industrial relations.

In the absence of such regulation and governance, an anarchic scheme of things is bound to prevail to the prejudice of industrial the and social development, and prejudice of the smaller and weaker trade unions in the country.
to My quarrel, therefore, with this Bill, is not that it seeks to regulate industrial 1541 22 JUNE 1967 1542 basic matters as such, but that it seeks to regulate industrial relations in such a manner as to either (i) flagrantly flout the rights of labour or (ii) to make unenforceable rights, certain responsibilities and prohibitions, which are contained in the body of the Bill.

I might explain, Sir.


I read Parts II, III and IV of the Bill with some elation, but the elation was knocked out of me when I came to Section 55 in Part IX of the Bill which provides for general penalties.
Part II of the Bill, for instance, deals with the rights of workmen and emplo yers and their trade unions, and con tains an imposing, a very imposing list of rights and prohibitions which, among other things, provide that no workman may be discriminated against in regard to his appointment, promotion, and so on, or that no workman may be vic timised in any manner whatsoever by reason of the circumstance that he is, or proposes to become, a member of a trade union or to participate in the promotion, formation or activities of a trade union.
At last, Sir, I thought trade unionism will become respectable in this country and workers will never again be subject to acts of victimisation because of legi timate trade unionism.

Parts III and IV, dealing with recognition of trade unions also contain certain desirable features.
But every good that might have ensued from the rights, responsibilities and prohibitions contained in these first Parts of the Bill is completely negatived by Clause 55 of the Bill, which provides for general penalties for contravention of the Act, and this Clause says, very blandly, as follows, and I quote: "Provided that no contravention of or failure to comply with any provision of Parts II, III or IV (other than Section 14) shall be deemed to be an offence punishable under this section."
And we note that the contravention of these major rights and prohibitions provided in the first Parts of the Bill are not punishable under any other section either.

In other words, Sir, the earlier Parts of the Bill, and especially Part II, are no more than a declaration of rights which the subsequent parts of the Bill make specifically unenforceable through the absence of penalty provisions.
Any legislation, Sir, worth the name, must provide for rights, responsibilities and prohibitions as well as for the enforce ment of such rights, responsibilities and prohibitions.

This is not done.

You might as well say, Sir, "It is wrong to steal but, nevertheless, if you do steal, you will go unpunished".

On closer reading of the Bill, the first favourable impressions are steadily eroded, and the contents of the Bill reduce themselves to a catalogue of cunning, and a first class exercise in duplicity.
in in, and to organise workers I will take, first, Sir, Clause 5 (2) (c) which should be read in conjunction with Clause 4 (1) of the Bill.

On the one hand, Clause 4 (1) guarantees the right trade unions.

On the other hand, Clause 5 (2) (c) stipulates that workmen employ "confidential I quote, ed to staff in matters relating capacity from be relations" are prohibited trade union.
coming members of a Now, nowhere "staff term the is relations" defined, and this vagueness is surely calculated to give headaches future.

to in confidential "Workman employed capacity to staff in matters relating relations"—this definition, Sir, might include even a typist who has to type a confidential report relating to staff relations.
industrial courts the in While the language in Clause 5 (2) (c) of the Bill is not absolutely clear, it does suggest that in respect of a particular class of workmen (i.e.

those employed in confidential capacity in matters relating to staff relations) there is a total restraint imposed.
We note, the however, preceding sub-clause (b) whereby a workman in a managerial position may be prohibited from being a member of a general union, he is nevertheless free to join a union catering specifically for employees in managerial positions.

language used the in There is a difference, Sir, between "partial restraint" and "total restraint", and I must ask the Minister to clarify 1543 22 JUNE 1967 1544 "in the intention in Clause 5 (2) (c) of the Bill.
Since workmen in managerial join a union catering positions can for managerial staff, why not allow confidential employed persons capacity to staff in matters relating relations" to join a separate union?

In this connection, I might also point out to the Minister Clause 9 (i) (a) of the Bill, in which an industrial court is required to exclude from recognition confidential "employed workers to staff in matters relating capacity relations" from being represented by a trade union.
in that no Next, Sir, Clause 6 (a), this Clause provides trade union of workmen shall "except with the con sent of the employer, persuade at the employer's place of business during the working hours a workman of employer from join or to joining a trade union."

refrain This Clause should again be con sidered in conjunction with Clause 4 lays down (1) of to to guarantees organise trade unions.

the Bill which the right relating Sir, practically every trade union in the world was born on the workspot.
I have yet to hear of a trade union being organised by interested people visiting the homes of workers in the evenings.

Indeed, many trade union functions, like those of the shop steward, for instance, are performed on the work- spot and I have never heard of a shop steward who operates from his bed room or from his sitting room.

I contend a that this provision will anti-union handle for provide to victimise organisers of employers unions, particularly new unions in new industries.
I think that the Minis ter will be aware that what happened to certain workmen in Ajinomoto is perhaps a case in point.

It must be noted that unlike the provisions of the Singapore Industrial Relations Ordinance, there is no time to do union off for union officials work.
I might mention that in most are countries where recognised for union work is granted by law and where such time off for union work is trade unions time off institutions, not granted by law, such time off is tolerated as a matter of general practice.

In this country at present, time off is granted and recognised for trade unionists who have to attend Whitley therefore, Council meetings.
I must, the call on phrase "with the consent of the emplo yer" as a retrograde provision, and to consider for time off trade union work, as obtains in other countries.

introducing for the Minister to delete provision Next, Sir, Clause 8 (4).

Part III of the Bill stipulates the procedures to be followed on the recognition of trade unions.
But the Explanatory State ment, I suggest, and a number of lawyers who have studied the Bill as a whole have suggested, is misleading when it states that "where a dispute over recognition is not resolved, the Minister is required to refer that dis pute for decision".

Industrial Court the to that in his provision the Minister.
On Sir, a reading of Clause 8 (4) reveals that no such mandatory requirement is placed on the contrary, all that it provides is that the Minister "may take such steps as may be necessary or expedient to resolve the matter".

After the Minister fails (which mind efforts you, Sir, may or may not be made, entirely at his discretion), then there is a mandatory he shall refer it to court".

That is how lawyers might read it and how lawyers might give the Minister himself.
So the question may be asked, "Why the permissive word 'may' and 'shall'?"

Is it a not the mandatory prerogative of the Minister to be the repository of cases of recognition of trade unions, which have not been resolved?

What is the purpose of it legal the Minister can with all, impunity sit on a case of recognition and refuse to do anything about it, so that the case need never be referred to the industrial court.
trouble to if It must be recalled, in this connec tion, that Clause 41 (e) specifically prohibits strike action in respect of any dispute over the claim for recognition of a trade union.

Sir.

if the workers 1545 22 JUNE 1967 1546 are to be deprived of this last weapon, then it would clearly be vital to make recognition procedures mandatory at every level—"shall" at every level and not "may".
"The Minister shall" and not "the Minister may" should be the operative phrase right through, and if this cannot be done, then, in all fair ness to workers, the right to strike over recognition must be restored.
include provision for It is also distressing that the Bill the does not compulsory recognition by an em ployer of a trade union which has satisfied, not the M.T.U.C, but which has satisfied the Ministry of Labour, after a secret ballot has been taken, that it represents the majority of the workmen employed in that particular that place.

It would be recollected such compulsory recognition is made in the Singapore Industrial Relations Ordinance, and why can't it be done here?
a provision for to commence Clause 12 (4) stipulates that where an collective invitation bargaining has been made and a reply notifying acceptance has been given, the parties shall commence collective bargaining "without undue delay".

Again, no specific time limit, as in other countries, is provided for.

We all know in this House what the Govern ment, for example, can sometimes mean when Government Members use the words "without undue delay".
It might mean a long wait of a year or two or more and, if the employers decided to take a cue from the Government, then I am afraid the trade unions would have had it!

for Clause 13 (2) (b)—While the Bill provides the minimum period during which a collective agreement remains in force, there is no maximum period prescribed for the duration of a collective agreement.

This, Sir, is bound to make the task of the indus trial court exceedingly difficult.
A maximum period should clearly be the duration of a prescribed for collective agreement, as in other countries.

is done Clause 18 (/)—This is a most un for a usual Clause providing not this member from tribunal but for a four-member court, made up of (a) a president (b) a mem ber from a panel of independent persons (c) a member from a panel of persons representing employers and (d) a mem ber from a panel of persons represent ing employees.
Sir, I do not believe that at any time in history anybody has ever thought of a quadripartite court.

The principle of a industrial tribunal is that the president of the tribunal is an inde pendent and impartial person, while the other two persons of the tribunal re present workmen and employers res pectively.

But here, we have a fourth member of the court who is supposed to be chosen from a panel of indepen dent persons.

So, you have two theore tically independent persons in a four- member court.
There is the president of the court who is supposed to be inde the pendent and independent panel and if the two inde pendents differ with the two partisans, the president is given a casting vote.

Sir, why must the Honourable Minister of Labour embark on such an un it be precedented experiment?

Can seriously held that it is possible to find an adequate supply of independent minded persons, who will have neither a pro-labour nor a pro-employer bias but who may well be in possession of a pro-government bias?
In any case, Sir, these so-called independent persons cannot be independent of the Govern the Minister who ment, appoints this panel of independent per sons and he does not have to consult anybody before he does so.

If the so- called independent person entertains a pro-employer bias, then it must mean that is weighted against labour and in the reverse situation, it would be weighted against employers.
In the event, Sir, of the industrial court having to hear a dispute in which the Government is involved as an employer, this would mean that the Government as employer would have two nominees in the court, while the Government employees would have only one.

I must therefore, call, Sir, on the Govern ment to do away with this completely unjustified and unprecedented innova tion.
the court for is it 1547 22 JUNE 1967 1548 there to note requirement—that It is also distressing that before appointing the panels of persons representing employers, and of persons representing employees, is no requirement—no manda mandatory tory the Minister should consult recognised organisations representing employers and workmen respectively.

The Clause merely pro vides that "the Minister may consult such organisation representing employ ers and workmen respectively as he may think fit".
This is not the case with the Indus trial Relations Ordinance of Singapore.

where it is mandatory for the Minister to approach the Trades Union Con gress and the employer's organisation to nominate persons for appointment to the respective panels.

It is no use for the Minister to tell us that he will not abuse his discretion.

Industrial justice.

Sir, requires, even more than other courts, the full appli cation of the maxim that justice must not only be done but be seen to be done.
One also notes the omission of a significant provision in the Clause re lating to the appointment of various panels.

There is no specific prohibition in the Bill against non-citizens of the country or those who are bankrupts or who may be of unsound mind and so forth from being appointed as members of the various panels.
Non-citizens in particular cannot be expected to have the same concern for industrial justice in this country as citizens, and this pro bably would apply particularly in the case of expatriate employers.

There is also no provision to prevent the appointment to the workers' panel of a person who is an employer or a director of a company which is an employer, or is employed by a trade union of employers.
I would submit, Sir, that this must be a necessary pro vision, as otherwise we may have the ludicrous situation of an employer re the workers' presenting workers on panel.

Clause 24—Sir, this Clause, allows a legal practitioner to represent any party to a trade dispute at proceedings before the court, subject, of course, to the per mission of the president.

Sir.
Sir.

I have time and again appealed in this House that lawyers should be disallowed from appearing before the industrial court on two grounds: to the than equal result criteria that while interpretative terms before legal practitioners the Honourable Minister (2) Industrial arbitration.

Sir, (1) Trade unions must be able to meet the employers on industrial court.
Most trade unions in the country, as is aware, especially the smaller ones, do not have the same financial and other resources which employers' associations can muster, it may be with to engage highly possible for employers qualified represent them, a similar course of action, Sir, would be beyond the means of most trade unions.

involves those the use of other employed by the law courts.

The dispensa tion of industrial justice does not depend on the exercise of forensic skills.
It must depend on the exposition of social, economic and even cultural factors.
industrial arbitration The procedures of courts, wherever such courts have become successful social institutions, are, therefore, much more flexible than the procedures of the law courts and there is a very real danger that if we start off on the wrong foot, or on the wrong premises, our indus trial court might degenerate into a rigid institution which, whatever else it might do, would be incapable of dispensing industrial justice.
It is because of the consciousness of these dangers that the industrial arbi systems tration in other countries, notably in Australia, specifically ex cluded, at least in the vital initial stages, lawyers from appearing before them.

There is yet another reason why legal practitioners should be excluded from the industrial court.

It is vital that we should train our own trade unionists and employers to depend on their own talents of advocacy in industrial cases.
Such education and training will be discouraged trade unionists are encouraged to be depen dent on professional legal practitioners for the advocacy of industrial cases.

if employers and Clause 26 (/)—This Clause stipulates that the court is obliged to consult with the Minister before it can call in the aid of one or more experts to assist in the determination of a trade dispute.

Now, Sir, why in the name of heaven should it be necessary for the court to consult the Minister?
The High Court, 1549 22 JUNE 1967 1550 or even the lower courts, do not have to consult the Minister of Justice before deciding to summon one or more experts in the determination of any civil or criminal case.

This is a matter which must clearly be left to the discre tion of the court itself.
I would go even further and suggest, Sir, that the President of the Court should be speci fically empowered the evidence of experts, either on his own volition or on the request of any of the parties to the dispute before the court.

Either the Minister allows the court full jurisdiction and the exercise of its discretion in this matter, or it is better to scrap the court altogether.

There is no need, for instance, for the Minister to insist that he should have his finger in every pie.
to summon The resolution of industrial disputes requires very often the summoning of expert evidence on a whole variety of issues.

And this responsibility of the court must not be hamstrung or inhibited by any obligation to refer to the Minister for a ruling on the matter.

In fact, the Minister might well prove to be the very last person the Court ought to consult on such matters, especially when it involves a dispute involving the Government itself as an employer.
Clause 27 (7)—This Clause places a restriction on the retrospective date of an award, so that such date may not be earlier than six months from the date on which the dispute was referred to the court Mr Speaker: May I know, if you are going Clause by Clause, for the rest of the forty Clauses?

Tuan C. V. Devan Nair: Well, Sir, I can leave you assured that I am not going to cover all the Clauses, but just only two or three more Clauses.
Mr Speaker: It is because if you do, you might find yourself speaking to sleeping Members!

Tuan C. V, Devan Nair: I am quite convinced, Sir, that the Minister of Labour would be the last person to sleep.

Sir, as I said, this Clause 27 (7) places a restriction on the retrospective date of an award, so that such date may not be earlier than six months from the date on which the dispute was referred to the Court.
This, 1 consider, is an unfair stipulation when it is con sidered that a trade union may have served claims on the employer long before any dispute is referred to the court.

By the time the claims of a union end up in court, it may well have taken several months.

exists We may also consider that circum stances might exist, in which ample justification retrospective effect to be given to wage or salary increases long before the union may the have employer.
its claims submitted for to In the circumstances, it would be wiser not to tie down the industrial court to any stipulation in regard to the retrospective date of an award, so that industrial justice might not find itself hamstrung.

The better part of wisdom, Sir, would be to delete this retrospective provision altogether, and to leave it to the discretion of the court to determine the retrospective effect of an award the principles of equity and justice.
in accordance with I that observe with Clause 30 (1), Sir, deals with the interpretation of an award or collective agreement.

some astonishment the Minister may refer the matter to the court in relation to the interpretation of an award or collective agreement.

Normally, only parties to an agreement, or parties bound by an award, can apply to the court for an interpretation.

No outside party, not even the Minister, has any business to refer any dispute on inter pretation to the court.
To allow this would be to run counter to the basic principles of what lawyers call "privity of contract".

I, therefore, call for the deletion of this provision, and to leave it entirely the parties to either of concerned to apply directly to the court a decision on questions of for interpretation.

It seems to me that Clause 41 (c) makes quite certain that no union of public servants can ever go on strike in future.
It stipulates that no workman 1551 22 JUNE 1967 1552 shall go on strike after the Yang di- Pertuan Agong, in the case of a trade to any Government dispute relating Service, has withheld consent to the reference of the dispute to the court.

In other words, Sir, the Public Service union may well find that no avenue whatsoever is open to it in order to secure the redress of its grievances.

Negotiations will have failed, arbitra tion is denied, and it can take no further action its claims or grievances.
in pursuit of If my reading is correct, and I see no reason to believe otherwise, then this provision constitutes of flagrant and outright denial of essential trade union rights of Government employees in this country.

I can think of nothing which is more stupidly calculated to drive Government employees in their frustration and desperation to revolu tionary forces in society who will not in accordance with propose to act constitutional methods of redressing grievances.
I find it absolutely incredi ble, Sir, that the Government should thought of such a draconian have method of denial and repression in relation to its own employees, who are, by and large, a very docile set of people.

In conclusion.

Sir, I might reiterate that the major defect of this Bill is the absence of penalty provisions for the contravention of certain essential rights, responsibilities and prohibitions which the Bill does provide.
No penalty is prescribed for employers who discrimi nate against members of trade unions or victimise them in any way because of their union membership or activities.

If the rights, which the Bill provides, are to be upheld, then there must be provision for Sessions Court jurisdic tion to entertain complaints about their contraventions.

Such provisions are included in industrial other countries, and there is no reason why they should be left out in our legislation.

legislation in the Bill.


In pros and cons of the circumstances, I must ask the Minister this Bill to Select to agree to refer Committee, so that public representa tions can be made on various aspects of the Bill by all interested sections of the community, and particularly by trade unions of workmen and of employers.

Much obliged, Sir.

Dr Tan Chee Khoon: rises.

Mr Speaker: The Honourable Mem ber for Bukit Bintang has indicated to me that he wishes to speak for a few minutes.
Tuan Tan Toh Hong (Bukit Bintang): Mr Speaker, Sir, it has been noticeable to all that in the past few years there has been an tendency of increased industrial unrest and frustration among workers.

Strikes, work-to-rule, delay in settling claims, frequent tug-of-wars between Government employers and Government etc., have employees, almost become a permanent feature of our daily life.

these This state of affairs is obviously unsatisfactory.
Tug-of-wars between the Government and the Government ser vants and acrimonious charges and counter charges between two groups will not benefit anybody.

This hurts not only the people, the Govern ment employees, who are involved in the trial of strength, but also the innocent taxpayers in the country.

We may recall, Sir, the extensive damage as a result of the big Railway strike some time ago whereby thousands of people suffered.
The country's economy was dislocated, the Railway workers lost their wages, the Railway Adminis tration lost its revenue and the innocent taxpayers, the majority of whom are workers and to pay higher prices for essential commodities like rice, sugar, oil, etc., because of that dispute.

In addition, there was incon venience all round.

farmers, had I am given to understand, Sir, that the trade union movement generally is unhappy about the provisions of this Bill.
Public opinion too has not yet the time to be informed about had In so far as this Bill provides for the orderly settlement of disputes— that is, in the first instance, through voluntary conciliation between em ployees and employers and, if that fails, 1553 22 JUNE 1967 1554 subsequently through compulsory arbi tration—is indeed a noteworthy feature.
In the Public Service in particular, the Government as an employer has been accused a number of times for breach of faith and delays in dealing with their claims and problems.

The application of the provisions of Parts VI and onwards of this Bill should ensure that the disputes in the Govern the frustrated claims of ment and settled Government innocent quickly, taxpayers disrupted Government services.
employees thereby preventing suffering from are This Bill is long overdue, and I recall that talk of revising industrial relation codes and putting the procedures for settlement disputes into an orderly system was heard as far back as 1963.
The earlier the arbitration machinery is set up, the better it is for all con cerned, for unless industrial peace and justice prevails, the nation, the workers and the people, would eventually have to bear the cost of industrial unrest such as services dislocated, wages and revenue lost, prices go up, school fees go up and eventually taxes also go up.
In this respect, Sir, for the Indus trial Arbitration Court function that effectively, this Court, apart from those represent ing employers and employees, should be composed of absolutely independent and impartial people.

This is parti cularly significant as the awards of this Court is binding.
it is most important to Finally, the other reason that this Bill is long overdue is that similar legislations have existed for some years now in our neighbouring countries who are in a more or less similar economic situation such as ours—India, Ceylon, Singapore, Philippines, Australia and New Zealand.

In all these countries, Sir, the legislation provides for varying degrees of compulsion in settling labour disputes.
Unless and until industrial peace prevails, the nation, the workers and the people, could not prosper.

As such, Sir, I beg to support this Bill.

Dr Tan Chee Khoon: Mr Speaker, Sir, before I speak, I wish to let this that although I have House know obtained your permission to speak after Devan Nair, I have generously allowed my namesake to speak, which shows that we on this side of the House especially as between one Tan and another, can find common ground.
Mr Speaker, Sir, the Member for Bungsar—I think, he after his mara thon effort has gone for a drink to come back and fight with renewed vigour in the Committee Stage—has the M.T.U.C.

has been stated unhappy.

The Minister for Labour himself has stated that he has consulted the M.T.U.C.

and they have not been quite happy.

All these are, of course, understatements, Mr Speaker, Sir, I have here press cuttings which say: that "Back the Bill?

Never!

says the M.T.U.C".

The other headline says: "The M.T.U.C.


will never be a party to the new Bill", said Zaidi, Honorary Secretary-General of the M.T.U.C.

There is another press statement: "There is nothing new in this Bill.

It seems only a camouflage to convert the essential Trade Union Regulations once described as tempo rary into permanent legislation.

Frankly, he added, the workers have been very much disillusioned.

The Government has not kept its faith and promises with them".
So, we can see, Mr Speaker, Sir, both the statements made by the Honourable Member for Bungsar and the Honour able Minister of Labour are, to put it mildly, gross understatements of the actual feeling of the M.T.U.C.

towards this Industrial Relations Bill.

trade unionist of Now, Mr Speaker, Sir, it is not generally that I agree with the Member for Bungsar.
But, in this case, I must say that I agree with a very good deal of what he has said and, of course, he is a international repute; and I do hope that the Minister will give careful thought to what has been said by the Member for Bungsar.

As for me, Mr Speaker, Sir, I cannot claim to be a trade unionist or an employee.
I must confess that I am in the position of being an employer speaking on behalf of employees and I hope by that criterion of the Member for Bungsar, I may well qualify myself to represent the panel of Industrial Arbitration Court.
However, in this House, I have proclaimed in no uncertain term that the employees on the 1555 22 JUNE 1967 1556 loud and bold for I am amicus laboris that is, a friend of labour in this House, and I have spoken out the labour movement in this country—and I am still and will, whether I am in this House, or outside this House, be always a friend of labour and will always speak out loud and bold for the cause of labour in this country.
Now, Mr Speaker, Sir, no Bill in recent times has aroused so much controversy and resentment amongst the working classes in this country as this Industrial Relations Bill.

When the Minister of Labour intro duced the Essential (Trade Disputes in the Essential Services) Regulations in 1965 he promised this House that the Regulations would be temporary and that they would be withdrawn as soon as confrontation was ended.
Now that confrontation is ended for almost a year, what do we see before this House today?

the Essential (Trade Disputes in the Essen tial Services) Regulations, 1965, these have been embodied in the Industrial Relations Bill and if passed in this House, will remain in the Statute Book to enchain the labour movement unless repealed by a change of Government.

Instead of withdrawing This act on the part of the Minister of Labour reminds me of what the Alliance Government did with the Emergency Regulations.
This House will remember that these Regulations had to be passed annually by this House during the twelve years of the Emer gency.

But, when Malaya was declared to be safe from the terrorists, and the communist menace defeated, the Emer gency Regulations were embodied in the diabolical and obnoxious Internal Security Act, and most of the safe guards in the Emergency Regulations were removed and all the loopholes were sealed off.

In other words, the screw was tightened further and the I.S.A.
is now placed in the Statute Book and only an Act of Parliament can repeal it.

As such, the M.T.U.C.

are, quite rightly, up in arms against this Bill.

To them it cuts right across the basic and fundamental principles which have formed the backbone of the industrial relations system in this country.

The M.T.U.C.

has always championed the system of voluntary industrial relations and, as such, to oppose with all means at their command this concept of compulsory arbitration as embodied in this Bill.
The whole tenor of the Bill is towards compulsory arbitration, as I shall soon show when I consider the Bill in greater detail.

they are pledged in Worse still, by increasing the list of public utilities the Schedule and imposing restrictions on strikes and giving the power to the Minister to refer dispute to the Arbitration Court, the Alliance Government is virtually denying the workers the right to strike and taking away from them this very important weapon.
If this Bill is passed by this House today, the Minister of Labour will have effectively pulled out all the teeth from the labour movement rendering it im potent and toothless.

The trade union movement will then be like putty on his hands to be manipulated at will by the Minister of Labour.
Is this the way the Alliance Government wants to foster a healthy vigorous, trade union movement in this country, or does it want the trade union movement to be one with feet of clay that can be toppled at the behest of the Minister of Labour?
The Bill also further imposes harsh and undemocratic hardships on the workers of this country and, as I have stated before, it is similar to the Internal Security Act which seeks to keep the Alliance Party perpetually in power and enslave the whole nation turning it into a Police State.

Only in this case this Bill will seek to enslave the labour movement.

the draft Bill with It is true that the Minister of Labour has consulted the M.T.U.C.

by discus sing them.

The M.T.U.C.


is now complaining, and I quote: "Despite the promises of the Minister of Labour that our proposals to alter the Bill will be seriously consi dered, almost in all cases they seem to rejected without much have been thought."

1557 22 JUNE 1967 1558 I have read through the draft Bill, Mr Speaker, Sir—this is the draft Bill that has been circulated to the M.T.U.C.

and the Bill before us today—and also the amendments proposed by the M.T.U.C.
carefully, and here I must be fair and say that the Minister of Labour has, in fact, taken cognizance of the views of the M.T.U.C.

and, as this Bill shows, a number of the amendments proposed by the M.T.U.C.

have either been incorporated by the Minister into this Bill or have been deleted as sug gested by the M.T.U.C.

But, if one looks a little closer at the amendments and deletions proposed by the M.T.U.C.
and accepted by the Minister of Labour, one soon comes to the conclusion that what the Minister had done was to throw a sop to the M.T.U.C.

The Minister of Labour has not budged one inch when fundamental issues are at stake, and thus the M.T.U.C.

is com pletely justified in making the com plaint that they have been ignored by the Minister of Labour.

Sir, most of the provisions in this Bill are completely contrary to the concept of freedom of trade union association as embodied in I.L.O.

Convention No.
Convention No.

87 concerning "Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Orga nise".

This is the Government's most audacious and brazen attempt to emas culate the trade unions.

If this Bill is bulldozed through the Parliament, and I am sanguine enough to know that the Minister of Labour can do just that, the trade union movement will be reduced to a pantomime show.

It is a complete travesty of democracy and trade union freedom.
If the Government really believed in its declared policy of promoting the growth of a free, indepen dent, healthy, responsible and democra tic trade union movement, it should withhold consideration of ill- concevied Bill.

this Mr Speaker, Sir, I.L.O.

Convention lays down as No.


87 specifically follows: Article 2—Workers and employers, without distinction whatsoever, shall have the right to establish and, subject only to the rules of the organisation concerned, to join organisations of their own choosing without previous authorisation.
Article 3 (1)—Workers' and employers' organisations shall have the right to draw up their own constitutions and rules, to elect their representatives in full freedom, to organise their administration and activi ties and to formulate their programmes.

Article 3 (2)—The public authorities shall refrain from any interference which would restrict this right or impede the lawful exercise thereof.
Article 4—Workers' employers' organisations shall not be liable to be dissolved or suspended by administrative authority.

and Article 5—Workers' and employers' organisations to shall have establish and join federations and con federations and by such organisation, federation or confederations shall have the right to affiliate with international organi sations of workers and employers.
right the Article 6—The provisions of Articles 2, 3 and 4 hereof apply to federations and confederations of workers' and employers' organisations.

Article 7—The acquisition of legal personality by workers' and employers' organisations, federations and confedera tions shall not be made subject to condi tions of such a character as to restrict the application of the provisions of Articles 2, 3 and 4 hereof.
Article 8 (1)—In exercising the rights provided for in this Convention, workers and employers and their respective organi sations, like other persons or organised collectivities, shall respect the law of the land.

Article 8 (2)—The law of the land shall not be such as to impair, nor shall it be so applied as to impair, the guarantees pro vided for in this Convention.
Article 9—The extent the guarantees provided for in this Convention shall apply to the armed forces and the Police and shall be determined by rational laws or regulations.

to which Mr Speaker, Sir, now I wish to com ment in some detail on some of the Clauses in this Bill.

Sir, Clause 4 (1), in regard to the right of workman to form and assist in the formation of and join a Trade Union.

One is familiar with the practice of employers in this country to regard trade unions as a necessary evil.
Other employers go fur ther and refuse to recognise trade unions legally constituted and, worse still, time and again employers have sought to destroy the trade unions by victimizing their leaders.

The tactic the employer adopts is a very simple one: he merely sacks the trade union leaders, and the Ministry of Labour must hang its head 1559 22 JUNE 1967 1560 in shame for often they are impotent and incapable to persuade the employer to recognize the trade union.
meantime, Management has resorted to employing undesirable to operate the establishment on a skeleton basis".

elements Now, I am glad that the procedure for the formation of a trade union is laid down in Clauses 4 and 5.
The latest instance of the adamant attitude of the employer is in conjunction with the Dolomite Industries, Batu Caves and, with your permission, Mr Speaker, Sir— I have here a copy of the press release from the Secretary of the Dolomite In dustries Branch, Batu Caves—I shall quote a bit from it, and the Minister must know that this is a very common practice amongst the employers in this country.
This press release is dated 17th June, 1967. remind the workers I need hardly Now, Sir, as I have pointed out before, the Minister of Labour that this is not one instance where Management has victi mised in particular, by sacking the potential trade union leaders and their group and further by employ ing "black legs" to break any strike.
I do hope that with the regulation being laid down in this Industrial Relation Bill, if such an eventuality does occur in the future, the Ministry of Labour will come down heavily on the side of the workers and not of the Manage ment.

"Ranting Dolomite Industries, Batu Caves— Strike by Workers from 13th June, 1967 This is a quarrying establishment.

All the Directors of this Company are Malaysians.


With the approval of the Registrar of Trade Unions, we organised the majority of workers employed during December, 1966.

92 members representing over 80 per cent of the workers have joined this Union.

Application for recognition was made to the Management on 11th January, 1967. establishment this in Since the date of application was made, Management had resorted to all forms of unfair practices.
Management spread false rumours, intimidated members of the Ranting Committee and in every other way obstructed recognition of this Union.

Management consulted the R.T.U.

Management also asked the Commissioner for Industrial Relations to make a check of our members.

The Commis sioner for Industrial Relations made a check of our members against Management's list of employees and confirmed that we had organised a majority of workers.
In spite of going through all this procedure, Manage to recognise our ment stubbornly refused Union.

We have only one dispute with Manage ment—recognition.

Management ignored the advice of the Ministry of Labour.

The National Mining Workers Union of Malaya Executive Council, at its meeting on the 3rd and 4th June, 1967, considered the whole issue and took the following decisions : (a) Serve one week's notice on Manage ment to recognise our Union failing which resort to strike action.
(b) Issue secret ballot papers for strike action.

Action was taken on both decisions.

Nearly 100% of our members voted for strike action and the strike commenced on the morning of Tuesday, 13th June, 1967.

Management had defied the Union and we had no alter native but to order a strike.

In the Mr Speaker, Sir.

Clause 5 (2) (b) is a convenient way of getting rid of troublesome trade unionists.

In politics, such people are kicked upstairs to the Upper House or, in England, to the House of Lords.
The Member for Bungsar has already asked the Minister to define what is meant by "matters relating to staff relations"; and I too want to ask that question, except that I think it will be more convenient for an employer, finds anyone if he troublesome, either to kick him upstairs to a managerial position and render him innocuous there, or to push him into typing a confidential letter—if I heard him correctly, the Member for letter"— Bungsar stated "confidential and therefore he becomes employed in staff matters and, therefore, cannot join the trade union.
In this instance, as I have stated the management or the em before, ployer, by the simple expedient of appointing a troublesome trade union leader to a managerial position, or to work as a confidential secretary, can effectively hamstring a trade union.

These two classes in Clause 5 (2) (b) and (c) should be deleted, and the matter should be left for adjustment by the workers concerned.
the employer and Clause 10 is designed to prevent the formation of splinter unions, and here I am sure practically the whole trade 1561 22 JUNE 1967 1562 union movement is behind the Minister in this matter.

There are far too many peanut unions, and the sooner they are reduced in number the better.
However, some of the actions of the Ministry of Labour are in direct con travention of Clause 10.1 wish to bring to the attention of this House and to the Minister of Labour how this Ministry has almost connived at the formation of a splinter union in the the Transport Sri Jaya Branch of Workers Union.

I had intended to ask a question for oral answer but, unfortunately, the time was up, and I wish to take this opportunity to bring this matter to the attention of the Honourable Minister.
I quote from a statement from the Transport Workers Union's release.

"The Transport Workers Union was extended recognition by the Sri Jaya Trans port Company Limited during the middle part of 1960 as its representative body of workers in dealing with matters concerning the entire employees of the Sri Jaya Trans port Company Limited.
From this period, the Union had continued to make full use of the existing available permanent Joint-council machinery to resolve all issues arising between the company and the workers from time to time.

On wages and working conditions, the Union and the company negotiated an agreement in 1962 and in 1966 the Industrial Arbitration Tribunal made an award in respect of the wage claims made by the Union.
In this award, we wish to draw the attention of the Company, where the tribunal has stressed the need to restrain wage claims by the Union on behalf of the workers until 1969.

The award will indicate to the extent this Union has been recognised by the tribunal as a bargaining unit.

In addition to this, in December, 1966, the Union concluded a further agreement on bonus.
Recently, on May the 17th, 1967, the Union met the Management, again, to discuss the procedure that should govern the payment of bonus and also retirement benefit.

These bona fide events will illustrate the cordial relationship between the Company and the Union.

A splinter Union since 1963 had existed in the Sri Jaya Transport Company.
In spite of the new Act, i.e., the new Societies Act, which was passed in Parliament in 1965 authorising the Registrar of Trade Unions to cancel all splinter unions, no action has been initiated on this union due to political consideration.

From this time, a number of splinter unions have been cancelled but successful political manoeuvring has obstructed the Registrar of Trade Unions to de-register this trade union.
In early 1967 a prominent politician belong ing to a communal organisation has manipulated with the authorities and has compelled the said authorities to float all laid procedure, by not de-registering the splinter union and has subjected the Ministry of Labour to political pressure.

We are prepared to substantiate our allegation if we are challenged.
The Ministry of Labour, in this instance, had failed to rise above political pressure, and any desperate attempt to evade facing reality and facts would only be an act of cowardness.

Time will expose any Govern ment that violates and contravenes the very law that it has passed.
We are aware that the largest transport undertaking in this country suffers in the hands of certain directors who have stooped low to the level of engaging themselves in disrupting the unity of workers on communal sentiments and have also interfered with the administrative the company functions of which has been traditionally the responsibility of the Manager.
The Company is being driven to deterioration by elements in the management who lack the knowledge of a transport establishment and if the same situa tion continues, the fate of the Sri Jaya Transport Company will be no better than many other bus companies in the country which have failed due to mismanagement.

This, of course, may be considered as not the concern of the Union, but as a responsible trade union we have an interest in the progress and stability of the industry as a whole.
that During the last month, the splinter union, the said Sri Jaya Transport Employees Union, under threats, intimidation and false interpretation, obtained a number of signa tures from the Transport Workers Union members requesting the company to cease deducting their subscriptions from the pay- sheet.

Among these signatures it was later discovered an act of forgery: towards this, at least two workers have made Police reports their signatures have been forged by certain elements.
However, repre sentation was made to the Police for necessary investigation.

In the meantime, the Union had called upon the Company not to act on the signatures until Police investigation was completed.

Until such time a proper investi gation is made and the question of forgery is ironed out, the Union maintained that the entire signatures should be declared null and void.
Since forgery is a serious crime, any action of the Company on the signatures would be sub judice since the matter is bound to be heard by a court of law.

The Company disregarded the Union's suggestion and continued to act on the signatures.

While this controversy is prevailing, we have been informed that the Ministry has advised, under political pressure, that the Company could deduct the membership subscriptions towards the splinter Union on receiving a list from the said Union.
If this is true, it will be a most irresponsible action on the part of the Ministry of Labour."

Mr Speaker, Sir, I have read at length the this press release from Transport Workers' Union not because 1563 22 JUNE 1967 1564 taken action to de-register I wish to bore this House, but because this is a very important thing.
The Ministry of Labour and the Minister of Labour, himself, is committed to the getting rid of peanut unions and yet, when a splinter union is formed in the Sri Jaya Branch of the Transport Workers' Union, the Registrar of Trade Unions has not only registered that union but the Ministry of Labour has not that union.
I fail to see how this can be reconciled with the action on the part of the Minister of Labour or of the Registrar of Trade Unions when he had de-registered the United Malayan Estate Workers' Union that, according to its thousand workers.

books, had There, the Registrar of Trade Unions has de-registered that Union on the score that there is already the N.U.P.W.

to cater for the rubber industry.

Here, the T.W.U., i.e.


the Transport Workers' Union, is recognised as the national body for the transport workers in this country and yet, due to political pressure, the Ministry of Labour has yielded to it and has not taken any action to de-register that Union.

three is a Mr Speaker, Sir, I now come to Clause 14 (2).

This ludicrous provision.

It is an unwarranted inter ference and will lead to the disruption of a collective agreement freely entered into by two parties.
As such, Clause 14, sub-clause (2)—(a) and (b)— should be deleted.

the Clause 18 (1)—Composition of the Industrial Court—Here I entirely agree with the Member for Bungsar, when he says that instead of a tribunal of three, you have now a tribunal of four—two independent members; one from the workers and one from employers.
This sub-clause gives the Minister absolute power to make appointments to the panel in the case of 18 (1) (a) and (b) and that, I think, is quite in order, except for Bungsar, I do not quite agree, with the appointment of yet another independent person by the Minister after having appointed the President who presumably is an independent person.
The Minister should be required to consult repre sentative organisations of workers and the Member that, like it consult" employers, before he makes such appointments to the panels in the case of (c) and (d) and, as such, I have proposed that instead of "the Minister may "the Minister shall consult": it should be mandatory on the part of the Minister to consult the representatives of both workers and management, and he need not necessarily accept their advice, but he loses nothing by consulting them before he appoints people to the panels.
should be Clause 18 (3)—I shall be grateful for a clarification from the Minister of what is meant by "shall have power to impose any term or condition upon which the appointment is made".

Is it the intention to give the Minister absolute power impose restricted to conditions on members of the panels?

If this is so, then sub-clause (3) should be deleted.
typical of the attempt of Clause 19 (7)—This strikes at the very independence of the Court, and it is the Executive, in this case the Cabinet, in asking the Minister to interfere with the workings of the Court.

The Minister only deals with matters of policy and, surely, it is none of his job to dabble with the day-to-day running of his Ministry, much less with that of the Industrial Arbitration Court.
In the draft Bill I see, Mr Speaker, Sir, the three members are selected by the in the Bill before us President but today the Minister has taken over this function.

Why should he want to do so?

Does he want to take over this function so that he can pick on safe the people from verdict can be a foregone conclusion, especially in the case of an arbitration involving Government servants?
One shudders to think if this principle is applied to other branches of Govern ment, for example, in the picking of juries.

There the Minister of Justice quite rightly has no hand in the picking of the jury, nor has the judge or the magistrate.

To illustrate it further, I think, I am correct in saying that in Industrial Arbitration the Court, the is picked by President of the Court and not by the Minister.
To give another illustration, the panels so that the panel present 1565 22 JUNE 1967 1566 I have been selected by the Honour able Minister of Finance, whom I see is sleeping now, Mr Speaker, Sir, to serve on the Tariff Advisory Board.

When I am asked to serve on it, I am not picked by the Minister to serve on a particular hearing.

I have just received an invitation, and the invita tion comes from the Chairman of the Court of the Tariff Advisory Board, not from the Minister of Finance.
Consequently, I fail to see why the Minister wants for a particular hearing.

If justice must not only be done but it must also be seen to be done, then the Minister must step down and allow the President to take over this function.

Clause 23 (1) is perhaps the most crucial Clause in the whole Bill.

Here is exposed in all its nakedness the intention of the Government to thrust the arbitration compulsory throats of the trade unions.
Thus, in line 3, it states that the Minister may refer the dispute to the Court on the joint request in writing of either parties.

But why should it be a joint request?

This effectively means if one party refuses to go to arbitration, then the dispute the continues unless Minister intervenes under sub-clause (2).

Surely, the sensible thing would be to let the parties go to arbitration if either party requests it.
down that In Clause 23 (2), it is stated : "The Minister may of his own motion refer any trade dispute to the Court if he is satisfied that— X X X X X (c) that it is expedient in the public interest X so to do:" Under this blanket Clause, I have no doubt that he will order the parties to go to arbitration, particularly when the workers concerned are Government servants.
I have also no doubt that when he wants it, the word "may" will mean "shall", and the whole trade union movement is up in arms against this Clause.

The Minister would do well to heed the voice of the M.T.U.C, if he wishes to have indus trial peace in this country.

this is why Clause 27 (4) makes a hollow mockery of the independence of the Court.

Here, the Government seeks to dictate to the Court and, as such, it is an obnoxious and iniquitous clause.
Whatever fears the Government may have are adequately covered by sub clause (5) and the Minister should not be so clumsy as to try to hamstring the Court.

Clause 40 (1) (a) and (b) are rather ambiguous.

Clause 40 (1) (a) states that six weeks are required, but Clause 40 (1) (b) states "within fourteen days of giving such notice".

I shall be grateful for a clarification from the Minister of Labour.

I see that in the Schedule the list of public utility services has been lengthened.
Thus, in the draft Bill, banking was included but in the Bill now before us, banking has fortunately been withdrawn at the request of the M.T.U.C.

The M.T.U.C.

has also asked for the deletion of Item (ix) in industry or the Schedule, i.e.

"any Government is refining, principally engaged storage, transport or supply of petrol or petroleum products;".

What is the reason for the retention of this item in the list of the public utility services?

I shall be grateful for an answer.


undertaking which the in Clause 41, read by itself, is innocuous enough but, if read in conjunction with Clause 40, it becomes very ominous.

Thus, if a trade union in a public utility service has given six weeks' strike notice, 41 (a) and (b) takes place, then the workers cannot go on strike as has been pointed out.

Literally, the strike weapon has been taken away from the hands of the people if listed in the public utility services.
Is this the intention of the Government?

This is a blatant attempt to emasculate the freedom of the trade unions to resort to strike action in the furtherance of legitimate trade union objectives.
Mr Speaker, Sir, if a Government trade union gives six weeks' notice of strike and the Minister, under Clause 23 (2) (c) refers the case to the Court, but if the Yang di-Pertuan Agong or the State Authority withholds consent to the reference of the Court, then the trade union concerned the dispute to 1567 22 JUNE 1967 1568 is left in animated suspense: it cannot go on strike, as has been pointed out by the Member for Bungsar, and yet its case cannot be forwarded to the Industrial Arbitration Court.
If such an eventuality occurs, may I ask the Minister of Labour, what is going to happen to the trade union concerned?

Will it be left hanging in the air with animated suspense ad infinitum!

This is one other example of how the Government victimises or tries to hamstring and emasculate trade union movement.

Clause 41 (a), (b) and (c) should be deleted.


the Clause 49 states that the provisions of Parts II, III, IV and V shall not apply to the Government Service or to a workman employed in the Govern ment.

This is a travesty of justice.

The whole Bill should apply to the Govern ment Service unions as well.

the Mr Speaker, Sir, in view of what I as said before, particularly have the from opposition regards M.T.U.C.
the obvious solution would be to refer the Bill to a Select Commit tee, so that the Bill can be thoroughly discussed before it is brought back to this House.

If the Minister of Labour does this, he will gain the respect and gratitude of the trade union movement.

If he rejects this proposal, he must expect active opposition the implementation of in M.T.U.C.

this Act, when this Act is placed on the Statute Book.
from the Mr Speaker, Sir, I wish to move that this Bill be referred to a Select Com mittee, under Standing Order 54, which reads: "When a Bill has been read a second time, it shall stand committed to a Com mittee of the House unless the House in motion commits it to a Select Committee.
Such motion shall not require notice, must be made immediately after the Bill is read a second time, and may be proposed by any member, the question thereon shall be put forthwith and shall be decided without amendment or debate."

Mr Speaker: The sitting is suspended for ten minutes.

Sitting suspended at 10.35 p.m.

Sitting resumed at 10.45 p.m. (Mr Speaker in the Chair) Debate resumed.
Mr Speaker: Before I ask the Minister to reply, may I point out the Honourable Member for Batu that he has got to propose the motion to refer this Bill to a Select Committee, once again, with seconder?

to Tuan V. Manickavasagam: Mr Speaker, Sir, the Honourable Members for Bungsar and Batu have asserted that the Bill vests too much discretion with the Minister and have proposed that this be referred to a Select Com mittee.

Sir, I am afraid I am unable to accept their proposal.
Sir, the Honourable Members on the opposite bench and the Government do not really see eye to eye on the provi sions of the Bill.

As I have said in my remark in introducing this Bill, we wish to continue the voluntary system of industrial relations and wish to give every encouragement to employers and workers to discuss and settle all matters and problems that arise in their mutual relationship.
Sir, this Bill is long over due, and the reference of the Bill, as suggested by the Honourable Members, to a Select Committee will only hold things much longer.

The Government has studied this Bill with the utmost care.

In fact, Sir, a Committee of Cabinet has gone through the Bill in detail.

Since the first draft of the Bill, various amend ments have been made to cater more effectively for the objectives that I have outlined in my speech in introducing this Bill.
The Bill has also been discussed extensively with the National Joint Labour Advisory Council which, the House knows, consists of as representatives and workers throughout Malaysia.

The various Ministries of Government con cerned with the operation of the Bill have also been consulted, and I must say that the Bill, as presently drafted, represents the stand of the Government on this matter.
Even the Honourable Members for Batu and Bungsar, in employers of 1569 22 JUNE 1967 1570 studying this Bill so carefully, have been able to suggest only a few rather, if I may say so, inconsequential amend ments.

All the matters raised by them had been considered on more than one occasion by the Government, but regrettably we are unable to accept them.
in the Bill, introducing As I have already stated in my speech the working of this Bill in practice would to be watched closely with a view making such improvements and modi fications that might be necessary in the light of actual experience.

As the Bill stands, I think, it is largely a satis factory document, and I see no purpose in delaying the Bill any further.

Sir, I would now like to refer to the remarks made by the Honourable Members for Bungsar and Batu on the details of the Bill.
The Honourable Member for Bungsar claims that this Bill destroys the voluntary industrial relations and he has suggested that we to have unduly and harshly regulate too much of the practice of industrial relations.

I cannot agree that we have, in the Bill, flagrantly violated the basic rights of the workers.

I have checked every I.L.O.

Convention on this much abused subject, but I have found no evidence of his allegations.
I am prepared to hear more substantial arguments from him on his allegations, but till then I should ignore his broad allegations.

tried Coming to Clause 54,1 have already explained as to why Clause 54 exempts Parts II to IV of the Bill from the penal provisions.

I took great pains to explain this, but I presume the Honour able Member did not catch my words.
Making contravention of any of these Parts penal offences, would flood our courts, delay redress and even, I am advised, prejudice eventual redress of complaints in the Industrial Court.

I have also indicated that awards of the Court on disputes that might arise are binding and contraventions then be come punishable as crimes.

Tuan C. V. Devan Nair: On a point of explanation, if I may.
The Minister knows that the chances are that very few complaints about victimisation by reason of the circumstance that a man is a member of a trade union and engaged in trade union activities will ever end up in Court.

Cases which will end in Court, grievances, complaints, and so on are probably about 10%, which means about 90% of the com plaints and grievances will never secure redress, and that was why I suggested that the whole thing was wrong.
Tuan V. Manickavasagam: The Honourable Member says that 90% of the cases might not reach the court, but I can assure him that, if they are they will trade unions, responsible surely reach the Minister who could refer them to the Court.

Coming to Clause 5 (2) (c), the Honourable Member referred to per sons employed in confidential capacity.

It is clearly for the Court to satisfy itself as to who is such an employee, and quite obviously it would be unreasonable to cover all and sundry.
The reason for this Clause is to avoid conflict of loyalties—staff who deal with staff relations are clearly highly confidential management and union membership will surely place such awkward position.

the most staff staff in Coming to Clause 6 (a), the Honour able Member has not read the Clause carefully.

Unionists may do their union work during working hours with the employer's permission, but the unionist is an employee of that under taking he can do the quoted employer's permission.
He Singapore, but let me quote an I.L.O.

Convention which permits such a Clause.

this without if Coming to Clause 8 (4), I cannot follow his interpretation of this Clause.

My interpretation is that all cases of unresolved recognition disputes must be sent to the Court.

term of Clause 13 (2): He suggests the need for a maximum for collective agreement.

While I am aware that he has suggested that we follow Singapore.

I cannot agree that such a provision is necessary.


life 1571 22 JUNE 1967 1572 Tuan C. V. Devan Nair: On a point of explanation, Sir.

I never suggested that we follow Singapore.

Singapore has got a maximum limit of three years.

We might have it as four years or five years.

I never suggested that we follow "Singapore.

All that I suggested was that we do have a maximum period and that we decide for ourselves what that maximum period should be.
Tuan V. Manickavasagam: 1 cannot agree that such a provision is necessary.

It is for the parties themselves to decide on this.

I say the longer the agreement, the better it is for our young and growing economy.

that independent persons The Honourable Member has referred to Clause 18.

I am afraid that I cannot agree with him the Industrial Court would be the only one which has provision for indepen dent persons.

Sir, I am sure, he is aware of many other countries which have placed in such courts.
I cannot also agree that from non-citizens should be banned sitting on is not such courts.

necessary that such persons should be appointed, but let me point out that as long as we permit substantial foreign investment in our country, we cannot rightly exclude them representing emp loyer's interests here.

This is a sign of our openness on this question.

The Honourable Member rather think of this than to suggest that we exclude the non-citizens.
should It The other matter he suggested was that there may be a case where an employer may be asked to represent a worker.

The Honourable Member should credit the Minister with more sense on this matter, Sir.

Tuan C. V. Devan Nair: On a point of clarification, Sir.

All that I asked was that it should be mandatory that no find himself should sitting on the employees' panel.

That is all that I suggested.


employer Tuan V. Manickavasagam: Sir, coming to Clause 24, I have already explained at length to permit legal practitioners but at the discretion of the President.

I see no need to go through this again, but I the necessity to that trade unionists this clause also can point out permits represent workers in cases before the courts.

I can recall a number of humble trade unionists who have acquitted them selves extremely well in our Industrial Court so far.
for requiring the Court Coming to Clause 26 (f).

the only reason to consult the Minister is not to get his permission, but merely to consult him so as to ensure that financial provisions to pay for such assessors can be made available.

from the President, the Ministry Dr Tan Chee Khoon: On a point of clarification.

Cannot that job of finding whether there are financial provisions if be obtained by necessary of Labour?

Why should the consultation be with the Minister and not with the President?
If it is a question of finan cial the information can be obtained from the Ministry of Labour?

implications, surely then Tuan V. Manickavasagam: Sir, coming to Clause 30, I am surprised that the Honourable Member has interpreted it in a different way.

The parties themselves could refer disputes on interpretation to the Court.

Clause 41 (c), as I have stated in my speech, would be used by His Majesty only in very rare cases.
the Dolomite is concerned, Now, coming the other about the Honourable to Member for Batu he raised a number of points.

First, he took the opportu the two disputes— nity of bringing Industries one about and the Sri Jaya Transport Workers' Union.
Sir, as far as the Sri Jaya Transport Workers' Union I understand the Registrar of Trade Unions from that a the substantial portion of employees of the Transport Company are members of the Sri Jaya Transport Employees' Union and as such it is difficult for him to invoke the provi sions of the Trade Unions Act, 1965, to cancel its registration.

He dwelt at length on the strength of the Trans port Workers' Union.
the figures with me here; the total number of employees in the Company as on I have 1573 22 JUNE 1967 1574 27-5-67 was 955.

The total number of employees, in respect of whom trade union subscription was being deduc ted was 811, out of whom 434 wrote to the Company to say that deductions in respect of their subscriptions should be stopped, leaving only 377 with the Transport Workers' Union—the 434 say that they are no more with that Union.

The Sri Jaya Transport Workers' Union also wrote to us.
Sir, there is quite different the position each day.

We do not know which Union is actually holding the majority, and J hope the Honourable Member will wait for us to make a decision on that.

Dr Tan Chee Khoon: Sir, is the Honourable Minister aware that, out of this 430 that he talked of in the Sri Jaya Employees Union, there have been allegations of forgery of signa tures; and unless that case has been decided this question of whether this 430 or even 530, should be a matter of conjecture?
in Court, Tuan V. Manickavasagam: I am aware, Sir, that out of this 434 some have already withdrawn their letters.

So, the position changes from day to day.

I hope the Honourable Member will be patient for a little more time.

Sir, the Honourable Member men tioned about Dolomite Industries.

I have been dealing with this dispute myself.

I have met the Management, and I am expecting a reply from them within the next few days.

Dr Tan Chee Khoon: On a point of clarification, Sir.
Does the Minister not agree that this is a very simple ques tion?

All that the workers want is recognition, and that they represent the majority of workers has been ratified by officials of his own Ministry?

Tuan V. Manickavasagam: Mr Speaker, Sir, if the Honourable Mem ber would not ask for this Bill to be referred to the Select Committee, I can assure him that I will use the provi sions of this Bill as soon as I can get it through.

(Laughter).
(Laughter).

Sir, the Honourable Member for Batu statement by referred M.T.U.C.

leaders saying that this Bill to a press but two or three Clauses of just replaces the Essential Regulations.

The Bill does contain in a modified the form Essential Regulations, these Clauses are common in most labour legislations throughout the world, and I can find nothing to be ashamed of in using these Clauses.
The Bill does, in fact, represent vast areas of new thoughts in this field and it does us little credit to be accused of copying existing legislation.

being kicked Sir, the Honourable Member also mentioned about Clause 5 and some body upstairs.

But surely, Sir, the kicking upstairs tactic would be quite inapplicable in cases under this Clause.

It is not for an employer to say with finality who is dealing with confidential matters con cerning staff relations.
Complaints of this nature can be made to the Minis ter and eventually to the Court.

Sir, the Honourable Member also I.L.O.

Conven about mentioned .

.

.. tions Dr Tan Chee Khoon: Mr Speaker, Sir, I have also mentioned about Clause 5 (2) (6), whereby the mere expedient of promoting a person to a managerial position, he can then be ruled out as a member of a trade union.
He knows very well that this actually is, in fact, the case with the President of the to be moment: he has been asked placed on a managerial post and he has refused—at a great sacrifice to himself, he has refused and he has chosen to remain a trade unionist.

the M.T.U.C.

at Tuan V. Manickavasagam: If one is to be promoted and if one is due for promotion, I do not think anybody should deprive him of his rightful that should not be promotion, and called as "kicking upstairs".
Tuan C. V. Devan Nair: Mr Speaker, Sir, on a point of clarification.

The is aware of many emplo Minister yers—and as a trade unionist, I have come across such employers—where you promote a man as a manager just because you want to get him out of the union.

But certain countries do provide legislative provisions whereby 1575 22 JUNE 1967 1576 the employer is required to prove that the man is really a manager and what are the managerial perks.
Has his pay really been increased, because an employer can "So-and-so" becomes a manager tomorrow without any change in his salary, any change in his conditions of employment, any of the managerial perks, and that is why it was suggested that this Clause was insufficient.

say Tuan V. Manickavasagam: Mr Speaker, Sir, I cannot think of any case where a person is just promoted in name without at least some benefits to go with it.
in my experience Tuan C. V. Devan Nair: Just in order to clarify that, may I inform the Honourable Minister that I know an employer whom he should know well—the Shaw Brothers.

The Shaw Brothers had, in that certain people Singapore, said were managers, nominated them as managers when they did not enjoy any managerial perks, pre-requisites or rights?
And this was a matter, Sir, which had obtained certain publicity in the newspapers, because it went to the Arbitration Court and the Arbitration Court in Singapore decided against the managers.

So, there are these prece dences.

Sir, Tuan V. Manickavasagam: Sir, well, I think the Honourable Member has given a very good reference about Singapore now in this case (Laughter).

for the Honourable Member Batu also mentioned about certain provisions of the Clauses.

He referred to Clause 14 (2).


Sir, I am unable to follow the intention of the Honourable Member in suggesting the deletion of Clause 14 (2).

Clause 14 (2) follows the provisions of Clause 13. from is Since required ingredients specified in Clause 13, it must surely follow taking the Court, the agreement, must cognizance of ensure are ingredients contained in that agreement.

collective to contain agreement those that that the in a Sir, he also referred to Clause 18 (1).
The Honourable Member said that the word "may" in the proviso to Clause 18 (1) should be amended to read "shall".

The word "may" is used to cater for an eventuality, merely where there may be more than one organisation of employers or workmen catering for the same group of people.

It is important in such a situation that the Minister should be given some discretion to decide which organisation he should consult.
Sir, I have already indicated to both sides of the National Joint Labour Advisory Council that I recognised will continue organisations the question of appointing members to the Industrial Court.

to consult on to obtain their views.

The Honourable Member also men tioned about Clause 19 (1).

He referred to the first draft of the Bill which he read just now.
Sir, for the information of this House, the drafts of the Bill were handed over to both employers' and workers' group of the National Joint Labour Advisory Council in the strictest confidence, so that I may be able I am perturbed to note that some member of the Council has passed on a copy of the draft to the Honourable Member for Batu.
This is clearly a gross breach of the confidence that we have placed on the members of the National Joint Labour Advisory Council; and, if this is the manner in which they are going to conduct it difficult to continue to place my con fidence in them (Applause).
Neverthe less, Sir, their business, I find Dr Tan Chee Khoon: Sir, I wish to make my position clear Tuan V. Manickavasagam: I have not finished, Sir, I might point out that the power to appoint members to the Industrial Court to deal with specific trade disputes has been vested in the Minister in Clause 19 (1) as a result of representations made by the workers' group of the National Joint Labour Advisory Council for various reasons.

too had no The employers' group objection to this.


I would have pre ferred myself that the power be vested in the President, but in the event I thought it desirable to accede to the wishes of the workers' group.

I cannot go back now and accede to the request 1577 22 JUNE 1967 1578 of the Honourable Member for Batu.

Sir, he can have his say.

Dr Tan Chee Khoon: Mr Speaker, Sir, I want to make it perfectly clear to this House that I was not trying to subvert.
If I have any documents with me before, or now, I did not go and look for the documents.

The documents were brought to me, and as such I am completely innocent of any ulterior motives that the Minister may seem to impute.

These documents were brought to me.

I did not know that they were supposed to be confidential or not supposed to be given to any others.

They were brought to me by lots of other people who bring their letters or memorandum to me and ask me to study them.
Tuan V. Manickavasagam: I did not accuse the Honourable Member, Sir.

I accused the person who handed it to him.

Sir, with regard to Clause 27 (4), the Honourable Member for Batu has suggested the deletion of Clause 27 (4) which I consider to be a vital provision.

It is important in the interest of our economy and the programme of indus trialisation that the Industrial Court, in making its award, should have the fullest regard to the public interest and the financial implications of its award.
It is necessary that the Industrial Court be given this frame of reference for its work or, otherwise, we could ruin our whole economy.

I am definitely not able to accept his suggestion.

Sir, this Bill is a result of the expe rience so far gained and I am aware that more and more of late we are facing certain problems in the field of industrial relations which are becoming extremely difficult and irksome to a large degree.
to handle Sir, the Honourable Member from Bukit Bintang mentioned about dis putes in the public sector and disputes in the other private sectors too.

Orga nised workers in some sectors appear to be adopting questionable tactics in the pursuit of their very narrow objectives without regard to the conve nience of the public, or the interest of our young and growing nation.
While the Bill contains certain provisions to deal with such elements, I am aware that it may not go far enough in the view of some people who feel strongly about such actions.

The Government is responsible to the people of this country as a whole, and not only to the workers of this country who happen to be organised in trade unions or to the employing sections of the popula tion.
Organised labour in this country has made substantial progress not only in respect of their status in trade unions but also terms and in respect of conditions of employment.

Organised labour also enjoys a substantial degree of freedom of action and speech, which is rarely tolerated in many parts of the world.

The Honourable Member quoted other parts of the world, but this is not tolerated in many parts of the world.

This is especially true of staff unions in our Public Services.
Of late, these unions appear to have gone on a mass campaign of criticisms and damage to the image of the Public Services as a whole and to the Govern ment of the day.

They have gone to the extent of organising what must surely be considered as a threat of mass intimidation.

Staff unions would do well to bear in mind that we have permitted a large degree of freedom for them to exercise the right to orga nise themselves into trade unions and even, when necessary, to go on indus trial action.
This should not, under any circumstances, be interpreted by them to mean that the Government is either weak or fearful of their organised strength.

As we have stated on a number of occasions in the past, our Public Service the most excellent in this part of the world.

It is due largely to their hardwork and dedication that we have been able to levels of progress and record development that we are able to boast of.
Our Public Service from the lowest ranks the industrial and manual group to the highest level in the Civil Service deserve our credit and praise for this.

We can only sustain this level of well-being and growth if we con to have such hardwork and tinue dedication.

Public should bear in mind that the Government is is one of servants the in 1579 22 JUNE 1967 1580 to other doing all it can out of available resources to ensure that they get as fair a deal as possible.
This should not lead them to be drawn into battle of trials of strength with the Government by leaders, who merely seek the glory of power which unfortunately they seem to think they acquire by making tough statements or organising mass rallies, persuading "go-slow" tactics, preventing extramural activities and resorting forms of non- cooperation in the hope of bringing Government to its knees.

They are sadly mistaken, if they think that they are going to succeed in these ventures.
We, as the Government, Sir, believe firmly in providing the basic freedoms to our people and in the genuine pursuit of democratic belief.

However, it must be clear to the Honourable Members in this House, and to the country at large, that all these freedoms must be subject to the exacting demands for stability and progress and the exercise of this freedom seems to be subverting stability and progress, we will have to take a hard look at this matter.
that, where this As I have said in moving this Bill, the operation of law will be watched closely and carefully and such limitations or shortcomings as may be found in the Bill to cope with irres ponsible activities industrial field, will be looked into, and I would not hesitate to come back to this House for suitable modifications if the situa tion warrants it.

the in House itself into a Committee of the whole House.

immediately resolved Bill considered in Committee.


; (Mr Speaker in the Chair) Clauses 1 to 3 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 4— Tuan V. Manickavasagam: Mr Chair man, Sir, I beg to move an amendment to Clause 4 as in the Amendment Slip submitted to Honourable Members, viz: For sub-sections (1) and (2) substitute the following— "(1) Subject to the provisions of any written law relating to the registration of trade unions, every workman shall have the right to form and assist in the forma tion of and to join a trade union and to participate in its lawful activities.
to (2) Subject the provisions of any written law relating to the registration of trade unions, every employer shall have the right to form and assist in the forma tion of and to join a trade union and to participate in its lawful activities."

Amendment put, and agreed to, Clause 4, as amended, ordered stand part of the Bill.
to Clause 5— Dr Tan Chee Khoon: Mr Chairman, Sir, I beg to move that Clause 5 (1) (d), line 2, be amended as follows: "After the word 'employment', add the words 'or victimise him in any way'".

Sir, I beg to move that the Bill be now read a second time (Applause).

Question put, and agreed to.

Bill accordingly read a second time.

Dr Tan Chee Khoon: Mr Speaker, Sir, may I, under Standing Order 54, move that this Bill be committed to a Committee of the whole House?
Mr Speaker: You mean "to a Select Committee"?

Dr Tan Chee Khoon: Yes, Sir.

Tuan C. V. Devan Nair: Sir, I beg to second the motion.

Question put, and negatived.

Mr Chairman: The question is that Clause 5 be amended as in the amend ment slip submitted by the Honourable Member for Batu, which reads as follows— Clause 5 (1) (d)—insert the words "or victimise him in any way" in line 2 of the paragraph after the word "employment."

Clause 5 (2) (b) and (c)—delete; be agreed to.

Amendments put, and negatived.


Dr Tan Chee Khoon: Sir, in Clause 5, two the other I have not proposed amendments yet.

Mr Chairman: I it that all these amendments as contained in your take 1581 22 JUNE 1964 1582 Amendment Slip which has been passed round, should be taken together.

Dr Tan Chee Khoon: But, Sir, I only read out the first one.

I have yet two other amendments in regard to Clause 5 (2) (b) and (c).

Mr Chairman: I have put to the House all the amendments as contained in this paper.
Dr Tan Chee Khoon: I bow to your judgment.

Clause 5 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 6— Dr Tan Chee Khoon: Sir, in regard to Clause 6, I wish the deletion of both sub-clauses (b) and (c).

Amendment put, and negatived.

to move Tuan V. Manickavasagam: Mr Chairman, Sir, I beg the amendment to Clause 6 as submitted in the Amendment Slip, which reads as follows: to move "Insert the word 'or' at the end of para graphs (a) and (b)" Amendment put, and agreed to.
Clause 6, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clauses 7 and 8 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 9— Dr Tan Chee Khoon: Mr Chairman, Sir, I wish to move an amendment to Clause 9 (1) (a) and (b)-i.e., for the deletion of (a) and (b).

Amendment put, and negatived.

Clause 9 ordered to stand part of the Bill.


Clause 10— Dr Tan Chee Khoon: Sir, I wish to move an amendment to Clause 10 as shown in the Amendment Slip sub mitted by me, which reads as follows: the sentence after 'class of workmen unless' and substitute the sentence The Trade Union which has been accorded recognition is either no longer in existence or there exists reasonable doubt about its representative character.'"

"Page 7, first line—delete Clause 10 ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clauses 11 to 13 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 14— Dr Tan Chee Khoon: Mr Chairman, Sir, I wish to move an amendment to Clause 14 (2) as submitted in my Amendment Slip, which reads: "Delete the whole sub-section (2)."

Here I wish to say that where an agreement into by is freely entered both parties, why should it be subject to recognition by is implied here?

the Court as Amendment put, and negatived.

Clause 14 ordered to stand part of the Bill.


Clauses 15 and 16 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 17— Tuan V. Manickavasagam: Sir, I that Clauses 17 be beg amended as in the Amended Slip, which reads as follows: to move "In line 6, for 'without delay', substitute 'within such period as may be specified in the direction'."

Amendment put, and agreed to.

Clause 17, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 18— Dr Tan Chee Khoon: Mr Chairman, Sir, I beg to move "an amendment to Clause 18 (1) as submitted in my Amendment Slip, which reads: "Third last line—substitute the word 'shall' for 'may'."

Amendment put, and negatived.

Clause 18 ordered to stand part of the Bill.


Clause 19— Dr Tan Chee Khoon: Mr Chairman, Sir, I beg to move that the amendment as submitted by me in the Amendment Slip with regard to Clause 19 (1), which reads as follows, be approved: "Second last line—substitute 'President' for the word 'Minister'."

the word Amendment put, and negatived.

Amendment put, and negatived.

1583 22 JUNE 1967 1584 Clause 19 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clauses 20 to 22 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 23— Dr Tan Chee Khoon: Mr Chairman.

Sir, I beg to move that the amendment to Clause 23 (1) as submitted by me in the Amendment Slip, which reads as follows, be approved: "Third line—delete the word 'Joint' and substitute the words 'if either party' after the word 'Request'."

Amendment put, and negatived.

Clause 23 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clauses 24 to 26 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 27— Dr Tan Chee Khoon: Mr Chairman, Sir, I wish to move the deletion of Clause 27 (4).
Here, before I move this amendment, I wish to say that, con trary to what the Minister has said, this is an attempt to prejudge any case brought before any Industrial Arbitra tion Court, because it says here: "In making its award in respect of a trade dispute, the Court shall have regard to the public interest, the financial implications and the effect of such award on the economy of the country, and on the industry con cerned .

.

.

."

It means that the Arbitration Tribunal has got no elbow room at all.
It is told, "All these are restrictions, you must be very careful, you must not do this, you must not do that."

I would feel that Clause 27 (5) would be more than adequate for purposes of the Govern ment's fears, i.e.

: "The Court shall act according to equity, good conscience and the substantial merits of the case without regard to technicalities and legal form."
I do not see any reason why any arbi tration court should be dictated to by the Government even before it begins to sit, and as such, Mr Chairman, Sir, I move that Clause 27 (4) be deleted.

that Clause.

As I said, earlier, it is very important the interest of our economy and the financial implications should be taken into consideration in any award.

Clause 27 (5) is quite different.

It just says: "The Court shall act according to equity, good conscience .

.

.

."
.

.

."

but it may not have the financial con siderations in mind.

Sir, we do not say that they should not make any reason able awards.

But what we ask is to take into consideration the probable effect in related or similar industries and the economy, and I do not see any reason why the Honourable Member is object ing to it.
then the other Dr Tan Chee Khoon: Mr Chairman, Sir, it does seem to me that, in the first instance, of the four people appointed to the Court, first, the President is appointed by the Minister; next, the independent person is appointed by the Minister; two, the employees' representative and the em the Bill representative, as ployers' stands, are also appointed by the Minister.
In other words, all these four people who comprise the Arbitration Tribunal are all appointed by the Minister, and he has got no faith in them that they, of their own volition, would take into consideration the public interest, the financial implications, and the like.

It seems to me that he has no confidence in the people that he has appointed to serve on the Arbitration Tribunal, that he has to remind them every time of this Clause.
Tuan V. Manickavasagam: Sir, the independent persons will be very inde pendent—the President will be its chair man, the workers' representatives will be looking into the workers' interest and the employers' representatives will be looking into the employers' interest—I thought I should remind them of the national interest.

(HONOURABLE MEM BERS : Hear, hear) (Applause).

Amendment put, and negatived.

Clause 27 ordered to stand part of the Bill.


Tuan V. Manickavasagam: Mr Chair important man, Sir, this is a very Clause 28 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

1585 22 JUNE 1967 1586 Clause 29— Tuan V. Manickavasagam: Mr Chair man, Sir, I beg to move that the amend ment as mentioned in the Amendment Slip, in regard to Clause 29 (1) (a) which reads as follows, be approved: "In line 3, delete the word 'to' after the words 'appear or'."

Amendment put, and agreed to.


Clause 29, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clauses 30 to 34 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 35— Dr Tan Chee Khoon: Mr Chairman, Sir, I beg to move that Clause 35 (2) and 35 (3) be deleted as they are very harsh provisions.

Amendment put, and negatived.

Tuan V. Manickavasagam: Mr Chair man, Sir, I beg to move that a hyphen be placed "lockout" wherever it appears in Clause 35 of the Bill.

the word in Amendment put, and agreed to.


Clause 35, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 36— Dr Tan Chee Khoon: Mr Chairman, Sir, before I move my amendment, may I ask the Minister of Labour what is the necessity term of this to vary to not exceeding one imprisonment year or to a fine not exceeding $1,000 or to both such imprisonment and fine, from the Trade Dispute Ordinance of 1949 which says that it should be not exceeding 3 months or to a fine not exceeding $250 or to both such impri sonment and fine?
Tuan V. Manickavasagam: Sir, with regard to this question of fines, he has suggested that the penalties in these clauses are different.

Sir, I do not con sider that these penalties are harsh and that the maximum term of imprison ment for one year or a fine of $1,000 is unduly excessive.

Sir, it is necessary for us to provide sufficient deterrents to those who would choose to break the law.
I have a feeling that the Honour able Member for Batu is concerned about this, because it is largely that members of his Party who have been involved in numerous cases where the law concerning trade disputes has been broken in open defiance.

I consider penalties as drafted in these clauses to be necessary if we are to survive the challenge of irresponsible elements.

Sir, law-abiding workmen need not worry about such penalties as I do not think that they would get into a situation of that sort.
I also hope that members of the Labour Party would desist from leading other workers into such posi tions where they would have to pay penalties as drafted in this Bill.

Dr Tan Chee Khoon: Mr Chairman, it may interest the Minister of Labour to know that these amendments come from active trade unionists and they are not members of my Party.

Mr Chairman: Will you now propose the amendment?


Dr Tan Chee Khoon: Mr Chairman, Sir, I beg to move that the amendment to Clause 36, as laid down in my Amendment Slip, which as follows, be approved: reads "Third last line, delete the rest of the sentence after the word 'term' and substitute the words 'not exceeding three months or to a fine not exceeding $250 or to both such imprisonment and fine in accordance with the provisions of the Trade Disputes Ordi nance, 1949V Amendment put, and negatived.
Tuan V. Manickavasagam: Mr Chair man, Sir, I beg to move the amendment the to Clause 36 as circulated Amendment Slip, which as follows: in reads "Delete the words 'of either description' in Clause 36.

In line 1 of Clause 36 (c) for 'woned' sub stitute 'owned'."

Amendment put, and agreed to.

Clause 36, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 37— Tuan V. Manickavasagam: I beg to move that Clause 37 be amended as follows: "Delete the words 'house or' in lines 4-5, 7 and 16 and the words 'resides or' in "line 5."

Amendment put, and agreed to.

1587 22 JUNE 1967 1588 Clause 37, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 38— Dr Tan Chee Khoon: Mr Chairman, Sir, I beg to move that Clause 38 (1) be amended as per the Amendment Slip that I have submitted, which reads as follows : "Third last line—delete the rest of the sentence after the word 'term' and substitute the words 'not exceeding three months, or to a fine not exceeding $250 or to both such imprisonment and fine, in accordance with the provisions of the Trade Disputes Ordi nance, 1949'."

Amendment put, and negatived.


Tuan V. Manickavasagam: Mr Chair man, Sir, I beg to move the amend ment as submitted in the Amendment Slip to Clause 38, viz: "Delete the words 'of either description'."

Amendment put, and agreed to.

as submitted in the Amendment Slip to Cause 41, viz: "Insert the word 'or' at the end of para graphs (a), (b), (c) and (J)."

Amendment put, and agreed to.

Clause 41, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 42— Tuan V. Manickavasagam: Mr Chair the man, Sir, I beg the amendment Amendment Slip to Clause 42, which reads: to move submitted that in as "For 'lockout' or 'lockouts', wherever the word appears, substitute 'lock-out' or 'lock outs'."

be approved.

Amendment put, and agreed to.

Clause 42, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 38, as amended, ordered to Clause 43— stand part of the Bill.
Clause 39— Tuan V. Manickavasagam: Mr Chairman, Sir, I beg the amendment as circulated in the Amend ment Slip to Clause 39 (5), viz : to move "Insert the words 'of law' after the word 'Court'.''

Amendment put, and agreed to.

Clause 39, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 40— Tuan V. Manickavasagam: Mr Chair man, Sir, I beg to move that a hyphen be placed in the word "lockout" in Clause 40 (2).

Amendment put, and agreed to.

Clause 40, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 41— Dr Tan Chee Khoon: Mr Chairman, Sir, I beg to move that Clause 43 (1) in my be amended as Amendment Slip, which reads: laid down "Fourth last line—delete the rest of the sentence after the word 'term' and substitute the words 'not exceeding one month or to a to both such fine not exceeding $50 or imprisonment and fine in accordance to the Trade Disputes Ordinance, 1949'."

Amendment put, and negatived.


Tuan V. Manickavasagam: Mr Chair the man, Sir, I beg amendment, the as Amendment Slip, to Clause 43, which reads as follows: to move submitted that in "For 'lockout' or 'lockouts', wherever the word appears, substitute 'lock-out' or 'lock outs'.

", be approved.

Amendment put, and agreed to.

Clause 43, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Dr Tan Chee Khoon: I beg to move for the deletion of Clause 41 (c), as laid down in my Amendment Slip.
Amendment put, and negatived.

Tuan V. Manickavasagam: Mr Chair man, Sir, I beg to move the amendment Clauses 44, 45 and 46— Tuan V. Manickavasagam: Mr Chairman, Sir, with your permission, could I take the Clauses together to save your time?

Mr Chairman: Yes, certainly.

1589 22 JUNE 1967 1590 Tuan V. Manickavasagam: Sir, with your permission, I would like to take Clauses 44, 45 and 46 and move that the amendments to these 3 Clauses be accepted, viz: "Clause 44—in line 3 for 'Atc' substitute 'Act'.
lockout' or Clause 45—for lockouts', wherever the word appears, substitute 'lock out' or 'lock-outs'.

Clause 46—for 'lockouts', wherever the word appears, substitute 'lock out' or 'lock-outs'."

'lock-out' or the House, this side of Dr Tan Chee Khoon: Mr Chairman, Sir, it would be more convenient to us on the Minister would move the amendments separately for the simple reason that we agree with amendments to Clause 44, which is a typing error, and to Clause 52 (2) which is also a typing error .

.

.
.

.

.. if Mr Chairman: May I point out that these are consequential spelling mis takes?

Dr Tan Chee Khoon: Yes, I agree with them, but I do not agree with amendment to Clause 48 for which he wants an omnibus approval.

Mr Chairman: Not Clause 48 but Clauses 44, 45 and 46.

Is that right?

Tuan V. Manickavasagam: Yes, Sir.

Amendments put, and agreed to.

Clause 44, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 45, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 46, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 47 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 48— Tuan V. Manickavasagam: Mr Chair man, Sir, I beg to move an amendment, as submitted in the Amendment Slip, to Clause 48 which reads as follows: Substitute therefor the following— "Prosecution 43.

(i) A prosecution under this under this Part shall not be instituted except by or with the consent of the Part.
Public Prosecutor: Provided that a person charged with such an offence may be arrested, or a warrant for his arrest may be issued and execu ted, and any such person may be remanded in custody or on bail, notwithstanding that the consent of the Public Prosecutor to the institution of a prosecution for the offence has not been obtained, but the case shall not be further prosecuted until that consent has been obtained.
(2) When a person is brought before a Court of law under this section before the Public Prosecu tor has consented to the prosecu tion the charge shall be explained to him but he shall not be called upon to plead, and the provisions of the law for the time being in force relating to criminal proce dure shall be modified accor- dingly.".

Amendment put, and agreed to.

Clause 48, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clauses 49 to 51 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 52— Tuan V. Manickavasagam: Sir, I beg to move that the amendment to Clause 52 as submitted in the Amend ment Slip, which reads as follows: In the last line for "fire" substitute "fine" be approved.

Amendment put, and agreed to.

Clause 52, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clauses 53 and 54, ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Clause 55— Tuan V. Manickavasagam: Mr Chair man, Sir, I beg to move an amend ment, as submitted in the Amendment Slip, to Clause 55 (1) which reads: Delete the words "of either description".

Amendment put, and agreed to.

Clause 55, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clauses 56 to 58 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Schedule ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Bill reported with amendments: read the third time and passed.
1591 22 JUNE 1967 1592 THE EMPLOYMENT (AMENDMENT) BILL Second Reading Tuan Lee San Choon: Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move that a Bill intituled "an Act to amend the Employment Ordinance, 1955" be read a second time.

Clause 2 of the Bill amends sub section (2) of Section 61 of the Employ ment Ordinance.

At present, employers the Employment are required under Ordinance labour registers for only twelve months after the recording thereof.

to preserve their for Section 17 (2) of the E.P.F.


Ordinance the that proceedings provides summary recovery as civil debts of any contribution may be instituted at any time within three years from the date when contribution becomes due.

The therefore, in Clause 2, amendment would facilitate the enforcement of the the E.P.F.

Ordinance by officers of Ministry of Labour requiring employers to preserve their registers for three years.

by Clause 3 of the Bill corrects a printers' error.
the right Clause 4 of the Bill amends Section 85 (2) of the Principal Ordinance to give the Commissioner of Labour and his officers to appeal and represent a labourer not only in procee dings instituted under the Ordinance by a Session Court, or the Court of a First Class Magistrate, but also in procee dings arising out of the Ordinance.
The proposed amendment would specifically enable officers of the Ministry to appear and represent a labourer before a Court in judgment debtors summons cases which, in effect, arise out of the orders made by Labour officers in Labour Courts in such matters as wages and maternity allowances.

Clause 5 of the Bill amends Section 86 of the Ordinance.
This section, as it stands at present, gives the impression that an employer, or a worker, having instituted proceedings for any breach or non-performance of a contract of service in a Labour Court under Section 69 of the Ordinance, may not com mence civil proceedings in a court of law.

The intention, however, is that the employer or the worker should have the alternative, if he so wishes to bring a civil suit in a court even though his case might be pending in a Labour Court.
The proposed amendment would, therefore, provide the alternative and save unnecessary duplication of work for both the officers of the Ministry and the law courts by requiring the complainant to withdraw the procee dings instituted by him in a Labour Court before he commences proceedings in a court of law.

Clause 6 of the Bill amends Section 97 (1) of the Ordinance to bring it in line wtih the corresponding provisions of the E.P.F.

Ordinance.
Ordinance.

Officers of the Ministry have encountered some diffi culty in places of employment with less than five labourers.

The proposed amend ment facilitate this Bill would enforcement of both the Employment Ordinance and the E.P.F.

Ordinance.

their enforcement work in in Clause 7 of the Bill repeals the Employment (Amendment) Act, 1961, which has not been brought into force as the provisions of that Amendment Act relating to payment for overtime Suitable unenforceable.
are work amendments in this regard are now being discussed in the National Joint Labour Advisory Council.

Sir, I beg to move.

Tuan Ali bin Haji Ahmad: Sir, I beg to second the motion.

Question put, and agreed to.

Bill accordingly read a second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House.

House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill.

Bill considered in Committee.

(Mr Speaker in the Chair) Clauses 1 to 7 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill.
Bill reported without amendment: read the third time and passed.

1593 22 JUNE 1967 1594 THE TRADE UNIONS (AMENDMENT) BILL lagi sa-lain daripada apa yang ter- kandong di-dalam Rang Undang2 ini.

Second Reading Tuan Lee San Choon: Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move that a Bill intituled "an Act to amend the Trade Unions Ordi nance, 1959" be read a second time.
This Bill seeks to amend three of the terms used in the Trade Unions Ordi nance so as to bring them into line with the definitions used in the Indus trial Relations Bill which this House discussed today.

It is necessary that the terms used in both these laws should be identical as the Trade Union Ordi nance requires certain procedures to be gone into before a strike.
The explana tion of these definitions have already been given during the debate on the Industrial Relations Bill, and I need not take up the time of this House by going through them again.

Sir, I beg to move.

Tuan Ali bin Haji Ahmad: Sir, I beg to second the motion.

Question put, and agreed to.

Bill accordingly read a second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House.

House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill.

Bill considered in Committee.


(Mr Speaker in the Chair) Clauses 1 and 2 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Bill reported without amendment: read the third time and passed.

THE TRANSFER OF FUNCTIONS (REGISTRAR-GENERAL OF SARAWAK) BILL Second Reading Tuan Haji Abdul-Rahman bin Ya'kub: Tuan Yang di-Pertua, saya mohon menchadangkan supaya Rang Undang2 Pemindahan Tugas2 Pendaftar Besar Bagi Negeri Sarawak, tahun 1967 di- bacha bagi kali yang kedua.
Saya tidak berhajat hendak menambah penerangan2 Saya mohon menchadangkan.

Tuan V. Manickavasagam: Tuan Yang di-Pertua, saya menyokong.

Question put, and agreed to.

Bill accordingly read a second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House.

House immediately resolved into a Committee on the Bill.

itself Bill considered in Committee.

(Mr Speaker in the Chair) Clauses 1 and 2 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Bill reported without amendment: read the third time and passed.
MOTIONS THE CUSTOMS ORDINANCE, 1952 The Customs Duties (Amendment) (No.

9) Order, 1967 The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Finance (Tuan Ali bin Haji Ahmad): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move: That this House resolves that in accordance with the powers vested in it by virtue of sub-section (2) of section 10 of the Customs Ordinance, 1952, the Customs Duties (Amend ment) (No.

9) Order, 1967, which has been laid before the House as Statute Paper No.

86 of 1967 be confirmed.


Mr Speaker, Sir, the Order before the House implements the recommenda tions of the Tariff Advisory Board Report on tyres and tubes, and also reduces the present rate of duty on cement from $24 per ton to $12 per ton.

The level of duty on motor tyres and tubes had been increased from $1.40 to $1.80 per pound and on cycle tyres from 50 cents to $2.00 per tyre through out Malaysia.
These duties are imposed in order to give sufficient protection to local industries against overseas manu factures.

The reduction in import duty from $24 to $12 on cement is made after taking into consideration petitions by industry and other the construction 1595 22 JUNE 1967 1596 users of cement, who claim that as a result of the increase in the price of cement, their construction costs have increased with the general cost of living.

repercussion on Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move.


The Assistant Minister of Education (Tuan Lee Siok Yew): Sir, I beg to second the motion.

Br Tan Chee Khoon: Mr Speaker, Sir, may I seek a clarification from the Honourable Minister of Commerce and Industry with regard to cement?

I am grateful that, I believe, it was on the advice of the Tariff Advisory Board that he has lowered the tariff from $24 to $12 per ton.
In view of the fact that even with reduction of tariff the price of cement is not enough, will he consider lowering the tariff more, so as to make it more competitive, and to make the manu facturers of cement to see the way and the light?

is very high—it The Minister of Commerce and Industry (Dr Lim Swee Aun): Mr Speaker, Sir, the Government will ensure there will be no over- protection of any factory, particularly those who exploit the consumers as a result of the protection.
that Question put, and agreed to.

Resolved, That this House resolves that in accordance with the powers vested in it by virtue of sub-section (2) of section 10 of the Customs Ordinance, 1952, the Customs Duties (Amend ment) (No.

9) Order, 1967, which has been laid before the House as Statute Paper No.

86 of 1967 be confirmed.

THE SABAH CUSTOMS ORDINANCE (CAP.

33) The Customs Duties (Sabah) (Amendment) (No.


9) Order, 1967 Tuan Ali bin Haji Ahmad: Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That this House resolves that in accordance with the powers vested in it by virtue of sub-section (3) of section 8 of the Sabah Customs Ordinance (Cap.

33), the Customs Duties (Sabah) (Amendment) (No.

9) Order, 1967, which has been laid before the House as Statute Paper No.

87 of 1967, be con firmed.

(Amendment) This Order is the same as the Cus toms Duties (No.
9) Order, 1967, for West Malaysia which has been confirmed by this House except that, in this case, it applies to Sabah.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move.

Tuan Lee Siok Yew: Sir, I beg to second the motion.

Question put, and agreed to.

Resolved, That this House resolves that in accordance with the powers vested in it by virtue of sub-section (3) of section 8 of the Sabah Customs Ordinance (Cap.

33), 1967, which has been laid before the House as Statute Paper No.

87 of 1967, be confirmed.


THE SARAWAK CUSTOMS ORDINANCE (CAP.

26) The Customs (Import and Export) Duties (Amendment) (No.

9) Order, 1967 Tuan Ali bin Haji Ahmad: Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move.

That this House resolves that in accordance with the powers vested in it by virtue of sub-section (3) of section 8 of the Sarawak Customs Ordinance (Cap.

26), Order, 1967, which has been laid before the House as Statute Paper No.

88 of 1967 be confirmed.


Sir, this Order is the same as the Customs Duties (Amendment) (No.

9) Order, 1967, for West Malaysia which has been confirmed by this House except that in this case it applies to Sarawak.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move.

Tuan Lee Siok Yew: Sir, I beg to second the motion.

Question put, and agreed to.

Resolved, That this House resolves that in accordance with the powers vested in it by virtue of sub-section (3) of section 8 of the Sarawak Customs (Cap.
26) the Customs (Import and Export) Duties (Amendment) (No.

9) Order, 1967, which has been laid before the House as Statute Paper No.

88 of 1967 be con firmed.

Mr Speaker: The House is now adjourned sine die.

Adjourned at 12.15 a.m. on 23rd June, 1967.