SINGAPORE IMPROVEMENT TRUST (ADVANCES FOR ERECTING LOW-COST HOUSES)

Mr T. M. Hart: Sir, I have His Excellency the Governor's authority to move,

That this Assembly approves the allocation of advances to the Singapore Improvement Trust up to but not exceeding the sum of one million dollars for the purpose of erecting low-cost houses for sale to members of the public subject to such conditions as the Minister for Local Government, Lands and Housing may from time to time impose; and that this Assembly further takes note that the Government proposes to guarantee repayment of one half of that part of any loan made by the Federal and Colonial Building Society, Ltd., in respect of any such houses which exceeds 80 per cent but does not exceed 90 per cent of the agreed valuation of the property which forms the security for such loan.

The object of introducing this motion is to give a full opportunity for explaining, and to obtain the Assembly's formal approval of, a scheme for the erection of low-cost houses for sale to members of the public. For some time, various proposals for a scheme of this nature have been under consideration. The Government is making every effort, through the agency of the Singapore Improvement Trust, to build as many houses and flats as possible for letting at low rents, but we consider it desirable that the opportunity should be given to members of the public in the lower income groups to buy their own homes. Many houses are now being built for sale in Singapore by private enterprise, but we consider that it is desirable to supplement these efforts by building small, well-planned houses as cheaply as is compatible with good construction, so that the benefits of home ownership may be extended as far down the lower income groups as possible.

It is therefore now proposed that the Singapore Improvement Trust, as the direct agent of Government in this matter, should be advanced funds up to a limit of $1 million at any time for building suitable types of cheap houses. This expenditure will be recouped when the houses are sold and the money used again for further building. These advances will therefore be in the nature of a revolving fund which, it is hoped, will enable a substantial number of houses to be built and sold.

A block of 68 houses in Queenstown, which the Singapore Improvement Trust has already built, will be taken over for sale under this scheme and plans for further building are being put in hand. I would emphasise that this scheme is entirely additional to the Trust's present and future programmes for building houses and flats for letting, and it is not intended that there should be any reduction in the tempo of building under those programmes on account of the introduction of this new scheme for building for home ownership.

I would also explain to hon. Members that it is not Government's intention to make any profit out of this scheme. Some small variations from the estimates will be inevitable, but the general principle will be that the purchase price should be the actual cost to Government. Taking one programme with another over a period, the advances which we make available under this scheme will be preserved intact, but with no accumulation on account of interest or profit for use in further schemes.

In preparing the scheme. Government has had to bear in mind that the maximum loan which building societies are normally prepared to offer on the security of an individual house and plot of land is only 80 per cent of their valuation. It was thought that to introduce a scheme whereby each purchaser had to lay down at least 20 per cent of the value of the house, would tend to restrict severely the number of people who could participate in the scheme. A special arrangement has therefore been made with the Federal and Colonial Building Society, Ltd., whereby under this scheme loans of up to 90 per cent of the agreed valuation may be made by that Society, so that in each case the individual purchaser will have to make a minimum deposit of only ten per cent of the valuation. It has been agreed with this Society that Government and the Society should share equally the additional risk which the Society will incur by making loans of up to 90 per cent of the valuation, instead of the present limit of 80 per cent. Government will therefore be guaranteeing the repayment to the Society of one-half of that part of any loan made by the Society under this scheme which exceeds 80 per cent but does not exceed 90 per cent of the agreed valuation. The Society has agreed to this joint guarantee for properties valued at $8,000 and below, but it should be noted that Government's intention is to build houses for sale at prices much lower than that limit.

I do not think I need take up Members' time further on this subject, and I will leave it to my hon. colleague the Minister for Local Government, Lands and Housing to explain further details of the scheme and to refer to the conditions which it is his intention to lay down. I will merely add that this scheme is essentially in the nature of an experiment. We do not know what the demand is likely to be, but Government feels that it will be a very desirable step to afford facilities for home ownership to those sections of the community to whom they are not at present available. Sir, I beg to move.

The Minister for Local Government, Lands and Housing (Inche Abdul Hamid Bin Haji Jumat): Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise to second the motion. This Government, when it took office, announced that it was its intention to find ways and means of encouraging those in the lower income group to own their own homes. This scheme is the first step towards that end. The houses are to be sold at their real cost, due allowance being made for appropriate overheads. They will be offered to families with a joint income from all sources of not more than $400 a month. Preference will be given to wage-earners. The title to the houses will be a 99-year lease which will contain a limited restriction of assignment. This restriction is designed to prevent them from falling into the hands of speculative buyers. Amongst the restrictions which Government has in mind and which it most certainly will insist are:

(1) That houses are to be used for residential purposes by the owner occupier;

(2) Sub-leases shall not be assigned either in whole or in part without the written permission of the Singapore Improvement Trust.

Mr Speaker, Sir, as the houses are sold, more houses will be built from the proceeds of the sale. With a fund of $1 million it will be possible to build approximately 200 houses each year. If this scheme meets with the success which we think it deserves, consideration will be given to the question of making a larger sum available for this purpose. I should like to repeat, however, what the Hon. the Financial Secretary has said just now, and that is this - it is Government's intention that this scheme should be supplementary to and not in any way in replacement of the existing S.I.T. building programme. While building for sale will, to some extent, help to conserve the capital resources of Government, the main object of the proposal is to foster a community of responsible home-owners, a community which will add to the strength and stability of the new Singapore which we are planning. I trust, Sir, that this is a motion which hon. Members from both sides of the House will be able to give their wholehearted support.

Question proposed.

Mr Lee Kuan Yew: Sir, on a point of information. The Minister has indicated that he expects 200 houses to be built. My arithmetic shows that if $1 million is divided by 200, the answer will be $5,000. He says 200 houses will be built each year as the loan gets repaid. Could we have more information, Sir.

(1) As to the type of houses being built and the cost; and

(2) As to how these 200 houses a year is arrived at out of this $1 million?

Inche Abdul Hamid Bin Haji Jumat: Mr Speaker, Sir, as to the type of houses which we intend to build, I should think the Singapore Improvement Trust will probably build the type of houses that are now being put up along Guillemard Road which, I understand, cost approximately between $4,000 and $5,000 each.

As for the revolving fund, I did say just now that, with a fund of $1 million, it is possible to build 200 houses a year. As a beginning, Sir, this will be so, but as loans are being given and houses are being bought by wage-earners, I anticipate that this figure will keep on increasing from year to year.

Mr Lee Kuan Yew: On a further point of information, Sir. If $1 million purchases 200 houses at $5,000 each, and they are bought by members of the public, then the following year the capital would not have come back to build another 200 houses. Could we have the position explained?

The Chief Minister: If it please you, Sir, the position is this. This is in pursuance of Government's policy to give interest-free loans to buy houses. We give the S.I.T. $1 million. It builds 200 houses. It sells them to people who go immediately to the Federal and Colonial Building Society and say, "We want to buy a house for $5,000. Will you loan us 90 per cent of it, which is $4,500? Here is $500." So the Society gives the $4,500 plus the $500 to the purchaser. The purchaser himself remains indebted to the Society, but the S.I.T. (which is already building in the meanwhile) gets its $1 million immediately on sale and that pays for the next 200 houses which it resells. Have I made myself clear, Sir?

Mr Lee Kuan Yew: As I understand it, Sir, $1 million is given to the S.I.T. The S.I.T. builds 200 houses at $5,000 each. 200 people come and buy the houses at $5,000 each. They each go across to the Federal and Colonial Building Society and put $500 down. Then they get $4,500 from the Society as a loan. The $500 deposit plus the $4,500 is thereupon sent back to the S.I.T. which builds another house. But the man who goes to the Society to get the $4,500 will have to pay interest on the $4,500. So where is this interest-free house?

The Chief Minister: Sir, the loan is interest-free to the S.I.T. to keep down the cost of the house, because if it costs $5,000 interest-free, then plus interest it may cost $5,500 or $6,000; so that part of the additional cost, Sir, is borne by Government by way of a hidden subsidy in that the loan is given to the S.I.T. free of charge. A man who has $5,000, Sir, can then go to the S.I.T. and buy this house which has been built on a loan free of interest and at a cost much lower or lower than it would have been if the S.I.T. had to borrow money at four per cent or more, as it does now. Therein lies the subsidy from the Government - an interest - free loan. We cannot pursue it further at this stage, Sir, and try to make mortgages interest free!

Mr Lee Kuan Yew: I hope the Chief Minister will forgive me, but do I understand that Government assistance in this matter lies in financing the S.I.T. to put up houses and selling them at cost?

The Chief Minister: Without interest.

Mr Lee Kuan Yew: Without interest. Then let us view it from the purchaser's point of view. I want to buy one of these low-cost houses and I go along to the S.I.T. and say, "I have $5,000." The S.I.T. say, "Here is a house which has cost us $5,000, including the land on 99-year lease plus the building on it." In fact, the Government subsidy is to this extent: that for the period between the time when the S.I.T. has paid for the building, and the time when it sells it and gets the money back from the Federal and Colonial Building Society, there is no interest charged.

I do not quite get the point, Sir. I do know one party that gets an advantage out of this, and that is the Federal and Colonial Building Society, because it is going to do a lot of profitable business. But from the buyer's point of view, what does he get out of the house which he could not have got from a good contractor? If we did not have building societies that were out to rook the public, somebody puts up a house worth $5,000 and says, "Here you are - $5,000 for it!"

The Chief Minister: Is it a question?

Mr Speaker: Order.

Mr Lee Kuan Yew: Information, Sir.

The Chief Minister: Oh, information!

Mr Speaker: Order, order. I think we are getting just a little beyond our depth. I would suggest that the hon. Member makes his speech, puts his point, and perhaps the Minister will reply later on.

Mr Lee Kuan Yew: I am at this disadvantage, Sir, in that I am unable to criticise the scheme unless I understand it. Of course, I am better informed now. At first I was under the misapprehension that the Government was buying these houses, building 200 every year, and selling them out of this capital of $1 million. Now we have been roughly informed how this thing operates, but I would like to know what is the advantage. The Chief Minister has said that the advantage is that there is no interest charged to the S.I.T. As far as I can see, the interest would run from the moment the building is completed and materials and labour paid for until the moment when it is sold and the money obtained. Is that not a very short period of time?

The Chief Minister: Just once more, Sir, and if my hon. Friend cannot understand it, I will leave it at that. The subsidy from Government is two-fold. First, there is a normal subsidy to the S.I.T. in clearing the sites and giving certain allocations per acre in respect of all sites on which the S.I.T. builds. That is the normal subsidy in respect of all S.I.T. buildings. But the second subsidy is this - that in the normal course, whether it is the S.I.T. or a contractor, to start building, capital will have to be produced and that capital carries interest. The S.I.T. would, in the normal course, pay interest at market rates, six per cent or more, from the moment it starts building - not from the moment the building is finished - until it sells it.

In this case, Sir, the loan is intended to continue and we hope to give further loans, so that if this experiment is a success, there will be more than 200 houses built and sold to the public. The purchaser benefits from:

(1) absence of the additional cost of the charge of interest from a normal contractor;

(2) absence from the profits of a normal contractor; and

(3) the normal subsidy of Government to the S.I.T.

Mr Lee Kuan Yew: May I have elucidation from the Chief Minister with reference to the normal subsidy to the S.I.T.?

The Chief Minister: Sir, in the normal course, the Singapore Improvement Trust building schemes are subsidised in respect of all costs of preparing and laying out a site in excess of $25,000 per acre. I understand from the latest scheme that that subsidy amounts to some $7 millions out of the total cost of the buildings of $21 millions or $23 millions. The cost of lay-out is normally very considerable, but I am informed by my colleague that I am under a misapprehension about this and I do apologise and wish to clarify it, Sir. It seems that where we are selling at cost under this scheme, there will be no subsidy.

Mr Lee Kuan Yew: Who charges the cost of building?

The Chief Minister: We charge.

Mr Lim Koon Teck: Mr Speaker, Sir, I think the misunderstanding occurred because of the use of the phrase "interest-free" by the Chief Minister. In this case, I do not think the idea of the public and his idea coincide at all. An interest-free loan to buy a house means that the purchaser gets it free of interest; but this morning's exposition by the Chief Minister would imply that only the interest on that million dollars which is sought to be loaned to the S.I.T should be waived.

To my mind then, the advantages accruing to the purchasers of these low-cost houses are these: the saving of this interest; no profit by the S.I.T.; cheaper construction by the S.I.T. because of the facilities they have and the big numbers they are producing.

Now, coming to this motion, our Party welcomes this measure.

The Chief Minister: Hear, hear!

Mr Lee Kuan Yew: You are starting a loan society?

Mr Speaker: Order, order.

Mr Lim Keen Teck: My motives are always subject to suspicion by the P.A.P.!

The Chief Minister: Not the only one!

Mr Lim Koon Teck: We have always advocated housing for the lower income groups, particularly when we can help people who are earning a few hundred dollars a month to have a stake in the country and free themselves from the restlessness of certain members whom the Member for Tanjong Pagar represents. As long as four years ago, I advocated in the Press the sale of Singapore Improvement Trust houses and flats already built to the public, because I pointed out that the requirement of 10,000 units per year, which would involve a commitment of $50 millions by Government, could not be undertaken; and more so today in conjunction with the efforts we are trying to make to create more industries and give better working conditions to the underprivileged people.

We can now see that people who are well off can build their own houses; people with moderate incomes are being provided for by the housing societies; and it is only those people in the low income group who must be subsidised to a certain extent by this Government. Although it is a small effort - it will only involve 200 houses - nevertheless, it is a very welcome one.

The only thing that has been worrying us is that we do not have enough information, and this morning's debate clearly illustrates that possibly a White Paper should have been produced before this House. We could have studied it and we could have saved at least ten minutes of our time trying to find out what type of houses are being provided for and under what conditions they are to be sold. I have to point out that we have to be very careful how these houses are going to be allocated. There are only 200 of them and there may be complaints of favouritism; so I would advisedly point out to Government that it is much better to let us have everything clear-cut. As this is, to my mind, an extremely urgent matter, I am not proposing an adjournment. I hope that this motion will be passed today so that we can straightaway go and dispose of these 200 houses. But at a later stage, when another loan is asked for, I do hope that all the points will be given to us in a White Paper and we can then study the whole question without having to spend so much time in this House.

Another point that raises a doubt in my mind is the second part of the motion which asks this Assembly to "note that the Government proposes to guarantee repayment of one half of that part of any loan made by the Federal and Colonial Building Society, Ltd., in respect of any such houses which exceeds 80 per cent but does not exceed 90 per cent of the agreed valuation." I am always averse to Government committing itself to any guarantees, and it would appear that a guarantee of this nature might also affect any other private concern which would try to build for people in this income group. But on reflection, I feel that, because the amount involved and the risk incurred is so small, and the advantages that it would give to the purchaser are so great, I am prepared to waive that objection. I do hope that the Federal and Colonial Building Society and other loan societies would take all this into consideration and give the same concession as they have agreed to do now.

With these thoughts, Sir, and so as not to delay the lower income group from getting these houses as soon as possible, I hope Members will approve this motion today, and I am quite confident that a White Paper will be produced in the future for our guidance.

Mr M. P. D. Nair: Sir, the Government indeed is to be congratulated on this magnificent scheme which is now placed before the House. In the previous Legislative Council I have many a time argued that most of the people in Singapore do not own their homes and that it is highly desirable that such a step should be taken. I hope today that the people who will be benefited by this scheme are the wage-earners. These people have been paying rent all the time and they have never had any incentive to own their own homes. I hope and believe that the wage-earning class of Singapore will take advantage of this scheme and let the Government 'stump up' more and more money for a scheme of this kind.

I would not like to comment on those aspects which deal with the Federal and Colonial Building Society and the interest-free loan at this time, because comments may be forthcoming after the first sale of these houses built by the S.I.T. I hope that that experiment will give a lot of knowledge and experience to both the Government and the Singapore Improvement Trust, so that any complaints arising out of the first sale will be corrected in due course.

I am only sorry that this scheme has been delayed a little bit by both the Singapore Improvement Trust and the Government. As far as I am aware, it was unavoidable. There was no intention at all in delaying this scheme. Sir, I heartily endorse this motion.

Mr Lee Kuan Yew: Mr Speaker, Sir, I think we are all grateful to the Government Ministers - three of them - for taking about half an hour to explain to us their scheme.

The Chief Minister: It shows how clever you are!

Mr Lee Kuan Yew: I am indebted to the Chief Minister, Sir, for his complimentary remark. However I think he should realise by now that I am impervious to silly criticism from those for whose intellectual capacity I have the greatest wonderment but no desire to emulate.

Sir, what we are being told today is that a mountain has produced a mouse. We were told, once upon a time, that this island was going to be turned into a property-owning democracy and one of the ways in which the Government was going to do it was to build houses and make everybody petty bourgeoisie. Everybody was going to get a $5,000 house, and the Government was going to do it in a big way - interest free. You buy as you pay your rent.

Now it turns out that the two advantages that a purchaser gets from buying one of these Government subsidised houses, instead of buying somebody else's house, is,

(1) That interest is not charged for the time in which capital has been expended and before sale.

(2) No profit is being made by the S.I.T.

I take it that the S.I.T. would compute in the cost its administrative expenses? It would! So, the situation now is that the S.I.T. does not charge a profit for its entrepreneuring effort. As I understand it from the Hon. the Minister for Local Government, Lands and Housing, in terms of dollars and cents, it would amount to $500 to $600. Sir, assuming that the S.I.T. is an economical and efficient builder, one would, by buying an S.I.T.-built house, saves about $600 and the sort of profits which associates of the Member for Serangoon in their building enterprises would add on. But if the S.I.T. is not efficient and competitive in costs, then it may well be that no advantage at all would be gained by buying an S.I.T. house. However, for the purposes of my argument, I will assume that the S.I.T. is as efficient as any other builder, perhaps even more efficient so that there is some advantage. On that basis, I congratulate the Government for working out a very cheap scheme which will help about 200 people to house themselves each year, provided they are able to earn not less than $400 a month. I have not worked it out mathematically, but, at a rough guess, I would say that a family must be prepared to pay not less than $120 a month towards repayment of that loan of $5,000.

Sir, it may be that this is one way to alleviate the housing situation in the middle income group, but it is no more than a mockery of a solution to the housing problem. We were told, when the Government took office, which they were going to investigate the problem of housing. They said they fully appreciated the tremendous pressure of our increasing population and the urgent need to clear the slums and build houses. We were told that there would be a Housing Authority to replace the Improvement Trust. We were told that this was one of the important targets of the Labour Front. We were told today by the Hon. the Financial Secretary that building by the S.I.T. for collection of rent will go on as it has always been going on. Sir, the housing problem will never be solved as long as building by the S.I.T. goes on in the way it has gone on over the past five, six or seven years, and so long as the only innovation introduced by the Government is a property-owning scheme which produces 200 houses for purchase on the instalment plan via the good services of the Federal and Colonial Building Society. I need not elaborate on what I have said before when I criticised the Budget. I would only remind the Government that time is running out, and in the very near future it will have to go back to the electorate and show results.

The Chief Minister: Let us do our own worrying.

Mr Lee Kuan Yew: Sir, if others did the worrying of the Chief Minister for him, and he were able to get rid of some of his worries, he would today be a much happier man.

The Chief Minister: What arrogance!

Mr Lee Kuan Yew: What humility. One feels that perhaps the Chief Minister is somewhat over-wrought by the difficulties confronting him. But if he does not put his back to the wheel, if the housing problem is not solved, then his Government will fail dismally. It has made grandiose promises. It has the capacity to fulfil a great part of them. It has the power. It can raise taxation. But it threw away $19 millions on tobacco. And all it can do is to produce $1 million interest-free to help finance that part of the housing programme from building to sale.

We support this motion because a drop in the ocean is better than none, but we would like to take this opportunity to remind the Government that this is not the way in which the housing problem can be resolved. Whilst it may be possible to get 200, maybe 300, maybe even 500 middle income group workers to buy houses on the hire-purchase system a year, that is not the way in which the housing problem can conceivably be resolved. The housing problem is more acute in the lower income bracket. It is the man who earns $150 a month and who has got to find a roof under which to live who must be looked after. If the Labour Front Government does not look after him, then he will seek other governments whose promises he can trust. That may be one of the solutions. That is a point the Chief Minister does not really understand, does not really appreciate. All he says periodically is - thank God we have not had it for the last two days - "this lovely island of ours" - an island full of slums, poverty and disease!

The Chief Minister: If it please you, Mr Speaker, Sir, the P.A.P. has a now well-established reputation and capacity for reducing everything they touch to a condition of slime. This is not a Government scheme to meet the housing problem. It is a pilot scheme to attack one aspect. It is a pilot scheme which, even at its fullest expansion, can touch but a small aspect of our housing problem, but it is a step in the right direction in respect of that aspect of the housing problem. It is not the exclusive remedy that Government is producing. The P.A.P. are quite unable to let a right action for the welfare of some part of our population go past unless they can take the credit for it - that same credit that the Member for Tanjong Pagar sought to take this morning in respect of the question of broadcasting and television. Where he cannot take the credit, Sir, he seeks to pour ridicule.

Now, Sir, let us get the facts straight. This scheme is not for those who can earn a minimum of $400 a month. It is for those who are earning a maximum of $400. There is a distinction which neither the Communists nor the P.A.P. are at times able to understand, but there is a distinction which I hope other Members will understand.

Sir, the loan is not interest-free - just a few dollars. I would like the House to recognise this fact - that this one million dollars is not going to come back to Government for a long, long time. The housing problem, on that part, is going to remain with us for decades. If this scheme is successful, Sir, other loans must and will follow in order to encourage the purchase of houses by this group earning between $200 and $400 and who can afford this type of housing. The money on these loans is not coming back to Government, and each year Government is losing interest on the money loaned out.

Mr Lee Kuan Yew: How much is it? The Chief Minister: It is about 4� per cent on the open market.

Mr Lee Kuan Yew: $4,000, is it?

The Chief Minister: That is P.A.P. arithmetic!

Mr Lee Kuan Yew: $40,000 a year.

Mr Speaker: Order, please.

The Chief Minister: This will be every year, and this will continue for years because we are not getting back our money next year, nor in two years unless, of course, by a special resolution in Council or a special decision of Government, the loan is recalled. This is a revolving loan which is going to remain with the S.I.T. and is going to remain free.

I am happy that the Member for Paya Lebar (Mr Lim Koon Teck) drew attention to the question of a Government guarantee. I will confess that originally I did not care for it, but the point is this. There are many people who are unable to afford $1,000 as a deposit, and this Building Society would not lend more than 80 per cent. Nor would any Society that we could contact lend more than 80 per cent of the valuation. So, in order to encourage a larger loan to facilitate purchase by those who are unable to place a deposit of more than $500, we have agreed to this guarantee which, as has been rightly pointed out, Sir, does not involve us in an unknown liability. The liability as known is not excessive.

I notice the jibe, Sir, that we are supporting one private corporation. Again, Sir, I must confess that I was not particularly happy, but when the factors are investigated there seems to be no other organisation prepared to give us equal or better facilities. Nor is Government in a position - it is not advisable at the present moment, but it could if it wanted to - to set up an organisation to deal with these loans. It may be that if the scheme is, in fact, as successful as we hope it will be, then other steps will be taken.

Sir, we have come to this House in the last two days seeking to tackle, step by step, our housing problem. Yesterday, I think it was, my friend and colleague the Minister for Local Government, Lands and Housing indicated that we were reducing the interest on all loans to the Singapore Improvement Trust. All loans, Sir, which at present carry three and four per cent, we are reducing to two per cent. It will cost us $1 million this year and it will cost the country progressively more each year. Apart from the question of the study at the present moment of special legislation in order to enable the sale of S.I.T. flats and building to the public, so that Government can carry out its own policy - and in this connection I am happy to note that we have at least the Member for Paya Lebar with us - we are awaiting the establishment of a Housing Authority which will, we hope, be an independent Authority, with full Government financial support, in order to implement our housing plan which will be presented to this House before it is introduced.

Mr Lim Choon Mong: Mr Speaker, Sir, the scheme that has just been presented to this House is a timely one. In Singapore, Sir, there are many private builders but most of them want only one thing - and that is profit. It is not profitable for private builders to build houses below $5,000.

Mr Lee Kuan Yew: Did you ask your friend about that?

Mr Speaker: Order.

Mr Lim Choon Mong: With this scheme, I would say the advantage to the small man is that he is now not asked to stake a sum that he will never be able to save. He will be able to get a house that is within his means. A worker, Sir, who earns a small sum of money usually, finds that it is difficult to save. It is difficult for him to save money on his own, but with the arrangement of loans as set out, it is possible for him to do some sort of forced saving, such as joining a "tontine". He puts aside $30 or $40 a month and, at the end, realises a large sum.

This experiment, Sir, I hope, will be a good one but I know that there are many factors that may mar its success. If we talk about people in the low income group, there are many people who can come within this category. It would be very difficult indeed to say who should or should not be given first choice of a house. What I would like this scheme to achieve is to see that it benefits the people while at the same time we should not hear of too many complaints.

Mr Speaker: Mr Hart, in reply?

Mr T. M. Hart: Mr Speaker, Sir, perhaps the main attraction of my present job is that when I go swimming in the political sea and appear to get into difficulties, my colleagues are quick to organise a rescue squad to extricate me from my predicament! Sir, I now find myself in the happy position of having had every question - very legitimate questions I think - put in the course of this debate already answered for me by my colleagues!

Question put, and agreed to.

Resolved,

That this Assembly approves the allocation of advances to the Singapore Improvement Trust up to but not exceeding the sum of one million dollars for the purpose of erecting low-cost houses for sale to members of the public subject to such conditions as the Minister for Local Government, Lands and Housing may from time to time impose; and that this Assembly further takes note that the Government proposes to guarantee repayment of one half of that part of any loan made by the Federal and Colonial Building Society, Ltd., in respect of any such houses which exceeds 80 per cent but does not exceed 90 per cent of the agreed valuation of the property which forms the security for such loan.

Mr Speaker: It is an appropriate time to suspend. I will take the Chair again at 2.30 p.m.

Sitting accordingly suspended at 12.14 p.m. until 2.30 p.m. Sitting resumed at 2.30 p.m.