(This amendment also stood in the name of Dato Abdul Hamid.)

(9) That the sum to allocated for Head D58 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (7) of subhead 11.

(10) That the sum to be allocated for Head D58 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (6) of subhead 12.

(11) That the sum to be allocated for Head D58 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (7) of subhead 12.

The Chairman: Are they all connected?

Mr Ong Chang Sam: Yes, they are all connected.

The Chairman: Please move.

Mr Ong Chang Sam: (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head D58 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (1) of subhead 11.

Mr Speaker, Sir, we see that from the Development Plan of the Govern ment that only about 33 per cent of its provision has been used, particularly in respect of the P.W.D. where only some work has been done. The other point I want to raise is that the Minister for National Development must take note that all construction work, especially flood alleviation works, must be considered in respect of the interests of the people's livelihood. But the P. W. D. seems to be more concerned with air conditioners and air conditioning plants. But this is of minor importance. What we want is to give better benefits to more people.

7.30 p.m.

The Chairman: The Question is,

"That the sum to be allocated for Head D58 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (1) of subhead 11."

The debate on the general principle is, to range over item (3) of subhead 11, item (7) of subhead 11, item (6) of subhead 12, and item (7) of subhead 12. The general principle is that not enough of drainage work has been carried out.

Mr Low Por Tuck: (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I will use the same words. I say the same thing to the Minister concerned. That is to say, in the 1961 Budget, there was such a provision for this use, but the Government has not made use of it. For instance, there was $200,000 voted for certain items. For Geylang Serai, there was a provision of $800,000. At Circular Road, $20,000 has been provided for flood alleviation work. But then only $10,000 was spent. And this sum was spent only during the Hong Lim by-election. When the P.A.P. was defeated, the remaining work to the value of $15,000 was not carried out. It was cancelled. If I were to enumerate every item; then this would dishearten everybody, because this will only show that the Government has not done its work well.

The Chairman: It is all on the point that the Government has not enough of work. Dr Goh.

Dr Goh Keng Swee: Mr Speaker, Sir, the Member for Havelock was for nearly two years my Parliamentary Secretary.

Dr Lee Siew Choh: That is something!

Dr Goh Keng Swee: If he had, during his two years, bothered to learn the simple elements of financial procedure, he would not have drawn inferences from the Estimates in the way that he did. The fact that the whole of a certain vote has not been spent in that year is no indication at all about the state of completion of this particular work. For one thing, the financial accounts had not been closed at the time these Estimates were prepared. A lot of the figures entered there were very likely in the nature of estimates of what the vote condition would be by the end of the year. Before we could draw any inference from any particular development expenditure, we must take into account the amount revoted. I have gene to great lengths to explain that development expenditure is less easy to fore cast in advance than ordinary estimates, because the date of completion cannot be estimated so accurately in advance. It depends on how you deploy your engineers; how quickly tenders are put out; and how fast the work is completed. Sometimes work is held up because of the weather. Sometimes it is because the originating Ministries or departments put in last-minute changes in designs and so forth. Therefore, merely to draw an inference, as the Member for Havelock has been doing during the whole of the two days' debate on the Estimates, from the figure put in under the amount estimated to be spent in 1961, is completely erroneous. Anyone with a knowledge of the simple elements of financial procedure will know that the Member is just doing the wrong thing, a thing he would not have done if he had learnt his job properly when he was Parliamentary Secretary.

An hon. Member: That is right.

Mr Ong Chang Sam: I withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The Chairman: Dato Abdul Hamid is not here. Amendments* (8), (9), (10) and (11) are not being moved. Amendment (12)+, Mr Ong Chang Sam.

• See footnote at Cols. 2323-4.

+That the sum to be allocated for Head D58 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (3) of subhead 14.

Mr Ong Chang Sam: Sir, can I move amendments* (12) to (16)?

*Amendments (13) to (16), standing in the name of Mr Ong Chang Sam, read as follows

(13) That the sum to be allocated for Head D58 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (4) of subhead 14.

(14) That the sum to be allocated for Head D58 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (5) of subhead 14.

(The same amendment also stood in the name of Dato Abdul Hamid.)

(15) That the sum to be allocated for Head D58 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (6) of subhead 14.

(16) That the sum to be allocated for Head D58 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (7) of subhead 14.

The Chairman: Amendments (12) to (16). They are all on the question of flood alleviation. That seems to be convenient. Please move.

Mr Ong Chang Sam: (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head D58 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (3) of subhead 14.

Mr Speaker, Sir, these five items are all about flood alleviation schemes. In 1961 the Government asked the House to approve $3 million on these flood alleviation schemes. But the Government has only spent $1,400,000 on these schemes. Mr Speaker, Sir, the flood situation has become more and more serious in Singapore. At present we in Singapore have water rationing. But when there is a little rainfall many places are flooded. Perhaps when your car comes from Bukit Timah, it will not be able to pass certain areas because of the flood.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I think the Government must double its efforts to carry out these flood alleviation schemes, because if there are no such schemes there are many farmers and people whose property will be swept away by the floods. Therefore, I hope the Government will expedite its efforts this year to carry out this work so as to alleviate or stop the flooding, and thus prevent loss of property. Their livelihood will be protected and they will not suffer any loss.

The Chairman: The debate ranges over items (4), (5), (6) and (7). I see the Member for Queenstown has also given notice of an amendment+ on the whole of the subhead which also concerns flood alleviation.

• The amendment reads as follows:

That the sum to be allocated for Head D58 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 14.

Dr Lee Siew Choh: I will not be moving.

The Chairman: The Member will not be moving. Mr Tan Kia Gan, on the general question of flood alleviation.

Mr Tan Kia Gan: Sir, under subhead 14, flood alleviation, we see items on Bukit Timah Flood Alleviation? Schemes; Drainage of Catchment Areas, Singapore River and Sungei Ulu Pandan; Geylang Flood Alleviation Scheme: Geylang River - Concrete Lining; Radin Mas/Nelson Road Flood Alleviation Scheme. These are major flood alleviation schemes and mainly in the town area. When the Member for Choa Chu Kang talked about flood alleviation in the town areas, he mentioned farmers and other things. This has no connection with the farming areas. In fact, as far as the flood alleviation schemes are concerned, when , they are major schemes, plans have to be made. In the case of the Bukit Timah Flood Alleviation Scheme, as I mentioned just now, an alternative scheme has been devised. Under the new proposal, the water of the Bukit Timah Canal will be diverted. Instead of allowing it to come down to the city, it is now to be diverted at the 6½ milestone to the Ulu Pandan Canal.

Dr Lee Siew Choh: When will that be built?

Mr Tan Kia Gan: You can ask that question later on.

The Chairman: We have enough of questions.

Mr Tan Kia Gan: About the Geylang Flood Alleviation Scheme, we have met with some snap speakers. This area, in which a flood canal will be dug from a point south of Airport Road to Geylang Serai and connecting finally with Geylang River near Geylang Road, is a very congested area, and negotiations will have to take place to move out the settlers. It will take some time before the plan could be carried out.

There is another flood alleviation scheme in which we have to do some concrete lining of the Geylang River. Part of this has been finished and the other part will be done next year. In the Nelson Road/Radin Mas area, the first part of the scheme was completed in 1960. The second part of the work was started in April this year and will be completed in June next year.

Since the Government took office in 1959, it has been paying attention to flood alleviation, and in various areas flooding is a matter of the past. For instance, Sir, in the Kampong Bahru area two big canals have been dug, costing over $1 million. Work has been completed and flooding is no longer a curse there. In Orchard Road and Scotts Road, the flood alleviation scheme has been finalised and there is no longer any flooding. In certain parts of Geylang Serai or Geylang area and Aljunied, the flood alleviation scheme has been carried out and such areas are no longer flooded. I cannot see why Members opposite should worry about Government pursuing this subject. We will do all we can to accomplish this scheme.

Dr Lee Siew Choh: Can we ask the Minister when the flooding at Bukit Timah and along Dunearn Road will be alleviated?

The Chairman: Can the Minister for National Development answer that? Mr Minister for Finance, can you answer that?

7.45 p.m.

Dr Goh Keng Swee: I was wondering whether the Member for Queenstown has bought or is contemplating buying properties in this area. [Laughter]

The Chairman: Order. Time has expired. Does the Member for Choa Chu Kang require a vote?

Mr Ong Chang Sam: I withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The time allotted for Head D58 having expired, the following amendments were not proceeded with:

Mr Ong Chang Sam:

Mr Low Por Tuck:

That the sum to be allocated for Head D58 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 16.

Dato Abdul Hamid Bin Haji Jumat:

Inche Mohd. Ali Bin Alwi:

That the sum to be allocated for Head D58 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (1) of subhead 21.

Inche Mohd. Ali Bin Alwi:

That the sum to be allocated for Head D58 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (14) (ii) of subhead 21.

Dato Abdul Hamid Bin Haji Jumat:

Dr Thio Chan Bee:

That the sum to be allocated for Head D58 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (14) of subhead 21.

Dr Lee Siew Choh:

Dr Thio Chan Bee:

That the sum to be allocated for Head D58 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 21.

Mr Ong Chang Sam:

That the sum to be allocated for Head D58 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (1) of subhead 22.

Dr Lee Siew Choh:

Mr Ong Chang Sam:

That the sum to be allocated for Head D58 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (2) of subhead 22.

Mr Ong Chang Sam:

That the sum to be allocated for Head D58 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (4) of subhead 22.

That the sum to be allocated for Head D58 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (9) of subhead 22.

That the sum to be allocated for Head D58 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (14) of subhead 24.

That the sum to be allocated for Head D58 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (3) of subhead 25.

Mr Ong Chang Sam:

That the sum to be allocated for Head D58 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (1) of subhead 32.

That the sum to be allocated for Head D58 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 34.

Dr Lee Siew Choh:

Dr Thio Chan Bee:

That the sum to be allocated for Head D58 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 36.

Mr Ong Chang Sam:

That the sum to be allocated for Head D58 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 37.

That the sum to be allocated for Head D58 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 39.

Mr Ong Chang Sam:

Inche Ahmad Jabri Bin Mohammad Akib:

That the sum to be allocated for Head D58 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 40.

That the sum to be allocated for Head D58 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 41.

Mr Ong Chang Sam:

That the total sum to be allocated for Head D58 be reduced by $100.

The sum of $36,287,630 for Head D58 ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.

The Chairman: The remaining heads of expenditure in respect of which no amendment stands on the Order Paper are D23 Public Works, D31 State Advocate-General's Chambers, D37 Customs and Excise, D51 Defence Services and D59 Colonial Development and Welfare Schemes.

Question, "That the sums stated for those heads as they appear in the fourth column of the Summary of Expenditure on page 8 of Paper Cmd. 36 of 1961 stand part of the Development Estimates," put, and agreed to.

Question, "That the sum of $206,684,278 shall be supplied to the Government under the heads of expenditure for the public services shown in the Development Estimates contained in Paper Cmd. 36 of 1961," put, and agreed to.

Resolution to be reported.

Thereupon Mr SPEAKER left the Chair of the Committee and took the chair of the Assembly.

Dr Goh Keng Swee: Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to report that the Committee of Supply have come to certain resolutions.

Resolutions reported -

"(1) That the sum of $352,920,900 shall be supplied to the Government under the heads of expenditure for the public services shown in the Estimates contained in Paper Cmd. 35 of 1961." (13th December, 1961);

"(2) That the sum of $206,684,278 shall be supplied to the Government under the heads of expenditure for the public services shown in the Development Estimates contained in Paper Cmd. 36 of 1961.".

Dr Goh Keng Swee: Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Assembly doth agree with the Committee of Supply on the said resolution."

Question put, and agreed to.

Resolutions accordingly agreed to.