LOCAL GOVERNMENT INTEGRATION (AMENDMENT NO. 2) BILL

Order for Second Reading read.

3.34 p.m.

The Minister for National Development (Mr Lim Kim San): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time."

Mr Speaker, Sir, the need for this Bill has arisen because of a number of deficiencies in the administration of Part II of the Local Government Integration Ordinance with reference to streets, particularly with regard to the wholly unsatisfactory position with regard to the making up of private streets in housing estates. The Bill will now afford a measure of protection particularly to future purchasers of houses in that they would have properly constructed access roads.

Firstly, let me deal with the question of public streets. Under existing provisions in the Local Government Integration Ordinance, the Director of Public Works may recover the cost of acquiring the land and the cost of construction when he has made up a new street. The amendment now proposed in clause 2 of the Bill will provide that, in addition to the making up of new streets, there should be powers to recover the costs in respect of the widening or improvement of a public street from frontagers. This is a necessary provision, as, in the past, the whole cost of such street works has been at public expense. It is reasonable that Government should be in a position to recover costs from owners who have obtained benefits from such works. This power will be discretionary and will be exercised only when owners have benefited, as it is not the intention that Government should recover costs of minor road widenings or improvements to public streets by the provision of footpaths, drains, and so on. The power will be exercised only in cases where road improvements have benefited frontagers as, for example, in the case of road deviations whereby tracts of land hitherto without means of approach have now proper access to a public street, arising from which an increment in land value accrues to the owners. It is therefore equitable that such owners should be called upon to bear a reasonable proportion of the costs of the road works.

There are provisions in this Bill, Mr Speaker, concerning private developers making up new streets. While private developers are required to submit street plans to the Director for approval, the existing law does not empower the Director to ensure that the street works actually constructed do, in fact, conform to the approved plans and specifications. Under the amendment in clause 3 of the Bill, it will now be incumbent on the person whose plan has been approved by the Director to construct the street in accordance with the plan approved. This will ensure that any road constructed will not be sub-standard and will not be unacceptable to the Public Works Department for taking over as a public street. Cases of applications to the Public Works Department for taking over of private roads in housing estates are not infrequent, and many had to be rejected on the grounds that they were below specifications. As a result, purchasers of houses in such private housing estates have genuine grounds for complaint, having been given to understand that the roads would be constructed to proper standards and would be taken over as public streets.

The new clause 5, Mr Speaker, Sir, will prohibit any person from commencing work on a new building having a frontage on a private street, until he has deposited an appropriate sum with the Director for the making up of such private street. This is to guarantee that the street works will be constructed according to approved plan. These are necessary powers to restrain unscrupulous developers who do not carry out their obligations to build the roads or will build only sub-standard roads to the detriment of the purchasers. The procedure for obtaining the deposit will be by way of a notice from the Director of Public Works determining the amount that is required for the execution of the street works and the date by which such works shall be completed. Any person who is aggrieved by such an order may, within ten days on receipt of the order, appeal to the Minister. In the event of street works not being commenced or executed satisfactorily, the Director may cause the street works to be carried out and the cost of such works shall be recovered from the deposit made. When the developer has completed the roads satisfactorily, a refund of the deposit will be made. There is also provision for a refund of deposit, when, owing to circumstances, a developer does not intend to proceed with the development and wishes to have his approval cancelled.

My Ministry has constantly received complaints that private streets have been made impassable or extensively damaged because of the development of housing estates. But under present law, the repair of these public streets can only be carried out at the expense of the owners of premises fronting or abutting such private streets. This is grossly unjust, as these owners are being called upon to pay for the repair of their private roads which have been rendered defective by the actions of persons or firms who are not frontagers, such as private contractors whose lorries cause damage to the foundations of private streets. Under the amendment proposed in clause 8 of the Bill, Mr Speaker, the Director may now serve notice to compel any person, firm or company who has caused the damage to repair such private streets. The Director may also serve notice to prohibit a person from making further use of a private street for the purpose of transporting building materials until a deposit has been made. This amount of deposit will depend on the cost which would have to be incurred to bring the road back into a usable condition.

The amendment proposed in clause 9 is consequential on the amendments proposed in clause 5. The Chief Building Surveyor will now be prohibited from approving the plan of a building unless the new provisions relating to access to a new street have been satisfied.

Sir, I beg to move.

Question proposed.

Inche Mohd. Ariff Bin Suradi (Kampong Kembangan): (In Malay): Mr Speaker, I support the amending Bill moved by the Minister for National Development on the grounds that with this amending Bill I am confident that the residents in kampongs, particularly in Kampong Kembangan, where there are factories and other small industries, will not be faced with difficulties due to roads and drains which have been damaged as a result of work carried out by contractors of such firms.

Mr Speaker, before elaborating further on this amending Bill, I would like to draw the attention of the Minister for National Development - and I would like an explanation from him - to clause 2 regarding the provision that the "Director may recover cost of new street or of widening, opening, - etc. of public street." If this is implemented, I believe that towkays, such as the M.C.A. towkays, owning brick houses, will have no financial difficulty. But what happens if this clause affects the semi-urban residents, especially those in the Kampong Kembangan area - Lorong Marican, Lorong Marzuki, Lorong Maideen, and other lorongs? In this area, the properties are owned by Malays who have inherited them and they are wage-earners whose incomes are barely enough to feed their families. And some of them are retired Government servants who have bought such properties with their gratuities. I think such frontagers, as I have referred to, will not be able to pay for the cost of widening the roads.

If my memory serves me right, Mr Speaker, Sir, the roads in Lorong Marican, Lorong Marzuki, Lorong Melayu, Jalan Masjid, and other lorongs have been included in the scheme of making up of new roads in the areas referred to under the Local Government Integration (Amendment) Bill, because the residents concerned are apprehensive. I am anxious to know whether the Government will proceed with such a scheme and whether the frontagers will be exempted from having to pay the cost of making up such roads.

Mr Speaker, I would like to explain my support of the amendments. I support them because this will ensure that the users of private roads will not damage the roads indiscriminately as mentioned in clause 8.

In Kampong Kembangan, Mr Speaker, it can be said that all the roads have been damaged by the lorries owned by contractors and timber merchants for the transportation of sand, and so on. The heavy loads of earth have resulted in the roads in this area being extensively damaged. When these roads cannot be used further, they use the by-roads. For this reason, all the roads in and around Kampong Kembangan are in a state of disrepair. When the Government steps in and repairs the roads the process starts again. The roads begin to be damaged, as in the case of Jalan Damai. In the Malay settlement in Jalan Eunos, the roads have been built by the Government for the benefit of the residents, but lorries owned by contractors use the roads for their transport ---

Mr Speaker: We are now on the general principles of the Bill. I think the Member is going too much into details. I have allowed him to go into details in order to make his point. But having made his point, I think he should leave the details now and get back to the principles of the Bill.

Inche Mohd. Ariff Bin Suradi: (In Malay): Mr Speaker, I am only attempting to put the Minister in the picture as to the state of disrepair of the roads in my area, which has been caused by lorries used by contractors. The residents are obliged to ask the Government to repair such roads for the use of the people. But when the roads have been repaired, they are again damaged. It means that the Government is forever incurring people's money on these roads. Also for this reason, Mr Speaker, there are many other roads which are in a similar state, like those which I have mentioned just now. Likewise, Jalan Tebu, Jalan Melayu, Jalan Ladang and other roads.

Another point, Mr Speaker, is this. I hope, after the Bill is passed, that the Minister concerned will see that the damaged roads are repaired for the benefit of the local residents.

Mr Speaker: The Minister in reply?

Mr Lim Kim San: Mr Speaker, I do not think I need spend much time in replying to this. The Member is supporting the principle of the Bill, and that is to prevent abuses by contractors who use private roads without consideration. As regards his suggestion that the Government should spend some more money in repairing roads, that will be looked into by the Urban and Rural Services Consultative Committee.

Question put, and agreed to.

Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole Assembly.

Assembly immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill -[Mr Lim Kim San].

Bill considered in Committee.

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

3.52 p.m.

The Chairman: No notice of amendments has been received. I will direct Members' attention to clause 1, where the passing of time has necessitated some amendments which will be effected as of course.

In page 1, line 5, to leave out "No. 2".

In page 1, line 5, to leave out "1964" and insert "1965".

As no amendments have been received, and unless Members wish to speak on any particular clause, I wish to take the Bill as a whole. Will Members indicate any particular clause they are interested in?

Hon. Members indicated dissent

The Chairman: Very well then. I shall take the Bill as a whole.

Clauses 1 to 10 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Bill reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed.