ESTIMATES OF EXPENDITURE FOR 1966

Order read for consideration in Committee of Supply [2nd Allotted Day].

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

2.34 p.m.

The Chairman: We are now on Head 0702 - Hospitals Division. Amendment No. (1) standing in the name of Mr Teong Eng Siong.

Head 0702 -

Mr Teong Eng Siong (Sembawang): (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 0702 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1051.

Mr Speaker, in the field of medical services, our country has won general acclaim. The Government has spent $40 million to look after the health and medical services for the people. Clinics have been built to look after the people's health. In spite of the smallness of our country, our health services can be said to be on par with the standard obtainable in any other country. For this, I have to thank the Minister for Health and our Government for their able leadership. But there is nothing perfect in all respects. Therefore, I have to comment somewhat on the drawbacks and shortcomings of the General Hospital.

The General Hospital has been set up for quite a long time. It has an important place in Singapore's medical history. It has set up an exemplary record in medical service. Nevertheless, I have received several complaints from members of the public about the General Hospital. Firstly, I would like to give an example. In my constituency, there is a spinster 60 years old who cannot see beyond several yards. She went for treatment at the General Hospital. But the officer-in-charge of the Eye Clinic there did not treat her eye disease and did not give any reasons. So this lady was very frustrated and came to see me. I sent her with a letter to see the Medical Officer-in-charge on the 6th of December. He recorded her particulars, including her name and address, and asked her to go back, telling her that she would be called when necessary. As far as I understand, the lady, after three weeks, has not been called back for any attention. Sir, I would like the Minister concerned to see whether there is such an incident, and I would like to know what is the reason for this happening.

Secondly, in respect of doctors and nurses, they do not promptly deal with emergency cases. Of course, I understand there are lots of sick people going to the General Hospital to seek treatment, and I understand the doctors and nurses are overworked. But in emergency or acute cases, doctors and nurses seem not to have acted promptly in dealing with them. Sometimes patients suffering from appendicitis have had to wait for two or three hours, and this delay might have been fatal to them. So I urge the hospital authorities to be more concerned with these emergency cases and act promptly when they arise.

Thirdly, concerning the attitude of some nurses in the General Hospital. Many members of the public have complained that the nurses have not been courteous enough when dealing with patients. Sometimes they have been contemptuous. So I hope the authorities concerned will look into this matter. I hope such incidents have been very rare, and that there will not be any more of these to destroy the good reputation of our medical institutions. The staff should be taught courtesy and to be kind and tender-hearted especially when dealing with patients.

Mr Speaker, I understand the Ministry of Health has been conducting a nurse-training course. Apart from giving nurses medical training, they should also be given courtesy training so that they may treat members of the public well, especially the patients.

The Minister for Health (Mr Yong Nyuk Lin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I believe the Member for Sembawang has three sets of complaints to make against the Ministry of Health. I would like to take them in the order in which they have been presented.

The first complaint, in one particular case, is that there was a 60-year old woman who had an eye complaint and who did not receive any attention when she went to the Opthalmic Department of the General Hospital; and when the complainant saw the Member for Sembawang about this, he gave her a letter of introduction which was duly considered by the people in charge, taken note of, and she was asked to go back and she would be told when to appear again at the hospital. But up till now - it is three weeks since he wrote the letter of introduction - there has been no news requesting her to turn up at the hospital for attention. I want to say that I myself do get similar requests for letters of introduction to see this doctor or that surgeon and I have to tell them that although I personally may be the Minister for Health, I am not a Doctor of Medicine and I am not in a position to give any letters of introduction. So I think my good friend the Member for Sembawang has taken upon himself quite a lot by issuing letters of introduction addressed to the doctors in the hospital. The proper procedure would be to advise the patient, or whoever is not feeling too well, to first see a doctor, who would then be in a position to diagnose the complaint.

2.45 p.m.

After examining the condition of the patient, this particular doctor would then give a letter - what is known as a letter of referral; that is to say, a general practitioner refers a patient to a specialist, who would then attend on him. So I hope in future instances, my hon. friend from Sembawang would do better to follow this line of routine rather than issue letters of introduction addressed to various officials of my Ministry. However, if he will be good enough to let me know the name of this particular patient, the 60-year old woman, I will try to assist him in this respect, to make sure that she gets some attention, but this does not go for all other cases in future.

His second complaint is that many patients in the General Hospital have to wait a long time before receiving attention. I am afraid he is not so particular in this complaint in that he makes a very general statement. It is very difficult to try to follow it up, and I would prefer if he could give me specific instances of so-called delays encountered by patients before they received attention. I must, however, state that it is more than one and a half years ago, since August 1964, that the Outpatient Dispensary of the General Hospital was closed down. In its place, there is a 24-hour Emergency Unit in the General Hospital to deal with serious emergencies or with cases where people have been involved in motor accidents. Ever since that time, I have been given to understand that all such cases have been promptly look after, and many of those who have had occasion to go to this emergency unit have indicated how pleased they were that the reorganisation has now given them more efficient and quicker service than was available hitherto.

If it is the case of an emergency patient having to wait for a long time for a doctor to examine his case, I would appreciate it if the Member for Sembawang would indicate the patient concerned and the day on which this incident happened, so that I can then follow it up, rather than making just a complaint that people have to wait for a long time to see a doctor and just stopping there. I am afraid I am not in a position to follow up on a general complaint of that nature.

As for the third complaint about the attitude of some nurses - I am glad that he says some nurses but not all nurses - who may appear to be somewhat ill-mannered and show a lack of patience with some of those who are ill, I think it is almost impossible to expect a hundred per cent of all nurses to be very well-mannered and full of patience all the time. Here again I do not think it would be fair to make just a general statement without giving specific instances of bad, ill-mannered treatment of patients in hospitals. It is almost impossible to defend against such a complaint. But in regard to the remarks of the Member that perhaps in the School of Nursing there should be established a courtesy course, I believe this is a matter which the hon. Member for Moulmein has already raised some time ago, namely, that perhaps we should institute a courtesy course for our nurses. This is part and parcel of the general training of nurses, and I do not think it is necessary to have a specific courtesy course for nurses in general. They are expected to treat everyone with courtesy, more so towards those who are ill and who would really need not only their attention but also normal courtesy which one citizen would extend to another.

I hope I have been able to answer all the three points raised by the hon. Member for Sembawang. Should he have occasion to have complaints, I would appreciate it if he could direct them to me personally, giving more information than he has given.

Mr Teong Eng Siong: (In Mandarin): I thank the Minister for Health for giving me a detailed reply. Just now I did not accuse all the nurses. I just mentioned that there were some occasions of that nature. I was not generalising, otherwise the good name of the medical services would be adversely affected. If the Minister wants the names, I have a list already prepared for him. I can give him this list of names.

The Chairman: Does the Member wish to proceed with his amendment or does he wish to withdraw it?

Mr Teong Eng Siong: (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker. I would like to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The following amendment stood in the name of Mr Sim Boon Woo ---

That the sum to be allocated for Head 0702 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1611.*

The Chairman: Amendment No. (2) * standing in the name of Mr Sim Boon Woo.

Mr Sim Boon Woo: I am not moving my amendment.

The Chairman: The Member is not moving.

Inche Mohd. Ariff Bin Suradi (Kampong Kembangan): (In Malay): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 0702 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1650.

Mr Speaker, Sir, assistant nursing is a profession which requires the necessary education, training and skill. Quite a number of our girls who have qualifications higher than the minimum necessary for assistant nurses prefer to go for other jobs rather than apply as assistant nurses. The reason is that they have to undergo training for not less than two years, and they have to pass an examination. Once they are accepted into the medical service, they have to go on shift duties. There are times when they have to be awake the whole night until morning. There are times when they have to work while others have their day off on public holidays. However that may be, there is a sufficient number of our girls who wish to work in the hospitals in order to give assistance to members of the public who require medical attention, by joining the service as assistant nurses. The spirit of these girls who do want to join as assistant nurses is dampened by the existence of the new government system - this applies to pupil assistant nurses - whereby those who passed their examination after their training have to reapply in order to become assistant nurses and serve in the hospitals. Those who are selected will continue to serve as assistant nurses and those who are not selected will be victimised. They cannot work in private clinics because they have qualifications only as assistant nurses, and private clinics do not employ assistant nurses. I do not know whether there are nurses and midwives who, after having passed their examination, are required to reapply. If the conditions of employing the nurses and midwives are the same as assistant nurses, and those who are not selected can work in private clinics, and so also the midwives can work in private clinics, or become private certified midwives, then their time and training would not have been wasted. These assistant nurses cannot work as private assistant nurses. The only place where they can work is in the hospital. Therefore, I hope the Minister concerned will see to it that the system whereby assistant nurses have to reapply in order that they can be taken on as assistant nurses will be abolished. This will enable those who have passed their examination to work straightaway as assistant nurses, because they have had training for not less than two years. Otherwise they will merely be victims of circumstances, and it would not be possible for them to earn their living by working elsewhere in a private capacity. Two years of their time would thus have been wasted. I hope the Minister for Health will see to it that the assistant nurses who have passed their examination will be accepted rightaway to serve as assistant nurses in the hospitals.

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: Mr Speaker, Sir, I think the Member for Kampong Kembangan is raising the question of some assistant nurses who are now in the Tan Tock Seng Hospital over their recruitment policy, which has shown a slight change as compared with previous years. There is no question at all regarding the value of assistant nurses in our hospital service. When opening the School for Assistant Nurses in Thomson Road Hospital some months back, I had occasion to pay tribute to the assistant nursing service which has become one of the pillars of our hospital service in assisting staff nurses to run our hospitals. There is a shortage of trained nurses as well as trained assistant nurses in our hospitals, and this will be so for quite some time.

3.00 p.m.

But unfortunately, owing to the fact that a number of approved posts in the hospitals for assistant nurses would appear to be a little less than the number of pupils in the School of Nursing, it was necessary in the middle of this year (that is to say, in July), for a tripartite discussion to be held between the Public Service Commission, the Treasury, and the Ministry of Health, to ensure that by next year, 1966-7, a situation will not arise where there are less posts than there are numbers of trained assistant nurses who have graduated; in other words, we will be having trained assistant nurses and not having posts for them. Therefore, it has been decided that the few batches of assistant nurses that will graduate this year will be informed that it would be necessary for them to go through a selection exercise by the Public Service Commission. It was not necessary to do so in the past because there were more approved posts than there were trained assistant nurses. So it was actually a case of the Public Service Commission having waived the requirements of a selection exercise after graduation. Hence, there was a little unhappiness amongst assistant nurses in Tan Tock Seng Hospital, that there has been a change in the terms of service. So I would like to assure those who have graduated this year from the School of Nursing as assistant nurses, that there should be no difficulty in placing them on the permanent establishment, but this is a precautionary measure being taken by the officials so as not to have a situation whereby they find themselves caught, as it were, with more trained nurses than there are established posts approved by Treasury.

Next, I would like to say that the question of nurses in our hospital service is a matter that is receiving attention by the Nursing Board. This is a question of reviewing the whole position of staffing of nurses in our hospitals. A memorandum is already in preparation and it will be studied by the Ministry during the course of the next few months. It is hoped that when this matter is finally considered, a situation like that which has recently taken place in Tan Tock Seng Hospital will not have to take place at all.

Inche Mohd. Ariff: (In Malay): Mr Speaker, Sir, I wish to thank the Minister for the assurances he has given - that the assistant nurses who have graduated this year will not face any difficulty in being taken into the hospital service. But I would ask him what is the position regarding assistant nurses who graduate in the years to come?

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: I have said that for the present those who are trained have every possibility of being confirmed in permanent employment, but that the position must be reviewed for next year, 1966-67. This is a matter under study and it will be too early for me to make a pronouncement now.

Inche Mohd. Ariff: (In Malay): Mr Speaker, I beg leave to withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Mr S. V. Lingam (Aljunied): Mr Speaker, Sir, may I have your permission to move the two amendments (4)* and (5) + together?

+Amendments (5) reads as follows:

That the sum to be allocated for Head 0702 to be reduced by $10 in respect of item 8 of subhead 2551.

The Chairman: The Member will move amendment (4) , and then speak on both amendments.

Mr Lingam: Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 0702 be reduced by $10 in respect of item 5 of subhead 2401.*

Sir, the people of Singapore do not only get free medicine but they also get free Rediffusion music. May I know whether the Minister will consider installing T.V. services for all children in all the wards?

The Chairman: In speaking on this amendment, Members may also speak on item 8 of subhead 2551.

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: Mr Speaker, Sir, I do not think it is correct to say that people are given free music, because everything has got to be paid for. Even in music, whether it is Rediffusion or Radio music, the set has got to be installed at some cost. I do agree that it is nice to be able to provide musical entertainment - whether over Rediffusion or Radio - to cheer up the sick and especially little children.

As for T.V. sets, they are fairly costly. So far, we have been able to install T.V. sets through private donations. Certain wards in certain hospitals have T.V. sets installed through the kindness and excellent social spirit of either certain individuals or charitable organisations. I hope this spirit can be continued and also that the Member for Aljunied would make a move by donating one T.V. set so that others may follow! Otherwise I may have to work very hard with our Hon. Minister for Finance to get him to grant more money. We would like to grant all available services, but it is a question of economy and finance. Since an excellent example has already been set by many kind individuals and organisations donating such sets, I do look forward to the Member for Aljunied making a move.

Mr Lingam: Mr Speaker, Sir, before I can make a move, I want to know whether the Minister can move first or not!

The Chairman: I believe the Minister says he wants the Minister for Finance to move first. Does the Member wish to proceed or withdraw?

Mr Lingam: I beg to withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Mr Lingam: Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 0702 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 2656.

Mr Speaker, Sir, this is for information only. What I want to know under this item is this - are these patients from Singapore, and are there no facilities for them in our hospitals?

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: Mr Speaker, Sir, this provision is for the reimbursement of a number of leper patients who were originally from Singapore but later were sent to the Malaysian leper settlements of Sungei Buloh and Pulau Jerejak. There are places available in our leper settlement known as Trafalgar Home. In fact, unlike other hospitals, we are in the fortunate position of having accommodation for more than a thousand patients suffering from leprosy, but at the moment there are less than 600 patients receiving attention.

At the moment the number in Sungei Buloh is around 24. Leprosy is a condition which could take a number of years to cure, so that many of the patients are practically permanently settled down there. It would be quite a difficult matter to bring them back to Singapore, although we could handle the situation if they were here. So it is probably better to allow them to continue settling there and we reimburse the cost for these patients.

At the same time, I would like to say that in Trafalgar Home we have 18 patients who are from Malaysia. So it is really like there are just as many Malaysian patients in Singapore as there are Singapore patients in Malaysia. We feel that perhaps the position could be left as it is without much disturbance of the patients, rather than withdraw them from Sungei Buloh and forcibly put them into our Trafalgar Home.

Mr Lingam: I beg to withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The following amendment stood in the name of Mr P. Govindaswamy -

That the total sum to be allocated for Head 0702 be reduced by $100.

Mr P. Govindaswamy (Anson): (In Tamil): I am not moving.

The sum of $43,625,820 for Head 0702 ordered to stand part of the Estimates.

Head 0703 -

Mr Ng Kah Ting (Punggol): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 0703 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1001.

Sir, I do not know whether the Hon. the Member for Health is aware of the mosquito nuisance that is rampant, I believe, not only in my constituency but also in others as well. I do not know whether strong measures have been taken to eradicate such nuisance. Almost every night, for myself, I have got to get up several times to beat off these mosquitoes.

The other fact is the question of flies. It seems to me that this nuisance is also on the increase. I wish to know from the Hon. Minister for Health what measures his Ministry will take to eradicate such nuisances in respect of mosquitoes and flies.

Sir, I beg to move.

3.30 p.m.

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: Mr Speaker, Sir, regarding these two complaints, the fly and the mosquito nuisances, I think it is not a question of my Ministry not being aware of their existence so much as what steps are to be taken to put a stop to them, and these have been unfortunately allowed to deteriorate for quite some years.

As indicated previously in this debate, in the Appendix to His Excellency's Speech, an indication was given that for the coming year, there will be a reorganisation of the Environmental health services which will include Public Cleansing, Hawkers and the Anti-mosquito services. The mosquito nuisance is somewhat correlated to a number of other factors besides just dealing with mosquitoes by our so-called Anti-Malarial Department. If public cleansing is defective - and unfortunately it is to a great extent - this will bring about considerable piles of refuse not being taken away and dealt with, and such refuse will block drains and, therefore, there will be stagnant water which will ultimately bring about mosquito-breeding and hence the numerous hordes of mosquitoes which worry not only the Member for Punggol but also many residents on this island.

I have already indicated that there will be licensing of the 40,000 to 50,000 hawkers during the coming year, and that will be the first step in the control of hawkers which will, of course, affect the reorganisation of the public cleansing services. And when this is tackled, it will somewhat reduce the mosquito nuisance, because we will then be able to clear away stagnant pools of water now collecting in numerous drains throughout the city.

But I would like to deal with the mosquito nuisance particularly, as the tendency up to the present for the last 40 to 50 years has been to tackle the mosquito problem as an anti-malarial measure, which is correct, because as far back as 50 years ago - 1910 to be exact - there used to be tens of thousands of malarial cases with over 2,000 deaths each year from malaria. And then an Anti-Mosquito Ordinance was passed which brought about concerted action against the anopheles mosquito which was responsible for malaria. Over a period of years, malaria became controlled in Singapore and the cases of malaria began to drop considerably. But during the Japanese occupation - the years 1941-1945 - the anti-malarial measures collapsed and again by 1945, we came back to the 1910 situation where over 2,000 people died from malaria. Steps were again taken to put our anti-malarial measures back to their original footing, and it was only in 1952 that we went back to the pre-war control of malaria. So all this while, we have had more or less been concentrating on anti-malarial measures. They have been fairly effective, but unfortunately, with the considerable urban development within the city area and less attention being paid to the construction of subsoil drainage and open drains for the carriage of drainage water, we are beginning to have the mosquito nuisance because of the collection of stagnant pools of water. And I am afraid also that since May 1963 there have been some difficulties with the workers in the Anti-Malarial Department who refuse to cut grass if they are oilers. They insist on division of labour. For example, an anti-malarial oiler who distributes oil over surfaces of water in the past used to cut grass every sixth day, but unfortunately they now say that they want something extra for cutting grass, and there has been some difficulty in agreeing to this request of division of labour. So for the forthcoming year there will be a re-organisation to put this matter right. Also mosquitoes are no longer a nuisance when they just bite people, because we are beginning to find that the so-called mosquito nuisance is no longer a nuisance. There are a number of other types of diseases appearing, like filariasis, more commonly known as elephantiasis, caused by mosquitoes biting individuals and there is encephalitis (inflammation of the brain) and hemorrhagic fever (that is bleeding into the skin and organs) - all caused as a result of mosquito bites. We are getting something like a hundred cases per year. So because of these new trends arising out of mosquito bites, it has been decided to make malaria what is known as a notifiable disease, that is to say, if a person has malaria, which is confirmed by taking a blood slide, it becomes obligatory of the doctor to notify the Ministry of Health. We shall be bringing out a new Bill to be called the Destruction of Mosquito Act so that we will be able to have the legislative authority to deal rather strongly with people who are breeding mosquitoes probably very innocently in their gardens by putting out shanghai jars for collecting rainwater for their gardens, but at the same time for breeding mosquitoes, and they may all the time be complaining why there are mosquitoes in their houses when they are themselves helping mosquitoes to breed. There will also be created a new Anti-Mosquito Control Unit. As I have said, in the past, the tendency has always been on anti-malarial work - but now we shall call it the Anti-Mosquito Control Unit - to cover anti-malaria and other diseases caused by mosquitoes. We have been fairly successful in controlling the T.B. problems by establishing an Anti-T.B. Control Unit. So we intend very soon to establish what is known as the Anti-Mosquito Control Unit to co-ordinate the activities of the Anti-Mosquito Department, and to cover the whole island. We hope that within a few years the so-called mosquito nuisance will be gradually reduced and Singapore will be mosquito-free as far as possible. We can say that Singapore has been free of malaria for a number of years, but we are really right in the heart of a very malarious region, which includes Indonesia and our next-door neighbour, Malaysia. Every year we have a few hundred cases of malaria recorded in Singapore but they are all cases that are imported into Singapore and none indigenous to Singapore, although last year at the Foo Yong Estate in Bukit Timah we had a local outbreak of malaria which resulted in 29 cases of confirmed malaria, and this occurred in what is known as a controlled area; that is to say, although we had taken anti-malarial measures, yet there was a small outbreak of malaria. Therefore, all this while, we have to maintain a very vigilant attitude towards the mosquito problem. We have been reasonably successful for nearly 50 years in the control of malaria. But it is preferable, now that there is such a large mosquito nuisance in Singapore, that we should take one further step in establishing a centralised unit to control it.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: Mr Speaker, Sir, I am fully satisfied with the Minister's assurance that urgent steps will be taken to destroy such nuisances.

Sir, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Inche Mohd. Ariff Bin Suradi: (In Malay): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the total sum to be allocated for Head 0703 be reduced by $l00. *

*The same amendment also stood in the names of Mr.Sim Boon Woo, Inche Rahamat bin Kenap, Mr. P. Govindaswamy and Mr. S. V. Lingam.

Mr Speaker, Sir, just now my colleague has spoken about the fly and mosquito nuisance. Kampong Kembangan is not free from it. It is a low-lying area and the fly and mosquito nuisance is very widespread. However, the Minister has given an assurance to improve the situation.

There is another point which concerns rubbish in Kampong Kembangan. In this constituency, many of the roads are kampong roads and the labourers dump their rubbish at one place where the rubbish bins are placed. But the Public Health Division does not send its garbage lorries to collect the rubbish on the ground that the roads are narrow. Therefore, the labourers are forced to burn the rubbish there, but when it rains, it cannot be burnt. Further rubbish is dumped there as the days go by. In those kampongs where the people rear poultry, if the rubbish is not removed, the poultry scatter the rubbish.

So I ask the Minister to give consideration to provide a small lorry or a jeep which can go over the kampong roads for the collection and disposal of rubbish which has been collected from house to house and dumped by the labourers. I believe that, in this way, the drains will be kept in a better condition and that the sanitary condition of the surrounding area will not be neglected. I hope consideration will be given by the Minister for Health to providing a jeep for the collection of rubbish which is dumped there.

3.30 p.m.

Mr Sim Boon Woo (Changi): Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to associate myself with the hon. Member for Punggol and the Member for Kampong Kembangan for the same complaint that I wish to lodge in this House. Sir, no one can deny that the health facilities in our country are one of the best in South-East Asia, for the cleanliness of roads and so on. Sir, owing to the increase in the population of our country, I would like to take this opportunity to draw the attention of the Minister to the fact that not only in my constituency, but also in many other constituencies, there is a great need for additional labourers to clean kampong roads, to remove rubbish and to clean drains, etc. This not only applies to our main island, but also applies to pulaus, the Southern Islands, Pulau Tekong and Pulau Ubin in my constituency. If we can recruit more of these labourers, I think we can look after the cleanliness of the kampongs much better.

Sir, another point which the hon. Member for Punggol has mentioned just now is about mosquito breeding in the rural areas. I too support his complaint. I would suggest that the Minister step up the anti-mosquito measures so that the Ministry can concentrate more in the rural areas rather than in town areas, because mosquitoes usually breed in rural areas where we get pig sties, poultry, pot-holes and ponds in the rural areas. Therefore, I urge the Ministry concerned to take more measures especially in the rural areas and the pulaus in Singapore. Sir, I beg to move.

Inche Rahamat Bin Kenap (Geylang Serai): (In Malay): Mr Speaker, just now my colleagues have discussed the subject of mosquitoes and rubbish. I also wish to draw the attention of the Ministry concerned to the fact that the administration of health facilities in the rural areas is far from satisfactory. I wish to quote an example in my constituency, Geylang Serai. The rubbish in rubbish bins is not removed by the Health Division for as long as three days or four days, and sometimes for even one week. This rubbish dumping and stench from the rubbish will affect the health of members of the public. There are places in congested areas where no rubbish bins are provided, and this results in the residents throwing rubbish indiscriminately. I have had occasion to inform the health officers in Katong about the state of affairs there. I personally visited the area with a health inspector from Katong, after which he informed me that lorries cannot go into the roads in Geylang Serai as the roads are narrow. As this matter is known to the Health Ministry, I hope it will be remedied as early as possible.

There are drains which are not serviced by the Anti-Malarial Department. I would like to know where the fault lies, and whether this Department has adequate employees or otherwise. I hope the Anti-Malarial Department will get rid of this nuisance. I feel that the pumping of anti-malarial oil should be done for all drains in the kampongs.

Regarding the market at Geylang Serai, the Markets and Hawkers Department has allocated one stall to two persons - one a night stall and the other, a day stall. The area of the stall itself is very small indeed. It can accommodate only one table and there is no room for stools and tables. What is more regrettable is that when the day-time stall-holder finishes his work, he has to remove his utensils and equipment. The night-hawker does likewise. Both the night and day stall-holders sell for limited hours and they have to use their transport to remove their utensils. I have received petitions from such stall-holders saying that their profits are insufficient to cover the rentals of the stalls. For this reason, they find it hard to make both ends meet. Hence, they give up their stalls and hawk by the roadside. We will find that it is so in Geylang Serai where they can hawk for unlimited hours rather than sell in the stalls provided by the Markets and Hawkers Department. I hope the Ministry concerned will be flexible in the allocation of stalls. This will be a great relief to hawkers to find a means of living. I believe if this can be overcome, the Geylang Serai market will be a boon to the hawkers there.

Mr P. Govindaswamy (Anson): (In Tamil): Mr Speaker, Sir, my colleagues who spoke before me were unanimous about one thing. They gave an adequate explanation of the health conditions in our State. I wish to add a bit to that. For example, in big streets one does not find much rubbish. This rubbish is gathered in one corner and taken away in vans. If one goes there in the evening, one sees a big rubbish dump. The next morning too, one finds the same rubbish dump there. The Minister for Health is fully aware of what the consequences will be if this rubbish is left there. If one takes Tanjong Pagar Road for example, there are stalls along the roadside. Even then the place is clean in the morning. But at five or six, there is a lot of rubbish in the centre of the road. We want those who visit Singapore to speak highly of it. If they were to see this rubbish, they would be very much ashamed of it and we should feel disgraced. We would like others to come and say that Singapore streets are clean and well-kept, but this rubbish is a setback for us. We shall be insulted as a result of this rubbish. There are smaller streets as well, I remember one thing. During the colonial days, all rubbish was swept up, kept in dumps and taken away. But nowadays I do not see this happening. I do not know whether the Cleansing Department employees are sweeping up the rubbish at all. If you go to the small streets, you can see for yourself, Mr Speaker, Sir, what happens to this rubbish. Even the people who live in those streets are not the least bothered about it. If such is the state of things, what will happen to the health of this State? We must know how to remove rubbish and how to get rid of all the dirt and filth. I feel that all the Members of this Parliament should volunteer to go and sweep the streets on a Sunday and set an example to the people of Singapore. Further, Mr Speaker, Sir, in Narcis Street, there are no rubbish bins available. In Wallich Street, there are rubbish bins. Those hawkers who ply along these roads go and dump their rubbish in one particular place. If proper bins are available, then the rubbish can be dumped into these bins.

The Ministry of Health has said that mosquitoes breed in water. But I beg to disagree. Mosquitoes breed on rubbish. There are plenty of mosquitoes all over. I do not know where they come from. There are even mosquitoes in running water. One wonders where they come from. In Thomson Road, there was a case where a child died as a result of mosquito bites. Therefore, I request the Minister for Health to consider this matter carefully. I do not wish to elaborate very much on this because my colleagues have spoken on it.

The Chairman: Mr Lingam? Mr Lingam is not speaking. Any other Member who wishes to speak on mosquitoes and flies?

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: Mr Speaker, Sir, I can fully understand the number of Back-benchers who have been descending on me and my Ministry over these nuisances.

3.45 p.m.

It has taken me some time to get down to the real problem of attempting to resolve public health measures that have unfortunately been allowed to deteriorate, not over a period of one or two years, but perhaps over a period of seven years. It is true that the matter could be resolved by employing more workers. But I think that would only be just attempting to evade the issue, because with the best of organisation and the best of equipment, unless there is a reasonably efficient working force, then all our plans can go wrong. And to have a reasonably efficient force - I am not asking for a highly efficient force but a reasonably efficient force - there has got to be normal discipline, and that is utterly lacking. It is impossible to run any department or organisation if the absenteeism which has to be faced fluctuates from three per cent to something like 15 per cent. As a result, you can never tell how many workers are going to turn up for work. That has been so for the last seven years. Absenteeism is at its lowest - three to five per cent of the whole working force - on Sundays when there is double pay, and on public holidays when there is treble pay. And when it is normal pay on Mondays, absenteeism is 15 per cent. Just how can any organisation work on such a basis? So I have not asked for the filling of vacancies in such a situation because it is a ridiculous situation. Had we filled the vacancies, the position would have got from bad to worse, because it would have continued to be run on that basis.

I am, however, happy to say that after long discussions and negotiations, a new disciplinary code has been drawn up dated 21st October, 1965, only two months ago, by the Government, through the Ministry, the Treasury, with the Public Daily-Rated Employees' Union Federation. It is only two months since the new disciplinary code has been effective, and now steps are being taken to pull up recalcitrant workers who have been taking advantage of the former disciplinary code which was wholly ineffectual. Things are beginning to improve, and it is now possible to consider the recruitment of more workers who would then be able to provide a reasonably efficient work force. So I can assure the Back-benchers that the new year will see an improvement in the public health services of Singapore; but like everything else, it will take some time before it can be truly effective. I hope this time next year it will be possible to report a much happier situation and a general improvement in the public health standards by way of fewer mosquitoes, fewer flies and less rubbish all round, whether in busy roads, in hawker congregations or side streets. But I do not think it is enough just to say that I have waited for two years to get this new disciplinary code put into effect.

Steps have also been taken since October of this year to create what is known as an Emergency Cleansing Corps which, at the moment, has 200 workers. They are used in two shifts at various localities which require what is known as a task force to clear up piles of refuse in hawker congregations and markets. As an example, I will give some indication of the work that is being done. Let me take 15th December, which is just an ordinary daily report which I receive for this Emergency Cleansing Corps of 200 workers, which we intend to increase to 400 within the next few months, and on to 600 thereafter. They work in two shifts; from 6 a.m, to 1.50 p.m., that is, ten minutes to two o'clock, and from 11.30 in the morning to 7.20 p.m. in the evening. The places that they go to work, which might be of interest to Members of the House, are as follows: Kelantan Lane, Jalan Besar, Queensway, Jalan Bukit Merah, Paya Lebar Road for desilting of drains. Most of our drains are being used unfortunately by the public as if they are just refuse dumps. They just throw things into the drains, unfortunately. And then for the maintenance of drains in New Bridge Road, Bukit Timah Road, Hoi How Road, Syed Alwi Road, Waterloo Street, Dorset Road, Sims Avenue. That is the A.M. shift.

For the P.M. shift, they go to the hawker congregations, like the one at Narcis Street. On 15th of December, the places that were tackled by our task force were the Kandang Kerbau market area, Syed Alwi Road (big drain), Hock Lim Street, High Street, Queen Street, Beach Lane, New Market Road, China Street, Pagoda Street and Smith Street junction, Narcis Street, Tai Thong Crescent, Idris Road, Lorong 25A, Lorong Tahar. Every day this task force of 200 workers is sent out specially to clean up refuse dumps which are known to accumulate over a day, and it goes round the island to ensure that there is better cleansing than hitherto. This particular force will be doubled to 400 within a month or so, and trebled to 600 in another few months' time. So it is hoped that by this method and by further recruitment of workers for public cleansing and in the anti-mosquito department and so on, we will be able to ensure, over the new year, some improvement. I hope to see in a matter of two years considerable improvement in the public health situation.

I do not think I need go further into the other comments of the hon. Members because they are all related. Hawkers, public cleansing, mosquitoes - all have to do with public health, and standards unfortunately have come down. Partly to blame for this, I think, would be the poor efficiency of the work force. But now that a new disciplinary code has been put into effect, I expect a great improvement in the working efficiency of our workers and that we can now think in terms of increasing the number of workers on a new basis, and, therefore, in a position to make an effective re-organisation of our services.

Inche Mohd. Ariff Bin Suradi: (In Malay): Just now the Minister for Health has explained that the emergency task force works only in the urban areas. Can he explain in this House if this emergency cleansing corps will work in the rural areas, like Kampong Kembangan and other places?

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: I am sorry if, in answer to the problem, I appear to have concentrated on the city areas. But naturally what takes place in the city will affect the rural areas, because we are looking at Singapore as a whole. May I just say that, to give an example of the size of the problem involved, say, for refuse, in any one day we are now collecting and disposing of nearly 600 tons of refuse, of which over 400 tons would be within the city area. The rural areas would be 130 tons. The task force deals with about 40 to 50 tons of refuse. That is the situation. We are really trying to tackle the big problem in the city area, where a huge pile of refuse can be seen to be there; whereas in the rural areas there is less refuse and it is also possible, as my hon. Friend, the Member for Changi has said, for the residents there to bury the rubbish within their compound. There is ample land to do so. But it is not possible to bury refuse in the city area; one could not dig up a hole, for example, in the concrete road to bury the rubbish. But it is possible for farmers to dispose of their own rubbish by burning - I am glad some refuse is being burnt rather than just being left alone to rot and to attract flies. So the problem of disposal of refuse in the rural area, in our view, is less urgent than that in the built-up area.

I think at this stage I might as well answer the hon. Member for Anson when he says that he does not think mosquitoes come out from water but that they come out from refuse. It is true that if tins collect some water in them after rain or a shower - there is a little bit of water in the tins - that will be suitable for the breeding of mosquitoes. So mosquitoes can come out from tins. But there is really water in the tin before the mosquitoes can breed.

Inche Mohd. Ariff Bin Suradi: (In Malay): I beg to withdraw.

The Chairman: Inche Mohd. Ariff is withdrawing. Mr Sim Boon Woo, do you wish to withdraw?

Mr Sim Boon Woo: I wish to withdraw.

Inche Rahamat Bin Kenap: (In Malay): Mr Speaker, the explanation has been about rubbish and mosquitoes. But there has been no explanation about markets, Mr Speaker.

4.00 p.m.

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: I am sorry if I have left out replying to the complaints of the hon. Member for Geylang Serai. I believe his complaint was that, in the allocation of stalls for the Geylang Serai market, they were given to day-hawkers and separate stalls were given to night-hawkers and, therefore, they were unable to make a decent living. Unfortunately, when this huge market was built in Geylang Serai, there were more hawkers registered for stalls than there were stalls in the market. So in order not to disappoint the hawkers, it was decided to make everybody happy by giving each hawker a stall, whether it is for day or night, instead of allowing one hawker to enjoy the facilities of a stall for day and night. That was how it arose, and there was some dissatisfaction over this division.

Then unfortunately the two racial riots broke out, and, I think, all the market stallholders who were allocated stalls decided to move out. That unfortunately is the situation. We have a brand new market erected at great cost - I think over $400,000 - but it is practically empty, which is a sad state of affairs.

So it is better to tackle the hawker problem not just for Geylang Serai but for the whole of Singapore. The problem is, first, to license all hawkers, and, second, after licensing them, to try to control them and get them into markets, whether built by Government at a considerable cost of a few hundred thousand dollars apiece, or to encourage them to go even into private markets built for that purpose. The private markets, like Government markets, are half-empty. And it may even be necessary to encourage hawkers to do their businesses inside shophouses and not to hawk in the streets, because Singapore is fast growing into a large city of two million, if not more, people. There are over a hundred thousand cars in the streets. In course of time, I think hawkers should not be doing their businesses in the streets. They should be getting into shophouses to do their businesses properly.

That is to be the general trend, Sir. That would be part and parcel of the new hawkers' code when it is announced. I hope that when it is implemented, we may be well on the road to having gradual control of the hawker situation.

Inche Rahamat: (In Malay): I beg leave to withdraw.

Mr Govindaswamy: (In Tamil): I did not say that mosquitoes do not breed in water. I said that they also breed in rubbish. I am not well up to date in scientific knowledge or in health knowledge. All that I said ---

Mr Lingam: I beg to withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The sum of $28,861,090 for Head 0703 ordered to stand part of the Estimates.

Head 0801 -

Mr Lingam: Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 0801 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 3023.

Mr Speaker, Sir, may I know from the Minister for Finance to whom these Malaysia scholarships are given?

The Minister for Finance (Mr Lim Kim San): Mr Speaker, Sir, Singapore is a member of the Colombo Plan Technical Co-operation Scheme and, as such, is both a recipient and a donor country. During the last few years we have been spending annually a sum of $160,000 to enable deserving candidates from surrounding countries, especially countries like Cambodia, Thailand and Ceylon, to receive special training in Singapore, particularly with regard to port administration and housing. We also allow these candidates to join our institutes of higher learning, like the University of Singapore and Nanyang University.

Now, all member countries of the Colombo Plan, including Sabah and Sarawak, are eligible to benefit from Singapore as a donor country, but unfortunately both Sabah and Sarawak will have to compete on equal terms for allocations made by Singapore. I think it was our desire, and still is our desire, to give special treatment to Sabah and Sarawak. Therefore, in 1961 - July, I think - our Minister for Education announced on behalf of the Government of Singapore at the 8th Regional Conference of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association (Malaya/Borneo Group) which was held in Singapore in 1961 that, as part of Singapore's concrete gesture to assist the advancement of the Borneo territories, Singapore is placing a special vote in order to give candidates from Sabah and Sarawak special concession so as to enable them to take advantage of the special training which we can offer here.

Though we are now separated from Malaysia, it is still our intention to help those two sister States, and therefore a sum of $100,000 has been entered in the vote for next year so as to enable students from Sabah and Sarawak to come here and take advantage of the training facilities that we have.

Mr Lingam: Sir, I withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Mr Govindaswamy: (In Tamil): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the total sum to be allocated for Head 0801 be reduced by $100.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the lower income group of civil servants, that is, the Division IV civil servants, do not have quarters. Only very few people enjoy this privilege. Most of the Division IV employees are in the lower income group. There are statutory board employees who are given quarters. So I hope that Division IV employees of Government will also get these facilities. If there are not enough Government quarters for Division IV employees, they should be given S.I.T. flats - Housing Board flats.

Mr Lim Kim San: Mr Speaker, Sir, I do not know whether the translation was a literal translation of what the Member for Anson said, when I heard over the loudspeaker the term "S.I.T. flats". There is now no such body as the "S.I.T." It is defunct, dead. In its place there is the Housing and Development Board.

I think I should tell the House that it is the policy of the Government not only to house civil servants whose salaries are in the lower income brackets, but it is also the intention of the Government to house as many of the underprivileged citizens in the lower income group of the whole of Singapore. That is the reason why we have embarked on such a large housing programme.

If I understand the Member for Anson correctly, what he is asking for is that all Division IV employees should be housed. Mr Speaker, Sir, in one of the Sessions of the Assembly sometime ago, I think a question was asked by the Member for Moulmein and the answer given to her was that about 79 per cent of the P.W.D. staff and 33 per cent of the staff in the Health Department are provided with quarters. Now, this percentage is much more than the number of people, in the lower income group in Singapore, who are provided with houses. In spite of the completion of 51,000 units of housing during the last five years by the Government, and an additional 12,000 units this year, about only 26 per cent of the people of Singapore are housed. Therefore, compared with the general population, the group of employees who are in the lower income bracket are better treated in the matter of housing than the rest of the population of Singapore.

Actually there are about 18,000 Division IV employees in the civil service and about 9,500 Division IV quarters, institutional or otherwise. Therefore, more than half of them are being housed. Our duty is to see that every section of the population does get the same treatment. About 50 per cent, taking an average, of Division IV employees are being housed; they are being given quarters which are heavily subsidised, much more than those belonging to the Housing and Development Board.

While on this matter, Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to emphasise the point brought up by the Member for Delta a few days ago, and that is that Government is not making any money at all in providing the public with Housing Board houses. The rental charged, as you know, Mr Speaker, Sir, is $20 for a one-room unit, $40 for a two-room unit, and $60 for a three-room unit, excluding service charges. Now, this is insufficient to amortise the capital that is put in as well as the maintenance of these houses, and every year Government is out of pocket. So for those people who are in Housing Board houses, there is already an element of subsidy.

4.15 p.m.

For Government to adopt the suggestion made by the Member for Anson just now, that if there are insufficient Government quarters for Division IV employees, then they should be given Housing Board quarters, there is nothing now at this very moment to prevent Division IV employees from applying for Housing Board quarters so long as they pay the same rents that are paid by the public. For his information, if he will look up the Development Estimates, there is a provision of $1.5 million next year for the building of some more quarters for Division IV employees. So all in all, compared with the other sections of the population, Division IV employees are well catered for in the matter of housing.

Mr Govindaswamy: (In Tamil): I am very happy to hear that, and so I withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The sum of $45,136,710 for Head 0801 ordered to stand part of the Estimates.

Head 0804 -

The following amendment stood in the name of Mr S. V. Lingam ---

That the sum to be allocated for Head 0804 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 2482.

Mr Lingam: I am not moving.

The sum of $7,109,510 for Head 0804 ordered to stand part of the Estimates.

Head 0807 -

The following amendment stood in the name of Mr Ng Kah Ting ---

That the sum to be allocated for Head 0807 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1003.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: I am not moving, Mr Speaker, Sir.

Inche Mahmud Awang (Kampong Kapor): (In Malay): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 0807 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1191.

Mr Speaker, in this appointment, we still cannot harmonise the law with the fines in the regulations concerning change of address by people who have radio licences if the licensees move out. The explanation regarding change of address was not satisfactory to the people and there was a lot of unhappiness. I support the wish of the Minister for Finance, and it is the hope of the Government, as well as the hope of the people, that as far as this section is concerned, it would be defeated if we could not harmonise law and fines and if this section was not improved. For example, Mr Speaker, A buys a radio and takes out a radio licence. He is of the opinion that he has got a licence and he would not go against the law if he were to stay in another place before the expiry of the licence, because there is nothing on the licence which says that he would be punished if he did not change his address. I believe there are regulations and by-laws in regard to radio licensing. But these are not known to the public except to the radio inspectors. The wording on the radio licence is only in English, and information regarding change of address is also in English. The attention of the owner of the licence is not drawn to the fact that if he does not note the change of address where his radio has been installed, then he has committed an offence and he would be fined. Mr Speaker, there are people who know English who do not even realise this. What more for those people who do not know English? What action has been taken by the radio licence officers? When a radio licence officer discovers that the licensee has not changed his address he sends a compound notice for $40. This also is in English. The offence relating to change of address should be explained in four languages in the radio licence. And for the first time, he should be given one week's grace to change his address. If he still does not comply with this, only then should he be fined. The penalty for not having a radio licence should not be lighter than the penalty should a licensee not change his address.

Mr Lim Kim San: Mr Speaker, Sir, I think it is always the policy of Government to temper justice with mercy. I am glad that the Member for Kampong Kapor has brought up this complaint, because though I have a radio licence and a T.V. licence, I have never taken trouble to find out whether they are written in four languages or one, and I will make it a point to investigate the complaint that he has made with regard to fines for not changing the address. I quite agree with him that probably there is not enough publicity given to this matter, and I will see to it that the Ministry of Culture give enough publicity to this so that there will be no misunderstanding of the rules and regulations which govern the issue of licences. That is all I can say for the moment, Mr Speaker.

Inche Mahmud Awang: (In Malay): Mr Speaker, as a result of the explanation given, I withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 0807 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 3041.

Mr Speaker, Sir, regarding the re-numbering of houses, I wish to point out that in the rural constituencies like Punggol, there are many attap houses which were built more than 10 years ago - of course, these are unauthorised. With this national re-registration about to take place next year, the residents in these old attap houses without numbers would find difficulty in stating their address on the identity cards to be re-issued anew. What I would like to ask the Minister for Finance is whether such houses could be given numbers so that the residents thereof can also apply for social amenities such as water and electricity supplies.

Mr Lim Kim San: On a point of clarification, Sir.

The Chairman: Yes, Mr Minister.

Mr Lim Kim San: I just want to know whether the hon. Member is referring to numbering of houses or re-numbering of houses.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: Mr Speaker, Sir, it is in this light regarding the re-numbering of houses. I know for sure that in my area re-numbering teams are going about re-numbering houses, and that also there are houses without numbers. This is where I should like my request to be made to the Minister for Finance; Sir, if I could proceed along that line ---

The Chairman: Yes, carry on, you have made the point, Mr Ng.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: Thank you, Mr Speaker, Sir, I was just saying that national re-registration would be implemented next year. Many people will have to state clearly their addresses; but in my constituency there are quite a number of attap houses which were built more than 10 years ago and which are without house numbers. So in the process of re-numbering the numbered houses, I wonder whether the Minister for Finance would give due consideration to my request that such houses be numbered when our re-numbering of houses teams make their tours.

The Chairman: You mean the un-numbered houses?

Mr Ng Kah Ting: Unnumbered houses. I have pointed out the reasons; that the residents can clearly state their residential address and they can also apply for social amenities like water and electricity supplies which are available; and if they do not have house numbers, even though their houses were built more than 10 years ago, then they will not be able to obtain such facilities. This is the request I am making to the Minister for Finance.

Sir, I beg to move.

4.30 p.m.

Mr S. Rajoo (Farrer Park): Mr Speaker, Sir, I wish to associate myself with the views expressed by my colleague, the Member for Punggol. But I have a different matter to bring up. The Inland Revenue Department was collecting assessment from two different persons, two different sums of money, but under one house number. A certain person had an old attap house which was numbered by the Inland Revenue Department and he was paying assessment for a number of years ---

The Chairman: Mr Rajoo, I doubt very much if you are in order in raising the matter. But if the Minister for Finance does not object, you may proceed.

Mr Lim Kim San: I am interested in hearing what he has to say.

The Chairman: Please proceed.

Mr Rajoo: In the year 1962, he applied to the Planning Department and the Chief Building Surveyor for the repair and renovation of his house with zinc roof and plank partition. The Planning Department approved the repair under condition that the house may exist for one year only from the date of the permission being granted. This person is illiterate and he could not understand the implications of the condition. He renovated the house after submitting 13 sketch plans and site plans. True to the condition laid down, a year later the Planning Department sent a notice to the gentleman saying that the permission granted to his house expired on such and such a date, and if he still wished to retain the house, he must submit a further 13 sketch plans and site plans in order that the existence of the building be legalised. In the meantime, another citizen had applied for the erection of a zinc house on the same plot where the previous building was situated. Either the Planning Department or the Chief Building Surveyor must have approved this structure, because the irony of the fact is that this house was given the same number as that of the existing building and the assessment was collected by the Inland Revenue Department under two different names, but under one house number. A further shocking factor was that there was no condition attached to the second house, as was the case in the first one. In other words, the second house can remain for any number of years and the owner may not submit any further sketch plans or site plans. Sir, this case happened in the Woodlands area. If the Minister for Finance would care to look into it, I am prepared to give him full details. What one cannot understand is this. Why should there be different types of conditions laid down for different buildings erected on the same plot? If one house can remain without renewing the permit annually, why cannot the other house? Is there or is there not any device in the Inland Revenue Department to find out their own mistake when they are charging two different types of assessment under one house number? I understand these houses are now given two different numbers for the purposes of collecting assessment. But the folly of the permit and the difference in conditions still exist.

Mr Lim Kim San: Mr Speaker, Sir, to take the request from the Member for Punggol first. He is suggesting that I ignore completely the building by-laws and approve illegal structures by giving them numbers. I think, if I were to do that, then architects would be out of job and the whole of Singapore would be a slum area. If the residents are really keen to see that their houses get numbers, there is a way by which they can do that, and that is to send the plans of their houses to the Chief Building Surveyor and to see that the houses that they are building or they are staying in conform to the building by-laws.

With regard to the Member for Farrer Park, the matter he has raised does not rightly involve me. All I can say is that, as far as the Inland Revenue Department is concerned, I should congratulate them on collecting assessments from two persons on the same number. They are not wrong there. Probably the numbering is wrong. But there are two buildings there. Therefore, two people should pay assessment, and correctly so. If I may, Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to answer the point which he has brought up, and that is, why is it that there should be different conditions for two buildings which are on the same plot? What comes to my mind is this. Though the owner may have sent in 13, 14 or 15 sketch plans, none of them conformed to the building by-laws, and it is out of consideration for the owner, I think, that the Chief Building Surveyor allows him to retain the building for a year, during which he hopes that the owner would comply with the building by-laws requirements. As for the other case, I think the very first time the sketch plans of the building were sent in, probably they conformed to the building by-laws. That is why there are different conditions laid down.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: Mr Speaker, Sir, I think the Minister for Finance has missed my point. I did not imply in any way that the Minister for Finance should ignore the building by-laws. What I said was about the attap houses in my constituency and which were built more than ten years ago. I wondered why action was not taken earlier when they were built. I did not say that the houses were built one or two years ago. I believe - I am not sure if I am correct here - that under the Local Government Integration Ordinance, 1963, unauthorised houses, or illegal houses, as the Minister calls them, built before September 1963 - I am not very sure - could not be pulled down. That is the main reason why. More than ten years ago ---

The Chairman: That is not correct. Three years from date of discovery.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: Thank you, Mr Speaker. Many applications have passed through me at my "Meet-the-people" sessions, in which these people came forward and asked if I could help them to get permits to retain their existing houses. Sir, a permit is obtainable on payment of $2, subject to approval by the Chief Building Surveyor and subsequently the Inland Revenue Department. So it takes quite some time to get such applications approved. I will be dealing with this matter under the Ministry of Law and National Development at a later juncture. A considerable length of time has to be taken, say, three, four or six months, when applications are sent in, and officials from the Chief Building Surveyor's Department may not even go to the site to investigate. Although sometimes permits were obtained, still house numbers could not be obtained.

The Chairman: Mr Rajoo, do you wish to say anything?

Mr Rajoo: Mr Speaker, Sir, I am still not quite satisfied with the reply given by the Minister for Finance. The point raised by me is this. The house built was in existence for a number of years and permission was required to renovate it. For the renovation of that building, a condition was laid down that the building would exist for only one year. When there was a new proposal submitted by another man to build a house on the same plot, no condition was attached and permission was granted. I again mention that there is the folly of the permit. If the Minister cares to look into this matter. I will give him full details for clarification.

Mr Lim Kim San: Mr Speaker, Sir, I only replied to the Member for Farrer Park because I know something about it. But if he really wants an investigation into that particular case, then he has got to raise it with my colleague, the Minister for National Development.

I do not know whether the Member for Punggol really wants the Government to pull down illegal structures or to legalise them, because, as you have clearly pointed out. Mr Speaker, Sir, they have got to be pulled down within three years of discovery. Therefore, if we are to recognise that they exist, then we have got to take action within these three years. As it is now, we are taking quite a realistic view of the situation, because during the last ten years things have got a little bit out of control, and, therefore, we thought that if we were really to smack down all the illegal houses that are in existence without providing alternative accommodation, then the people of Singapore would really suffer great hardships. As it is, we have been able to clear quite a lot of illegal structures in slum areas and rehouse these people in new houses built by the Housing and Development Board. I do not know whether the Member can bring up specific instances. Here again, I think he will have to raise it with my colleague, the Minister for Law and National Development - whether he is able to bring up specific instances where there has been undue delay in approving or considering the plans submitted by owners of these houses in order to regularise the position of their buildings. If there are such instances, them I would say that it would be best if he would bring it to the notice of my colleague, the Minister for Law and National Development, and I think the Minister would look into them and study every application whether the owners of these illegal structures are trying to conform to the building by-laws, and the regulations of this country would then he attended to as quickly as possible.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The sum of $3,907,970 for Head 0807 ordered to stand part of the Estimates.

4.45 p.m.

Head 0901 -

Mr Lim Cheng Lock (River Valley): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for head 0901 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1001.

Mr Speaker, Sir, earlier in this Session the Minister for Labour introduced the National Registration Bill which was passed by this House. That Bill empowers the Minister to take steps to re-register the people of Singapore into two categories - one for citizens and the other for non-citizens. I will give him credit for imposing a fee of 50 cents on citizens, and I would say that imposing a fee of $1 on non-citizens is very generous when we consider the amount of money we need to provide social services for our people.

Mr Speaker, Sir, identity cards, birth certificates, and citizenship certificates are all now very important documents. The birth certificates at present issued are very flimsy and can be destroyed easily, and so are our citizenship certificates. I would ask the Minister to consider whether he would also take steps to provide better quality material for our birth certificates and citizenship certificates, possibly like those plastic laminated cards which he proposes to introduce for the identity cards.

At the present moment, I believe that a person does not pay a fee for the registration of citizenship. A payment of $2 is being imposed as a stamp fee to legalise the document. This may possibly be so when citizenship was introduced years back and when all Parties were trying to vote-catch the public and, therefore, a fee was not imposed. But as citizenship is now an important document for the many good things that the Government will provide. I feel it is time that we should also impose a nominal fee for registration of citizenship, and I would ask the Minister to consider this.

Mr Teong Eng Siong: (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, citizenship is very important and essential to the people of this country, especially after Singapore has achieved its independence. The people who are citizens are entitled to many benefits, for example, free education, housing, employment opportunities, free medical services. They are also entitled to the right to vote and the right to be elected. During the past ten years, many people in Singapore have realised the importance of citizenship. Therefore, this Citizenship Registry is very busy because the applicants run into thousands.

The Chairman: Order. Could the Member please go a little more slowly? The Interpreters are finding it somewhat difficult.

Mr Teong Eng Siong: (In Mandarin): Therefore, the Citizenship Office is faced with a very burdensome task and has received many complaints from members of the public.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to classify these complaints into several groups. First, there are many complaints to the effect that applications have been delayed for as long as one year and that the Citizenship Office has not given any reply to these applications. These applications do not know whether their applications have been accepted or rejected.

Second, there are many applications which are very complicated. For example, an Indian who has been here since 1935 has resided here for 30 years. But during the past 30 years he has returned to India two or three times. According to the citizenship law, the period of his return to India cannot be taken into account for residential qualifications. But the authority concerned and the officials have not clearly explained to such people why their applications cannot be accepted. Therefore, the applicants in such cases came to see me because they reside in my constituency. They complained to me that their applications for citizenship had been turned down without reason and that they had not been told of the reasons. They also complained that the authority concerned and the officials in the Citizenship Office were not courteous to him. I would, therefore, like the Minister concerned to consider this matter. If there are certain civil servants who are discourteous to the public, it will affect our reputation as a Government.

Third, the complaint is that perhaps after independence many people have to apply for citizenship, and therefore the Citizenship Office is crowded with applicants. But most of the applicants have to wait for at least one day before their cases can be attended to. They are not happy with this long delay and waiting. So I hope the authority concerned will rectify this.

Fourth, the complaint about language difficulties. For example, some Hakka people do not understand Hokkien, or some Indians do not understand Malay. Although there are some interpreters in the Citizenship Registry who know many dialects, they do not know all the dialects. So in future when we employ interpreters, we must see that they know all the dialects so that the language difficulties can be solved.

The Minister for Labour (Mr Jek Yeun Thong): Mr Speaker, Sir, I must thank the Member for River Valley for having said kind words about my Ministry. As regards his suggestion that the Government should impose a fee for the issue of a certificate for citizenship, a birth certificate, and other documents, what I have to say is that we will look into the matter.

Regarding the re-registration campaign, as I have pointed out earlier in the Second Reading of the National Registration Bill, we are going to issue two categories of identity cards of different colours - one for citizens and the other for non-citizens. The fee charged will he 50 cents for a citizen and $1 for a non-citizen.

Here, I must take the opportunity to correct myself. Earlier I had said that the cost of issuing a card was $7. This is not correct. I have now verified it and the cost of issuing a card is about $1 after taking into consideration the machinery and equipment that we have to purchase and the number of staff that we have to engage to run the registration centres. I have corrected this in the Hansard. So 50 cents from a citizen and $1 from a non-citizen would be just enough to cover a part of the cost of the identity card.

When the re-registration campaign starts, we will set up centres in various parts of the island, and the cards issued will be specially processed plastic cards. I have a sample here to show Members. This is the exact size of the card that we are going to issue as an identity card, but the design of the card has not been finalised because we are waiting for an artist to draw up a suitable format.

5.00 p.m.

There are also various other technical matters to be considered. This sample card here is of a very convenient size, and it is waterproof, forgery-proof, and even crease-proof. When we have dealt with the issue of these identity cards, the machinery that we have purchased will be available to laminate the other documents such as the citizenship certificate and the birth certificate.

At present we do not have this equipment. We have placed an order elsewhere to purchase this laminating machine. As soon as we have it, and after the re-registration campaign is completed, it will then be possible for us to go into the question of laminating the birth certificate and the citizenship certificate, as suggested by the Member just now. [Turning to the Member for River Valley} If you want this ---

The Chairman: If the Minister will lay it on the Table.

Mr Jek Yeun Thong: Yes, so that Members interested can have a look at this sample.

As to the comments of the hon. Member for Sembawang on the Citizenship Registry, I think it is inevitable that consideration of an application for citizenship is delayed because of the shortage of staff in the Registry. We all know that the citizenship certificate is a sacred document. It entitles the holder to many privileges which are only extended to citizens, for instance, in the application for houses, jobs, places in schools for their children, and so on. It is, therefore, necessary that the issue of a citizenship certificate should be properly investigated. There should he some checks and counter-checks.

I think the issue of this citizenship certificate is a very important process. The normal practice in dealing with an applicant is this: on being issued with an application form, the applicant is at once sent to the Interview Section where his form is to he filled up by an officer and an interview takes place. This procedure can only be adopted if there are not more than 80 applicants a day; in other words, the Registry can deal with about 1,600 applicants a month. From January to July this year, as the average monthly number was 1,500-odd, the Registry staff was able to deal with all the applicants quickly. However, as from August 1965, with the separation of Singapore from Malaysia, the number of applicants rose very sharply. The average number of applicants monthly from August to September was about 3,530. Therefore, in view of this large increase, the Registry was unable to maintain its usual procedure of granting interviews to applicants on the same day. In these circumstances, different dates for interviews have to be given. These dates have been progressively advanced to December 1966. This is an inevitable process because of the large number of people wanting to get citizenship, and the number of staff we have in this Registry is very small.

Regarding the case of the Indian applicant who has been a resident in Singapore since 1935 and still has not got his citizenship papers, I think it is probably because of his various visits to India. At present the policy of granting citizenship is that, among other things, the applicant must have roots in this country. In other words, he must have his family here and has a stable job here. What we have found is that many Indians who have been resident in Singapore for quite a number of years do not have any family roots here. They have their wives in India; their children are also in India, and every month they send remittances back to India. In time to come, they may even go back to India to retire. Sir, for such cases the policy is this: apparently this applicant is not treating this country as his permanent home, and he is only taking up citizenship for his own convenience, and therefore normally citizenship is refused.

As to the complaint that the staff in the Registry is not courteous to the public, I think the matter has been taken up to ensure that the staff in this Registry is polite and treat the public well.

As to the language difficulty faced by the applicants, I have to point out that at present there is a ruling that applicants for citizenship must understand or must pass a language test in the national language. Only in circumstances where the applicant is very old and who cannot be expected to pass the national language test, will he be exempted from the language test. But the others have to pass the national language test. If we expect every person to speak the national language, then this problem of language will not arise here. But in any case, we have many translators and interpreters in the Registry who can look after these people who are old and cannot speak any language other than their mother tongue. I think the interests of this type of applicants are being looked after.

Mr Lim Cheng Lock: Mr Speaker, Sir, I think the Minister has misunderstood me. I only asked him to impose a registration fee for a citizenship certificate, and not for a birth certificate where the applicant would have to pay $2 to obtain registration of his child.

Mr Jek Yeun Thong: I beg your pardon. I wish to apologise.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The Chairman: I think this will be a suitable time to take the tea break.

Thereupon Mr Speaker left the Chair of the Committee and took the Chair of the house.

Mr Speaker: I suspend the sitting now and shall take the Chair again at 5.40 p.m.

Sitting accordingly suspended at 5.10 p.m, until 5.40 p.m. Sitting resumed at 5.40 p.m.