DEVELOPMENT ESTIMATES FOR 1967

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

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

2.38 p.m.

The Chairman: Singapore Development Estimates for the year 1967 contained in Paper Cmd. 27 of 1966.

The Minister for Finance (Mr Lim Kim San): Mr Speaker, Sir, I seek your consent and the general assent of Members present to move a motion, without notice, to increase the sums to be allocated for certain heads of expenditure in the Singapore Development Estimates for 1967. Mr Speaker, Sir, the totals for certain heads of expenditure in the Development Estimates do not include token provisions of $10 each provided for certain subheads under those heads, and the purpose of my motion is to put the matter right.

The Chairman: I give my consent. Is it the pleasure of hon. Members that the motion be moved?

Hon. Members indicated assent.

The Chairman: Will the Minister please move?

Mr Lim Kim San: Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sums to be allocated for the following heads of expenditure in the Singapore Development Estimates for the year 1967, as contained in Paper Cmd. 27 of 1966 be increased by the sums hereafter stated: Amount of Heads of Expenditure Increase $ 01 Civil Aviation 30 02 Postal Services 30 03 Telecommunications 60 20 Ministry of Education 30 22 Vocational Institutes 20 23 Teachers' Training College 10 30 Hospitals Division 70 31 Public Health Division 30 33 Pharmaceutical and Laboratory Services 10 50 Broadcasting Division 20 52 National Library 10 57 Fire Brigade 30 58 Prisons 10 63 Primary Production 60 64 Roads and Bridges 70 65 Drainage and Flood Alleviation 10 66 Sewerage 10

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move.

Question put, and agreed to.

Resolved,

That the sums to be allocated for the following heads of expenditure in the Singapore Development Estimates for the year 1967, as contained in Paper Cmd. 27 of 1966 be increased by the sums hereafter stated:- Amount of Heads of Expenditure Increase $ 01 Civil Aviation 30 02 Postal Services 30 03 Telecommunications 60 20 Ministry of Education 30 22 Vocational Institutes 20 23 Teachers' Training College 10 30 Hospitals Division 70 31 Public Health Division 30 33 Pharmaceutical and Laboratory Services 10 50 Broadcasting Division 20 52 National Library 10 57 Fire Brigade 30 58 Prisons 10 63 Primary Production 60 64 Roads and Bridges 70 65 Drainage and Flood Alleviation 10 66 Sewerage 10

The Chairman: The summary of expenditure of the Development Estimates appears on pages 5 and 6 of Paper Cmd. No. 27 of 1966. Pursuant to the Resolution of Parliament passed just now, the totals for certain heads of expenditure have been revised. For the convenience of hon. Members, cyclo-styled copies of the *Revised Summary of Expenditure have been made available. If the Minister will confirm that the totals for the respective heads of expenditure as they appear in the third column of the Revised Summary of Expenditure are correct, I propose to take those totals. Mr Lim, do you so confirm?

(* Appendix, cols. 1045-8.) Singapore Development Estimates, 1967 (Revised)(Cols 1045-1048)

Mr Lim Kim San: I do confirm, Sir.

The Chairman: Before we go on to the Development Estimates proper, I would just like to draw one matter to the attention of hon. Members. As Members will see, today's guillotine times are rather tight and for some topics we have only five minutes. What I would like to draw the attention of hon. Members to is that these are Development Estimates and the day-to-day running of the various departments or statutory bodies cannot properly be debated. What is for debate is Government's proposals for development under these various heads for 1967. Dealing now with the heads of expenditure in respect of which amendments stand on the Order Paper Supplement -

Head 01 -

The following amendment stood in the name of Mr Teong Eng Siong -

That the total sum to be allocated for Head 01 be reduced by $100.

The Chairman: Mr Teong Eng Siong is not here.

The increased sum of $6,012,030 for Head 01 ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.

Head 02 -

The following amendment stood in the name of Madam Chan Choy Siong -

That the total sum to be allocated for Head 02 be reduced by $100.

The Chairman: Madam Chan Choy Siong is not here.

The increased sum of $371,830 for Head 02 ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.

Head 10 -

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

That the sum to be allocated for Head 10 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 101.

Mr Speaker, Sir, in this vote I would like to know, firstly, why there is a delay in the payment of the uniform allowance to the People's Defence Force volunteers. Secondly, why there are no proper changing rooms for N.C.O.s and officer cadets at the Beach Road Training Depot. Thirdly, why training depots often experience a shortage of stationery, as a result of which lesson notes are not provided to trainees.

2.45 p.m.

Fourthly, why the Seletar Range is in a deteriorating condition. What steps are being taken to remedy the situation?

The Minister of State of Defence (Mr Wee Toon Boon): Mr Speaker, Sir, with regard to the delay in the payment of the uniform allowance to P.D.F, volunteers, this allowance will be paid as soon as decisions have been made concerning dress regulations for the P.D.F. volunteers.

On the next point as to whether there are proper changing rooms for N.C.O.s and officer cadets at Beach Road Training Depot, there are changing rooms for N.C.O.s and officer cadets at this depot. More adequate facilities are being considered, but these will have to be determined by planning development requirements in the area.

Regarding the shortage of stationery in training depots as a result of which lesson notes are not provided to trainees, all stationery requirements for training depots have been adequately met as and when demanded. Lesson notes are issued only at the discretion of instructors, and if they are not issued, it is not because of shortage of paper but because the inspectors feel that the trainees should be energetic and alert enough to make their own notes.

The last point is with regard to the Seletar Range. It is not only being re-conditioned but it is also being reorganised to provide more training facilities. The project is expected to be completed in March 1967.

Inche Mahmud Awang: (In Malay): I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

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

That the total sum to be allocated for Head 10 be reduced by $100.

Mr Speaker, Sir, Singapore is an independent and sovereign Republic and we must be prepared to defend our independence and sovereignty. Although our country is small, we must have our own Armed Forces, including Volunteer Forces, be they large or small in number. It is up to us to determine the size of our Armed Forces according to our means. We have the First and Second Battalions of the Singapore Infantry Regiment and, in addition, we have Volunteer Forces and the People's Defence Force to defend our Republic. We still need a Navy to patrol our territorial waters. Is this vote for 1967 meant for the establishment of the Singapore Navy? I would like the Minister of State of Defence to inform the House as to who does the patrolling of our territorial waters at the present moment. Earlier on, I have said that Singapore has two Battalions - the First and Second S.I.R. - and we should be proud of our soldiers who fought for our independence when Singapore was part of Malaysia. I am confident that they will continue to rise to the occasion in future. But I am sorry to say that these Regiments are housed in unsatisfactory barracks. I believe that the asbestos roof and masonite walls and the kitchen were erected about 10 or 11 years ago. I think the time has arrived for the Minister of State of Defence to improve the conditions in these barracks so that the prestige of our Armed Forces is maintained.

Mr Wee Toon Boon: Mr Speaker. Sir, the R.S.S. Panglima and R.S.S. Bedok belonging to our country have been patrolling the Singapore Straits since 14th November, 1966. However, owing to defects, the R.S.S. Bedok has not been operational since 8th December, 1966. The R.S.S. Panglima is now the only vessel doing sea-water defence patrol in the Singapore Straits.

Regarding the point raised by the Member for Kampong Kembangan as to whether the Government is going to establish a Navy, we have now the Singapore Naval Volunteer Forces, and they will be expanded in due course.

The Member also spoke of the condition of the S.I.R. barracks. Mr Speaker, Sir, it is not intended to make major alterations to buildings at Ulu Pandan since they are beyond economical repair, and a new home for the First S.I.R. has been planned. Nevertheless, officers and men are being given the means to improve their barracks and kitchen on a self-help basis as a temporary measure in order that the amenities can be improved during their temporary stay at Ulu Pandan.

Inche Mohd. Ariff: (In Malay): Sir, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The sum of $12,000,000 for Head 10 ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.

Head 20 -

Mr Teong Eng Siong (Sembawang): (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to know whether I can move my amendment to Head 01 first. I was delayed on my way here by a funeral procession.

The Chairman: Mr Teong, the Committee has already passed the total for Head 01. So I am afraid you cannot now seek to reverse a decision of this Committee arrived at about 10 minutes ago.

Mr Teong Eng Siong: (In Mandarin): All right, Sir, I beg to move,

That the total sum to be allocated for Head 20 be reduced by $l00.

Sir, we know that this vote is meant, among other projects, for Works and Buildings and Furniture and Equipment for the University of Singapore, as well as for Works and Buildings, Scientific Equipment and Library Books for Nanyang University. A part of the vote is also meant for projects and sports activities to be carried out by the Adult Education Board at the Adult Education Centre. This shows that the Government has been paying great attention to the problems of higher education and adult education in the technical and academic fields. If we want to have sufficient personnel to man every section of production, we must have enough schools to produce engineers, technicians, artisans, skilled workers, and so on. We are still short of doctors and the number produced by the University of Singapore is still not sufficient to meet local needs. So I think that very careful attention should be paid to the development of the Medical Faculty of the University of Singapore so that, from next year onwards, it will be able to produce enough doctors to meet the requirements of our society.

I would like to ask the Minister whether he has any intention to set up an Aeronautical Faculty in the University of Singapore to train personnel for the Civil Aviation Department. I understand the present personnel are not locally recruited, and therefore I would like to find out from him whether he has any plans to train local aeronautical personnel in the University of Singapore so that all the posts in the Civil Aviation Department can be Singaporeanised.

Sir, we know that the success and progress of an independent and sovereign country depend on the availability of trained and professional men in all fields. In this respect, the Prime Minister said at a function in connection with Nanyang University on 29th October,. 1966, that our country needs to produce a new generation which is well-educated, with a knowledge of the cultural background of the various races, and skilled in various ways in order to meet the requirements of our national production - meaning people with the technical know-how - and that University students are the future leaders of our society. Therefore, the task of University students is very great indeed. In the past, they only thought in terms of themselves, but now they have to change their attitude. At present, they should think in terms of the future of the country. They should realise that the country has spent a great sum of money on their education.

3.00 p.m.

Therefore, they owe a debt to the nation. Once they have learnt something, they should place their knowledge and ability at the service of the country. Recently there have been many incidents in Nanyang University.

The Chairman: Order. Before we started today's proceedings, I told Members that we are on the Development Estimates and that the matters to be debated are Government's proposals for development under the various heads and subheads. Although we are now on the Ministry of Education, I do not think it is proper at this stage to talk about the past activities of students. So I would ask the Member for Sembawang to try to relate his remarks to matters of development rather than the ordinary day-to-day policy in the Ministry of Education or in the various educational establishments?

Mr Teong Eng Siong: (In Mandarin): Thank you, Sir, I will not give too many details on what I have said. Let me now return to the Adult Education Board. Since last year the development of adult education has had great success. There are more than 60,000 students attending adult education classes. This is really a great achievement in the eradication of illiteracy in Singapore. So I feel that the setting up of an Adult Education Centre is very necessary and appropriate at this juncture and that after it has been set up, the Adult Education Board will be better able to carry out its work and we can score total success in the eradication of illiteracy.

I would now like to touch on educational T.V. This is an attempt to try out a new medium of instruction in our country. According to the experience of other countries, educational T.V. has achieved great results. I would like to ask whether the department concerned has any concrete plan to carry out educational T.V., what languages will he used as the media of instruction, and what will be the contents of such education. I hope the Minister can give details to this House.

I would now like to touch on the Physical Education Centre. Would I be wrong if I touched on it?

The Chairman: I think the Minister who proposes to reply to the matters set out on page 18 of the Development Estimates is Mr Ong Pang Boon, the Minister for Education. Unfortunately, the questions of detail which you are going into are matters which he may not have come prepared to reply. Could you try to speak on broad policy rather than on details like the media of instruction in educational T.V.?

Mr Teong Eng Siong: (In Mandarin): Sir, if that is the case, I think the Minister will be very lacking in understanding what I have asked about this. Let me now talk in general terms. The Minister seems to know too little about what I have asked.

I would like to ask some questions relating to the setting up of a Physical Education Centre. I hope the Minister can give this House some information. I have some suggestions to make also. Firstly, we must have a concrete plan and there should also be a realistic, policy. In addition to the setting up of the Centre, we should also have plans to produce a set number of sportsmen every year. Secondly, we should have capable and experienced people as coaches and other officers in charge of the Physical Education Centre. Thirdly, a practical programme should be mapped out to train school boys and school girls, especially during their vacation, in order to produce more able sportsmen and sportswomen. From the results of our performance in international games, our standard is too poor and I hope the Minister can pay attention to this.

The Minister for Education (Mr Ong Pang Boon): Mr Speaker, Sir, I am indeed pleased with the keen interest shown by the Member for Sembawang in educational matters. In fact, I agree with a lot of what he has said and I can assure him that my Ministry will be doing its best in the coming year when we will be shifting the emphasis from quantity to quality in the educational field.

It is true that the supply of doctors from the University of Singapore is inadequate to meet the needs of Singapore. It is for this reason that the expansion programme in respect of the University of Singapore will be reviewed and reconsidered. In fact, earlier this month I have already informed the University of Singapore authorities that they must plan for an output of about three times the present number of doctors from the University to meet the needs of Singapore as well as other places. So I think that aspect of the problem is well in hand, but the Member for Sembawang should realise that it takes six years to produce a doctor. Until then a certain shortage will still be there.

As for the Department of Civil Aviation, there is no plan yet at the moment to create such a department in the University of Singapore. There is, however, a proposal to set up a separate Technological University sometime in the future, and I think this subject will be more appropriate for the future Technological University to consider.

The proposal to set up an Adult Education Centre is still under consideration. However, this does not mean that the adult education classes currently carried out in the various schools will be affected. I agree with him that an Adult Education Centre is very necessary to enable the Adult Education Board to function more efficiently and effectively. However, the financial position of the State is such that this project has to be reconsidered.

As far as educational television is concerned, if the Member for Sembawang was present when the Supplementary Estimates for this subject were discussed in this House, he would not have raised that question just now. But for his benefit I might as well tell him briefly that the languages to be used by the E.T.V, will be English and Chinese in the first instance for obvious reasons, and that the subjects offered will be English language, Chinese as a second language, Mathematics and Science.

The proposed Physical Education Centre is to replace the temporary accommodation now provided for the Physical Education Inspectorate at the National Recreation Centre in Kallang. I agree with the Member that we should have more specialists, P.E. instructors to train more P.E. teachers for schools, and that students who are good in P.E. should be properly coached so that in time to come they can take part in international competitions. I think a plan is afoot to create a Department of Physical Education at the Teachers' Training College to train teachers for the schools, and I hope that as soon as finances are available this Department of Physical Education will be set up.

3.15 p.m.

Mr Lim Guan Hoo (Bukit Merah): (In Mandarin): I would like to take this opportunity to ask a question in connection with the Development Estimates for education, namely, the expenditure on Works and Buildings for Nanyang University. Are there some new buildings to be put up by the Government for Nanyang University, or is the money required for the completion of existing works?

Another point also concerns the buildings at Nanyang University. I would like to know whether there is any long-term plan for the building of Nanyang University. I do not want to criticise the past, but I will try to relate the present and the future with the past. We could draw a lesson from past mistakes. There are certain circumstances which are not very ideal in respect of certain buildings at Nanyang University. The Nanyang University Library was not built on a proper basis. A big hall was built. Later on some classrooms were built and it was found that they were too small so that the walls separating the classrooms had to be broken down in order to have bigger classrooms. These are past mistakes. I do not know whether the Government has a better plan for the future.

Mr Ong Pang Boon: Mr Speaker, Sir, I am afraid Nanyang University has not been able to draw up a blue-print for its future expansion. The provision in the Development Estimates so far is meant only for conversion of existing hostels and quarters for students and staff, because the present facilities are inadequate and badly designed. Whether the University should undertake the construction itself, or whether the Government should carry out the conversion and construction and present it to the University has not been decided.

Mr Teong Eng Siong: (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, I thank the Minister for his explanation and beg leave to withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The increased sum of $2,457,030 for Head 20 ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.

Head 21 -

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

That the sum to be allocated for Head 21 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 101.

Mr Speaker, Sir, is the provision in the 1967 Development Estimates meant for the erection of a primary school at Hindoo Road? This school was not built in 1965, as was pledged by the Minister for Education, and in accordance with the letter from the URSC dated 10th August, 1964. The school was also not built in 1966, as was pledged by the Minister of State for Education in this Chamber on 30th December, 1965, in the debate on the Development Estimates for 1966.

Mr Ong Pang Boon: Mr Speaker, Sir, a primary school was scheduled to be built at Hindoo Road under the 1966 Development Estimates. However, because of the restricted site, a multi-storey building had to be designed. This increased the estimated cost of the building to $700,000, which was about $260,000 more than the average cost of a standard-size primary school. This revised cost did not meet with the approval of the Finance Ministry and, therefore, the project was dropped. However, land will be available in the Kallang Basin re-development area for the building of a standard primary school which will serve the people living in the Kampong Kapor area and the new Housing and Development Board flats at Kallang Basin. Plans for the building of primary schools in the Kampong Kapor area will have to await re-development of the precincts under the urban renewal scheme.

Inche Mahmud Awang: (In Malay): If that is the explanation by the Minister for Education, I beg leave to withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

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

That the total sum to be allocated for Head 21 be reduced by $100.*

(* The same amendment also stood in the name of Inche Mohd. Ariff Bin Suradi.)

Mr Speaker, I would like to ask the Minister for some information about the development of secondary and technical education. Where is he going to build the new secondary and vocational schools?

Mr Speaker, I would like to add certain comments on this item. According to present plans, the siting of schools is concentrated in certain areas. For instance, in the Mountbatten Constituency there are no less than 20 to 30 schools. The allocation of the sites for schools is not equitable. Students living in the neighbouring constituencies have to pay for transport to go to the schools in this area.

Another complaint is that there are too few schools in the rural areas. For example, in my own constituency of Sembawang, there are too few schools. I would like the Minister to pay attention to this matter. I would also like to ask whether Sembawang or Nee Soon will have any secondary schools or vocational schools under the development plan.

The third point is this. According to the present policy, only two years' training will be allowed to students in the secondary vocational schools. After this, they will have to leave school regardless of the result. But we must not forget that, on the average, the age of the students is about 16 years. So how do you expect 16-year old boys to get employment after leaving school? I would like to ask the Minister whether he is prepared to extend vocational education by one year. The students will thus have three years' vocational education so that when they leave school they will reach the age of 18. This is a better age for seeking employment. This will give them more opportunity in competing in life.

Inche Mohd. Ariff Bin Suradi: I am not speaking.

Mr Tay Boon Too (Paya Lebar): (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, I would like to speak on two development programmes in this head. The first point has some similarity to the suggestion given by the Member for Sembawang. However, he is a little selfish, because he only wants a school for his own Sembawang area. I am putting myself on a different footing. The first point is that I would like the Minister to tell this House whether he has paid any attention to the development of schools in the rural areas. I believe if we have more secondary schools in the rural areas, then this will go a long way towards raising the educational standard of the rural people. At the same time, it will go a step further towards implementing a very important item in the P.A.P. manifesto which aims at raising the educational standard of the rural people.

The second point is this. I would like to know what plans are being proposed to build halls and gymnasiums in the new schools, and whether extensive use of such places in the school buildings will be made. I have recently visited several school halls. They all look very grand. But in practice they are not very good. They are very expensive. Some cost about $400,000 each. They are only good for show but are of not much use in practice. In some cases, they are not useful for sports, because the ceilings are too low or the hall lengths are inadequate for their purposes. If the new school buildings under the school development programme will make adequate provision for school halls of a practical nature instead of for show, they will be more useful.

Mr S. Rajoo (Farrer Park): May I ask the Minister for Education whether he has under consideration any plans for building a secondary school in the Farrer Park area? There is a big ground available and it is not profitably used.

Mr Ong Pang Boon: Mr Speaker, Sir, while I agree that the distribution of schools should always take into consideration the interests of the students in the city as well as students living in the rural area, it has not always been possible to do so for the simple reason that land in the city area is difficult to acquire.

3.30 p.m.

In the rural areas sometimes suitable sites are either occupied by squatters, or for some reason acquisition of the sites will entail considerable time. Therefore, we have to site our schools depending on the demand as well as the sites available. For next year secondary schools are proposed to be built at the following sites: (1) Chestnut Drive, which is in the rural area. (2) Junction of Crescent and Dun-man Roads. (3) Linden Drive, I think, is also in the rural area. (4) Lowland Road, also in the rural area. (5) Jalan Bukit Merah. (6) Junction of Sennet and Upper East Coast Roads, which is also in the rural area. (7) Toa Payoh - I am not certain whether it is going to be rural or urban now. (8) Mount Vernon, which is another rural area. (9) Jalan Hwi Yoh, another rural area. (10) Tiong Bahru sewerage site. (11) Tiong Bahru fire site. (12) Changi Road 6¾ m.s., another rural area. (13) Toa Payoh. (14) Whitley Road. (15) Queenstown.

From the list of school sites that have been approved for next year, Mr Speaker, Sir, you will notice that most of the schools, in fact, will be sited in the rural areas.

Although there are no plans for the building of secondary schools in the Sembawang area in 1967, there is a proposal to convert the existing Naval Base Full School into a secondary school and for extensions to be built to enable the school to increase the secondary school enrolment.

It is true that education in the present secondary vocational schools lasts for two years only and that the students will have to leave at the end of a two-year course. But the Member for Sembawang should realise that our present minimum school-leaving age, which is 16, is one of the highest in the world. In fact, in the United Kingdom the minimum school-leaving age is 15. While everybody would like to keep their children in school for as long as possible, I think it is just financially not possible to raise the school-leaving age to 18.

I agree with the Member for Paya Lebar that our school halls should be designed for multi purposes. In fact, the new school halls are so designed, apart from gymnastic equipment provided for in the new halls, that many other indoor games can also be played in the halls e.g., badminton, sepak raga -

An hon. Member: Basketball?

Mr Ong Pang Boon: Yes, basketball, in the halls of the 1965 type. Sir, as I have said, I agree with the Member for Paya Lebar and we will always pay attention to this aspect, and we will try to ensure that all schools will make full use of these new halls.

Mr Rajoo: Mr Speaker, Sir, the Minister has not answered my question.

Mr Ong Pang Boon: Mr Speaker, Sir, I am afraid there is no plan to build any secondary school in the Farrer Park Constituency.

Mr Teong Eng Siong: (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, I thank the Minister for his explanation. I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The sum of $22,463,300 for Head 21 ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.

Head 22 -

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

That the total sum to be allocated for Head 22 be reduced by $100.

Mr Speaker. Sir, under this head the vote is $580,020 for the development mainly of the Queenstown Vocational Institute. At the present juncture, our country is industrialising quite progressively and successfully. So we require, as a matter of course, more technical personnel for our industrial growth and to man our factories. But the vote for next year is only $580,020. I would like to ask the Minister why only a small vote is asked for.

Another question is this. As far as I am aware, there are vacancies in the vocational institutes. I do not know whether this is true or not. If it is true, can the Minister explain whether he proposes to fill the vacancies so that every place is fully made use of and so that more students will be encouraged to receive education in the vocational institutes?

The last question I would like to ask the Minister is whether he is aware of the actual development of vocational education and whether he is satisfied with the progress so far.

Mr Ong Pang Boon: Mr Speaker, Sir, most of the extension work to the Singapore Vocational Institute at Balestier Road will be completed round about this year and the next. It is envisaged that not all the work can be completed this year and, therefore, a provision of $300,000 only is entered in the Estimates.

In so far as the Jurong Vocational Institute of Engineering and the Queenstown Vocational Institute of Manual and Applied Arts are concerned, they are still in the planning stage. It is not expected that extensive construction work can be carried out by the end of next year. Therefore, only $100,000 has been provided for each of these institutes.

It is true that there are vacancies in our secondary technical schools, for the simple reason that technical education is something new and parents are still reluctant to choose secondary technical education for their children. However, from the trend in the past few years, I think we can foresee that more and more parents will in future send their children to technical schools. Of course, it is possible to fill all the vacancies in the technical schools by refusing the parents any choice. We can do so quite simply by just channelling students to technical schools or academic type of schools or commercial schools as we think fit. It is possible that we may come to that stage if the response from the parents to send their children to technical schools is not forthcoming. But I can anticipate that when we decide for the parents, there will be considerable criticism and resistance. I hope the Member for Sembawang then will stand up for the Ministry of Education.

Mr Teong Eng Siong: (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I thank the Minister for his explanation and beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The increased sum of $580,020 for Head 22 ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.

3.45 p.m.

Head 23 -

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

That the total sum to be allocated for Head 23 be reduced by $100.

Mr Speaker, Sir, under this head, a sum of $1 million is voted for the purpose of building a Second Teachers' Training College, among other works. The raising of the standard of teaching among teachers concerns the Singapore Government and the country as a whole. The quality of teachers and their dedication to education are very important to the fostering of a fine generation in future. The two are very closely connected ---

The Chairman: I do not want to disturb the trend of your speech, Mr Teong, but the sum asked for for the Second Teachers' Training College is $10. It is the Patterson Road Teachers' Training College where for works, buildings, furniture and equipment the $1 million is asked for. The $1 million is not for the Second Teachers' Training College.

Mr Teong Eng Siong: (In Mandarin): I agree with what you say, Mr Speaker, and thank you for the correction. But in any case, what I want to say has some connection with the Teachers' Training College.

I would like the Minister to pay more attention to the training of teachers. Has he got any concrete plans in the future to ensure that the teachers trained are really dedicated to education?

Mr Speaker, Sir, in future, trainees will have to pay for their training in the T.T.C. I would like to ask how much will be the fees for each student per year.

Mr Ong Pang Boon: Mr Speaker, Sir, the extensions to the T.T.C., for which a million dollars has been asked, were started in the middle of 1965 and are due for completion next year. They include a four-storey teaching block containing a lecture room, a T.V. studio, a Domestic Science room, Science laboratories, workshops and language laboratories, a library, a hall and a gymnasium. These extensions will enable the T.T.C. to provide training courses for specialist teachers who are required for secondary schools and will help to improve the quality of teacher training. The introduction of closed circuit television for teacher training is of significant importance in our efforts to improve teacher training.

It is true that the mass recruitment of teachers and the continuation of the part-time training of teachers have been largely responsible for our inability to improve the quality of our teachers and the standard of teaching in our schools. It is for this reason that we are introducing full-time training on a small scale beginning from this year. Under this full-time training system, a fee of $120 per annum for each student will be charged. But bursaries of $600 per year will be awarded to poor students.

For the information of the hon. Member, consideration is being given to the planning of courses for full-time teacher training and also the possibility of extending the period of full-time training from two to three years. We think that with the introduction of the three-year full-time training, the quality of our teachers will definitely show a marked improvement.

Mr Teong Eng Siong: (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I thank the Minister for his reply and beg leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The increased sum of $1,000,010 for Head 23 ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.

Head 30 -

Mr Yeoh Ghim Seng (Joo Chiat): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 30 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 101.

Sir, I have given this idea of an Institute of Medical Specialities a great deal of thought and I must say that I cannot reconcile myself to the impression that the medical progress in this country can be assured only if the number of super-duper specialities is developed. Perhaps one could consider it progress if there were enough trained and experienced specialists to take over the running and supervision of such medical specialities. Alas, Mr Speaker, Sir, I have looked around our 200 square miles, and I am not convinced at all, at the moment, that there are such specialists available, with the exception of specialists in radiotherapy. Therefore, Mr Speaker, Sir, I have no objection to the building of a Radiotherapy Isotope Centre, as there is no doubt at all that this country is in dire need of such a centre and we have the specialists who can man this centre efficiently and who can render valuable services to the patients in need of such therapy.

I want it to be understood, Mr Speaker, Sir, that I am not against the Medical Progress Fund, as I have a lot of praise for the good people of Singapore who responded so generously to the appeal launched by the Chairman and members of the Progress Fund Committee. In fact, they have already collected $3 million and I suggest that this Committee should continue with the good work and appeal for more donations so that, instead of building an Institute of Medical Specialities, the authorities could use the $3 million as a start towards the development of a University Medical Centre, that is, a University Teaching Hospital. This University Medical Centre can incorporate into its structure not only the various disciplines required for the training of future medical practitioners, but also all the medical specialities envisaged by the organisers of the Medical Progress Fund. Once this centre is established, then the city will have more hospital beds to look after the sick and help to relieve the congestion in the General and Kandang Kerbau Hospitals.

Mr Speaker, Sir, although Singapore is one of the smallest nations in the world, we have a lot of very intelligent and able young undergraduates and graduates of medicine, and we should use every available means to encourage our young men and women in medicine to bloom and blossom so that one day we may number among our graduates at least one Nobel Prize winner for medicine. If the authorities accept my suggestion and go all out for a Medical Centre, then our young graduates should be encouraged now to take up the necessary branches of specialisation so that once the centre is ready, there will not be any lack of medical men to fill the necessary appointments.

Mr Speaker, Sir, our country with a population of nearly two million has a singular lack of general and maternity hospitals. The result of this lack is reflected in the very small number of trained specialists of one type or another. I realise, Sir, that the Medical Departments of both the University and of the Ministry of Health have received complimentary remarks from various visitors who are experts in their fields. Surely, Sir, no matter how sincere these remarks might have been, we cannot afford to be complacent and bury our heads in the sand. We cannot disguise the fact that Singapore will require many more hospitals than what we now have and the University Medical Centre will represent not only a tremendous step forward in meeting the public's demand for more beds and more specialists, but also a step forward in our medical progress.

The Minister for Health (Mr Yong Nyuk Lin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I do not regard the speech of the Member for Joo Chiat as a maiden speech, but it is practically a maiden speech because, although he did say something a few days ago, it was only very briefly. I welcome his speech today on the very important subject of the Institute of Medical Specialities, especially coming from one who has had a distinguished career in our University and who, unfortunately, left it for private practice before I became the Minister for Health in 1963. So that I do have to pay great attention to what he has to say on medicine and medical progress.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the Member for Joo Chiat is also, fortunately, an honorary consultant to the Ministry of Health, besides being the President of the Medical Council. So I am speaking to one who is really a specialist in his field and I am just an ordinary layman.

4.00 p.m.

I am in full sympathy with most of his remarks, but I would like to give a little background on how the Institute of Medical Specialities came to be born. The Member for Joo Chiat has rightly pointed out that he is all in support of the speciality of Radiotherapy Isotope Centre. It was actually part of Government's plan to establish this centre. In fact, it has been so for a number of years. It was in the First Development Plan for 1960-64, but, unfortunately, for some reason or other, it was not implemented, but we did intend to go ahead with it this year. We had a sum of $1.7 million earmarked for the establishment of a new Radiotherapy Centre, shall I put it that way, as we do have a very small and rather out-of-date centre at the moment which is doing its best with out-of-date equipment in the Outram Road General Hospital. It was then that the Medical Faculty of the University of Singapore were thinking of what to do to commemorate their Diamond Jubilee. I think they originally had the idea of a very modest extension to the medical library for a sum of about $700,000-odd, and they already had in hand a grant from the China Medical Board for this particular project. They wanted to be more ambitious and thought that perhaps it was time to consider the project of an Institute of Medical Specialities. They therefore held consultations with our Ministry so that their ideas could be grafted on to our Radiotherapy Isotope Centre.

We were glad that the University was prepared to discuss matters of development with the Ministry. This was a great improvement compared to a few years back when the University authorities thought they would just draw up a plan for development on their own. That was in 1962 when they drew up a very ambitious plan of $40 million, half of which ($20 million) would be for a Teaching Hospital. But, unfortunately, there was no prior consultation between the University and either the Ministry of Education or the Ministry of Health, so that Government could not support this rather ambitious plan of $40 million and I am afraid it did not have a very long life. They did try to go out on their own to get funds, and they probably got less than one per cent of their target.

So we had the University of Singapore authorities at the end of 1964 coming for consultation with us and wanting to incorporate a number of specialities. The approved specialities were neurology and neurosurgery, kidney diseases, and blood diseases, genetics and a psychology unit, gastro-enterology, endocrinology and an intensive care unit. These were ultimately accepted, as I have said, for grafting on top of our proposed Radiotherapy Isotope Centre. All in all, it came to just around $4 million. That was how this joint project, shall we say, was presented to the public as part and parcel of the Diamond Jubilee celebrations of the Medical School in Singapore. By adding on the extension to the medical library of $¾ million, the joint target for the Medical Progress Fund was therefore $4.75 million, with the Government agreeing to back this proposal dollar for dollar up to a maximum of $2 million for the Institute of Medical Specialities itself, plus another one-half of $¾ million for the extension to the medical library.

I am very glad to say that this project captured the imagination of the public in Singapore so that the response was exceedingly good. The figure ultimately donated or pledged to be given to the University of Singapore for the Medical Progress Fund (some of the amounts pledged are to be paid in instalments over a 3-year period) has exceeded its original target of $2.375 million for the University of Singapore. And I think the Member for Joo Chiat has mentioned that they have actually got something like over $3 million.

Sir, I would like to say that the conception of the Institute of Medical Specialities is really a move on the part of the University of Singapore to join hands with the Government in building something which, in their view, is necessary and which, in our view, is really part and parcel of our own development. I think it is sometimes necessary not to impose Government's views too much on the University of Singapore because we would like them to be able to let us know what they think their development should be, and then we would give them all the necessary support, sometimes financially and sometimes morally. From the point of view of Government then, we have moved on from having to provide the sum of $1.7 million by adding another $600,000-odd to a sum of $2.3 million for this scheme.

On the subject of a separate Teaching Hospital for the University, I was originally of the view that it was not necessary, because if our Medical School has done so well with what it has, that is to say, making full use of the facilities that are available in our Outram Road General Hospital for the last 60 years, the conception of a separate Teaching Hospital is something which perhaps could be considered a luxury, especially if one is presented with the idea that a Teaching Hospital would come to as much as $20 million as conceived by the University authorities in 1962. But if it were something more modest, then I think there would be great advantages if there were a separate Teaching Hospital, because I am beginning to find that in the Outram Road General Hospital we are having a lot of complications because the University uses Government facilities. The administration, the staff, everything is Government. The University staff are just grafted on to a Government department and they appear to have the best of both worlds.

[Mr Lim Cheng Lock in the Chair]

4.07 p.m.

The Minister for Health (Mr Yong Nyuk Lin): If it suits them, the University talk of research. But there are service functions to be performed. So our Government officials of doctors, surgeons and specialists who work shoulder to shoulder with the University officers always find that, for some reason or other, the University staff always appear to be getting the best of all worlds, whether it is in salary, perks, leave of absence, study leave, consultation fees, holidays - a long string of perks - and the Government officials feel that they are always the worse off. I think that is not good for administration or morale. But I am cheered to find that the doctors and surgeons who are now in Government service are of very good material and are holding their own with the University staff. For example, at the last Surgeons' Seminar for the Asian Pacific Region, which was sponsored by the Academy of Medicine, there were as many Government doctors who were taking charge of sessions as there were University officers. Whereas in the past, I think it used to be led generally by University personnel. It has been one of my functions during the last three years to try to make our Government officials in the service feel proud that they are as good as the University staff in all fields. It so happens that some of them are more academically inclined and, therefore, choose a University career, whereas those who are in Government service are doing an excellent job in their posts. So I do say that I have now come to the point where I think it is highly desirable that the University of Singapore ---

The Chairman (Mr Lim Cheng Lock): May I inform the Minister that he has a minute more to wind up?

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: Thank you, Sir,I am all in favour now that the University of Singapore should have its own Teaching Hospital with its own teaching facilities and be responsible for administering and running it. In fact, I have been thinking of forming a committee to see to the demarcation of Outram Road General Hospital so that one section of the hospital will be hived off for the University to look after it, and that this committee should be set up very soon.

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

4.14 p.m.

Mr Yeoh Ghim Seng: Mr Speaker, Sir, in view of the Minister's explanation, I wish to withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

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

That the total sum to be allocated for Head 30 be reduced by $100.*

(* The same amendment also stood in the names of Inche Mohd. Ariff Bin Suradi and Madam Chan Choy Siong.)

Sir, the vote under this Head is $1,894,070, mainly to set up a Static X'Ray Unit, the provision of furniture and equipment for the Nurses' Training School, and to expand the facilities and equipment for the Medical School.

4.15 p.m.

We all know that our medical services can be considered as the best in the whole of South-East Asia. The annual vote for medical services has been increasing every year. We know that at present our Government has eleven different types of hospitals, 31 clinics and 5 mobile clinics which are mainly to serve the rural people. Because of the Government's efforts in this field, the health of the people has been well taken care of. This can be said to be the good fortune of our people.

Under this head I would like to ask the Minister two questions. Firstly, when will the building of the Institute of Medical Specialities be started and when will it be completed? What type of service will it provide for our people? Secondly, about the training of nurses and the subjects to be taught. Will the subjects taught include courtesy? What will be the Government's plan on the subjects to be taught? I hope members of the public will be able to praise the nurses instead of accusing or criticising them for their bad attitude as in the past.

Inche Mohd. Ariff: (In Malay): I would like to know from the Minister for Health whether in the Development Estimates for 1967 there is any plan to build a hospital in the eastern area near the Kampong Kembangan Constituency.

Madam Chan Choy Siong (Delta): (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to ask a question under the vote for the expansion of hospitals and other facilities. Why could the vote not also be used in the building of clinics? In the past, we received replies from the Minister that he had no plans to set up clinics in certain areas. I feel that to people working in certain areas the expansion of clinics and medical services is very necessary for their convenience. There are not enough clinical services because the people in various places are not adequately served with clinics. The Minister should understand that, in the course of development of Singapore through urban renewal, there have been concentrations of population in certain areas and the density of the population in the rural areas has also increased accordingly. The answers given by the Minister in the past are not quite valid now. It is wrong to say that, because certain clinics are set up in some areas, so the people from other areas can also go to them to get medical treatment. That is an incorrect conception. The Minister also gave a reply in similar vein to my query about postal services some time ago. Now the Minister's answer in respect of the medical services is just the same. He says there are clinics available, just as he answered my previous query about postal services. The most densely populated areas are Queenstown, Tiong Bahru and Bukit Ho Swee. In these areas at present the existing clinics are too small to give any efficient service. Yet our Minister thinks that they can still provide services to our people. I myself have gone for on-the-spot inspections and found that there used to be people queueing up and waiting to be examined by the doctors. At first the people queueing up might have merely some minor illness, but when they were finally examined by the doctors, their illness would have become more serious.

So I have some suggestions to make. I hope the Minister will try to solve the present situation. He has said that the main problem confronting the medical services is the shortage of doctors. Possibly because of this the services provided by the clinics are also affected. I would like to ask him whether there are private doctors who are willing to spend some of their time to serve the patients. If there are, is he willing to accept their offer of services? It seems that he has said that he wanted to accept such services, but that the private doctors are not allowed to accept remuneration. The Minister should not expect private doctors to meet expenses out of their own pocket. If some financial solution can be found, then it will be possible to solve many problems confronting the Ministry of Health.

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: May I, Mr Speaker, Sir, attempt to answer the Members in the order in which they spoke? Firstly, the Member for Sembawang. I believe he wants two questions answered: firstly, when will the Institute of Medical Specialities be built? It should have been built much earlier because the foundation ceremony was performed quite some time ago. But, unfortunately, like most building projects, they always want new additions and try to get new ideas. I was trying to explain to the Member for Joo Chiat how the Institute of Medical Specialities came into being. It is a nine-storey structure to be built on top of our Radiotherapy Centre which will form the ground and the first few floors. Our Radiotherapist actually had the advantage of going round the world, under a W.H.O. scholarship, to see various radiotherapy centres. That is a good idea because we will be spending a considerable sum of money, and if we can get the best ideas after visiting a few centres, then we will be able to keep abreast of scientific progress and not make mistakes which were made by other people. Just when I thought he had settled down, another offer came from Australia and off again he went there for another few months, and so the matter was delayed. But I hear that piling will get started next month. So we are well on our way to making some progress. I believe the Member for Sembawang also indicated what would be found in this institute and what it would provide for. I have indicated just now to the Member for Joo Chiat the various specialities, and if it is necessary, I will repeat again. The units that will be housed in this Institute of Medical Specialities will be radiotherapy, cardiology and cardiac surgery, neurology and neuro-surgery, units for kidney diseases and blood diseases; genetics and psychology units, gastro-enterology, endocrinology and an intensive care unit after surgery.

His second question is in respect of the extension to our Nurses' Training School in the Outram Road General Hospital. We are moving so fast and expanding so rapidly that I think we must also expand our training facilities for our nurses. With this extension, which is being provided for next year, we should be able to have a larger intake of nurses and train them --- it takes three years to train a nurse --- and also increase our intake of students for this purpose. Also for purposes of expansion as we are going to have more hospitals. I will have to defer going into that a bit in order to answer the other Members concerned.

On the question of courtesy for nurses, it is really part and parcel of their training to be kind and courteous. But everyone is human. We all say we want to be kind, to be nice, and to smile under all difficulties; but being human sometimes we do not smile. I do not think we can expect a hundred per cent from anyone. I think we will be expecting the impossible. Of course, it does not mean that we tolerate rudeness and incivility from not only nurses but anybody. If there is any complaint and it can be proved that they really go out of their way to be unkind and uncivil, then they come under the Disciplinary Code and disciplinary action will be taken, sometimes with a strong verbal warning and, if it is being repeated, a written warning, and later on perhaps a stoppage of increment, and finally, if the people are still impossible, then they get the sack. We expect all civil servants to show courtesy. But there are sometimes extenuating circumstances and we have to be reasonable. I think not all members of the public are angels either. Sometimes they demand the impossible and we have to be fair to our staff. If it can really be proved that our staff are going to the limit, then I say they deserve to be rapped. But I am not prepared just to jump to conclusions and say any complaint is a justified complaint. It has to be looked into.

I will now come to the Member for Kampong Kembangan who is interested to know whether the Ministry of Health has in mind the building of a hospital on the eastern side of Singapore Island. Yes, we have the intention to build another hospital there. It should form part of the Second Five-Year Plan, 1966 to 1970. This Second Five-Year Plan has yet to be published. Anyway, this project is accepted as being part of the Plan. It might be built probably late in the sixties - 1968 or 1969. So I can assure the Member for Kampong Kembangan that a hospital is coming up there and it might be a 700-bed hospital.

4.30 p.m.

Originally there was a site off Guillemard Road. But I understand we have been pushed out of there in favour of another Ministry, and so we are now looking for another site. There is a site available off Bedok - which is probably closer to Kampong Kembangan than if it were stationed in Guillemard Road.

Now I come to the Member for Delta who still makes a plea for increasing the number of outpatient dispensaries. I think she keeps on reminding me that my answers are all wrong and evidently her requests are all right, which is not the case. It is all very well, Mr Speaker, Sir, to say. "We must have dispensaries to look after the poor people," and things like that. We understand all these things, but we have got to be practical. Here is a little island of 200 square miles and a population of 2 million. There are 500 doctors in private practice all over the island. Government already has 26 outpatient dispensaries, some with one doctor, some with two doctors, some with three, and some even with five, seven, or eight doctors to man them. This has tied up nearly 70 doctors to look after 26 outpatient dispensaries and to treat common coughs, colds and tummy aches after dinner. 70 doctors can staff one good-sized hospital. So I say that as long as we do not have as many doctors as we want in our service, the first need is for doctors to be posted to hospitals to deal with the acutely ill cases. I will keep on saying that, as long as I am the Minister for Health, I have decided to stop establishing new outpatient dispensaries.

On page 22 of the Development Estimates, Sir, there is a subhead, No. 201, which mentions a polyclinic at Pasir Panjang. I may appear to be talking at cross-purposes. The building of this polyclinic, which is a combination of an outpatient dispensary and a maternal child health centre, is really something that I am building in order to close down one old-fashioned outpatient dispensary in Pasir Panjang, which is in a shop-house, and a maternal child health centre in Buona Vista. This is where the National Training Institute is. In fact, the National Training Institute wants to take over this maternal child health centre and has asked us to buzz off. I have said that I will readily do so if I can find another place to move over. So subhead 201 will be to build something in place of what is now available. So there is nothing new in the development of another outpatient dispensary. And I say that it will be a long time before we can consider the building of more outpatient dispensaries when we already have 26 outpatient dispensaries available to the people throughout the island.

As regards private doctors wanting to help in the outpatient dispensaries, this is nothing new, Sir, because the offer has always been a standing one. I think we pay them something like $40 per session of two hours. We have a few of them. Off-hand, I think there are about three or four who have given their services and are being made use of. If the Member for Delta has any friends of hers who are private doctors and who are prepared to come and help - I am not asking for free service, I am not asking them to prescribe their own medicines and so on for the poor public - we are prepared to pay them. I will be very happy indeed if the Member for Delta can suggest friends of hers who are prepared to do this service. Of course, we will be glad to have them. This is a system which the Malaysian Government has copied from us. We have had it for the last four or five years. They are just starting it and we wish them luck. So I can only say that if we can get as many doctors as we want, then we will have to decide on our priorities and, to my mind, the priorities are that the doctors should go first to hospitals, and when we have enough of hospital beds to look after the acutely sick, maybe we can think in terms of building more outpatient dispensaries. But, in my view, there are more than adequate Government outpatient dispensaries for a long time to come.

Madam Chan Choy Siong: (In Mandarin): Sir, I merely want to clarify two points raised by the Minister. I never meant to say that the answers given by the Minister are wrong. But because he is too preoccupied with his work, he might have neglected certain aspects. I gave an example that last time when I raised a question about postal services, he answered in the sam way, that in these areas there were already postal services. But he did not consider or carefully read the report submitted to him. The postal services provided at those places are inadequate and cannot meet the needs of the population there. There has been no development in the postal services. In the Tiong Bahru Post Office, some years ago the population was small ---

The Chairman: Madam Chan, I do not think you should go into details about post offices now.

Madam Chan Choy Siong: (In Mandarin): Sir, I was just giving an example. Now I am talking about clinics. The same situation, as the Minister has -

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: A point of clarification. I hope she is not suggesting that I have not visited my outpatient dispensaries.

The Chairman: I do not think she was suggesting anything of that sort, Mr Yong. Madam Chan.

Madam Chan Choy Siong: (In Mandarin): What I meant to say was that the clinics are also very small - too small, in fact.

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: Because she is trying to say that in another case, where she mentioned post offices, the Parliamentary Secretary had not visited the post offices and only got reports. But I have visited every outpatient dispensary. I know what I am talking about.

The Chairman: I do not want this to develop into a dialogue. Madam Chan, can you conclude your remarks shortly?

Madam Chan remained in her seat.

Mr Bernard Rodrigues (Telok Blangah): Mr Speaker, Sir, since the Minister has touched on subhead 201, can I be allowed to touch on the Nurses' Training School?

The Chairman: Yes, in broad policy terms.

Mr Bernard Rodrigues: I see under subhead 301 that provision has been made for 1967 for a Nurses' Training School amounting to $250,000. If this Training School is for the purpose of training assistant nurses, I am of the view that this subhead should be deleted, as there are at present in the Republic of Singapore facilities for training assistant nurses. There are more nurses than the Government can absorb in the hospitals. But if this Training School is for the purpose of training staff nurses, I fully support the inclusion of this subhead, as the hospitals in Singapore are experiencing a shortage of staff nurses. Further. Mr Speaker, Sir, is the Minister aware that many nurses, after being promoted to be staff nurses, leave Government service and look for employment elsewhere? Is it because of the very unreasonable salary that is being paid to them?

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: I would like to say to the Member for Telok Blangah that I have got his support, because this is an extension for the Outram Road General Hospital Nurses' School which trains staff nurses, which means those who are admitted for training after getting their School Certificate. But I will not accept that part of his speech where he says that if this were to be an extension to the building of the Assistant Nurses' Training School, then he would object to it because there is ample room for trained assistant nurses. Why he probably jumps to that conclusion is that some assistant nurses have been asked to wait a while before they are put on the permanent establishment because of certain difficulties of placing staff. But I want to say that assistant nurses are playing a very good role in our hospitals and there is room not only for trained assistant nurses hut also for nurses who qualify as staff nurses.

As for the fact that staff nurses are poorly paid, I would not like to make any comments on this because that is being considered by the Salaries Commission. But if they do leave, I suppose after being well trained, they will make very eligible wives and I think the Member for Telok Blangah has one!

Mr Bernard Rodrigues: Mr Speaker, Sir, I was not referring to my wife. I was referring to staff nurses in general. Most of them resign and look for employment elsewhere. I assure the Minister that my wife will never go back and work in the hospitals.

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: It is just too bad!

Mr Teong Eng Siong: (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I am grateful to the Minister for his reply. I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The increased sum of $1,894,070 for Head 30 ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.

Head 31 -

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

That the sum to be allocated for Head 31 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 204.

The Chairman: Mr Lingam is not here. Mr Lim Cheng Lock.

Mr Lim Cheng Lock: Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 31 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 901.

Mr Speaker, Sir, this subhead is on markets. In the original provision for the years 1966 to 1970, a sum of $1,700,000 was earmarked for the development of markets and the revised figure was reduced to $680,000. May I inquire from the Minister whether development of markets includes those built by the Housing and Development Board? Also what is the reason for this reduction in the provision for the development of markets, and where will the markets be provided for for the year 1967?

Mr Speaker, Sir, another point I wish to raise with the Minister is the old market at Raffles Square.

The Chairman: Raffles Quay!

Mr Lim Cheng Lock: Raffles Quay, I am sorry.

An hon. Member: Lau Pasar.

Mr Lim Cheng Lock: Lau Pasar, that is right. In view of the valuable land this market is occupying, I believe it is uneconomic to have the market here. Is there any plan to develop that area for a more useful purpose, possibly rebuilding the market to house all the eating stalls for all the office workers around the city?

4.45 p.m.

Mr Bernard Rodrigues: Mr Speaker. Sir, under subhead 901 in respect of Markets, the original estimate for 1966-1970 was $1,700,000.

The Chairman: Mr Rodrigues, Mr Lim has raised that question.

Mr Bernard Rodrigues: I will touch on my point, Mr Speaker. From my own experience, hawkers seem to fight shy of markets or of making use of them. The inference is that there are insufficient markets to accommodate all the hawkers, with the result that hawkers' stalls are set up in spaces allocated to parks. The other inference is that markets are superfluous because hawkers do not want to make use of them am of the opinion that an investigation should be made as to whether markets are inadequate to meet the needs of hawkers, in which case the provision this subhead should be increased, whether the hawkers do not make of them, in which case it is unnecessary to make any financial provision markets.

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: Mr Speaker, Sir, first of all, I would like to compliment the two Members on their shi eyes in detecting a large provision the Five-Year Plan, 1966-1970, and very small provision for next year which is not quite in proportion if it is divided by five.

It is true that when the Second Five-Year Development Plan for 1966-1970 was originally prepared, there was change in policy. This sum of $1.7 million was entered into the Plan the basis that the previous policy would be continued. The previous policy the time was one of acquisition of land and probably the construction of ten Government markets over a few years each of which would cost something like $200,000 to $300,000, and would be able to cater for only 150 haw stalls. But early this year, it was decided to review the situation and now it has been decided ---

The Chairman: Mr Yong, may intervene to say that we are two minus short of the guillotine time for Head 21?

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: Sir, I will try to finish in two sentences. There has been a change in policy and it now a case of the Housing and Development Board undertaking all major development in Singapore, be it urban renewal, etc., and it will built shopping centres as well as ---

The Chairman: Mr Yong, I am quite wrong. We have ten minutes more, I am sorry.

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: I will find it hard to extend my speech to ten more minutes! But I will do my best.

The Chairman: Mr Teong will probably be grateful because the next amendment is his!

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: Sir, I was saying that there has been a change of policy and it is not necessary now for the Government to build markets. It will be the responsibility of the Housing and Development Board to build markets in addition to the building of flats and shopping centres. So the burden has been gratefully taken away from the Ministry of Health. In fact, should the Housing and Development Board want to take over the hawkers in the housing estates, we say. "Please do. Thank you very much."

As for the number of markets that will be built next year, although the figure stated here is $374,000, two markets have actually been built this year, but the bills will be due for settlement next year and so they are included in next year's estimate. You will notice a little star there stating that there is a revote of $22,000. The two markets which have already been built - and for which bills have to be settled next year - are Jurong I Market at a cost of $167,000 and the Bukit Ho Swee IV Market at a cost of $105,600. Therefore, a sum of about $100,000 is left to cover Tuas Market which is way up in the Jurong area. It is at present under construction and will cost about $20,000, and it should be finished by February 1967. The other item will be an extension of Holland Road Market for a sum of a little over $80,000. This extension is necessitated by the rapid housing development that has taken place along Holland Road during the last few years. We have also managed to resite about 80 hawkers who were congregating at the triangle - the piece of vacant land in front of Holland Road Village into the Holland Road Market itself. So it is necessary to extend our market to accommodate the present hawkers.

The Member for Telok Blangah has said that hawkers are shy of markets. Unfortunately, it is true and it has been so for some time. But with the implementation of the new Hawkers' Code, we are able to make unlicensed hawkers less shy to go into markets or stay a reasonable distance away from markets, as in the case of a number of new markets which we have been able to tackle in recent months, especially the Killiney Road private market where there was a large congregation of hawkers outside, and we have been able to move some of them inside it and resite a large number of them along Somerset Road and Exeter Road. We are using this as a model for re-siting other hawkers in other markets, which we shall attempt to do within the next few years.

I do not think it is correct to say that markets are superfluous. I do not think it is even necessary to conduct an investigation as suggested by the Member for Telok Blangah. Markets are necessary. But we would be naive if we think we can build enough markets to put in all the hawkers, because a market costs as much as a few hundred thousand dollars. Let us say it is $300,000. It can only house 150 hawkers. But there are nearly 40,000 to 50,000 hawkers in Singapore. I do not think Singapore can afford to build hundreds of millions of dollars' worth of markets to house these 40,000 to 50,000 hawkers. So I do not think we can work on the principle that if we build markets, we will be able to tackle the problem. Some hawkers will be housed in markets, but for some time to come, we will have to permit some of them to trade in side streets and have them licensed and controlled. If and when we succeed in industrialisation and the numbers of our unemployed become less and less, then there will be fewer people wanting to hawk as a means of livelihood. So I think, with time and patience, we can license and control hawkers and probably look to the day when we can have full employment in Singapore and the question of hawkers, as we see it today, will become a thing of the past.

Mr Lim Cheng Lock: Mr Speaker, Sir, the Minister has not answered the question on the old market at Raffles Quay.

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: I am sorry. I was a little bowled out, because first I was asked to stop within a little while, and then I was given a lot of time! So I missed this out.

Sir, my colleague, the Minister for Education, who is the Member for Telok Ayer, says the old Telok Ayer Market is a historical market. So it looks as if he is more in favour of preserving it than having it pulled down. I agree that this is an excellent site and it is just next door to the multi-storey car park. I would rather prefer that this be looked into by the planning authorities. The Urban Renewal Planning Committee may perhaps enshrine this historical market for posterity or consider it should give way to progress, tearing it down and rebuilding a multi-storey market. For the moment, I have nothing more to say on this market, but I think that when it comes to the planning team for urban renewal, as and when the Telok Ayer Constituency is to be rebuilt, this matter can be brought up. But in the meantime, should there be any patching work to be done, we shall be looking into it.

Mr Lim Cheng Lock: In view of the explanation, I beg leave to withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The Chairman: Mr Teong Eng Siong, you have three minutes for your speech and the Minister's reply.

Mr Teong Eng Siong: (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, it is more than enough. Sir, I beg to move,

That the total sum to be allocated for Head 31 be reduced by $100.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the provision of $1,813,830 for this head is mainly for the setting up of refuse disposal plant. I would like to know when the work will start and when it will be completed.

I would also like to ask the Minister whether he intends to build Government markets in the rural areas.

The Chairman: The Question is,

"That the total sum to be allocated Head 31 be reduced by $100."

Mr Yong, you have your two minutes now.

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: Unfortunately, I cannot off-hand inform the Member for Sembawang when the new Public Cleansing Department in Havelock Road is going to be built, but it should be well established before 1967 ends.

As regards the question of mark in the rural areas, I have already indicated that there will be an improvement in Jurong - $20,000 for Tuas Market - but unfortunately not in Sembawang But I think the Sembawang Mar needs a little bit of reorganising. The other day, I just could not pass through Sembawang Road because of the hawkers.

Mr Teong Eng Siong: (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn

The increased sum of $1,813,830 for Head 31 ordered to stand part of Development Estimates.

Head 32 -

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

That the total sum to be allocated Head 32 be reduced by $100.

The provision of $117,000 is mainly for the extension of the Dental Clinic at the General Hospital. I would to ask the Minister what kind of services are provided by this Dental Clinic.

Another point is this. As far a know, the Eye Clinic provided service in the past. I do not know whether this has now been stopped and if it is so, why?

5.00 p.m.

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: I would like to inform the Member for Sembawang that it is time we disabused the minds of people that they can get anything free. Free services are likely to gradually whittled down because we have to pay our way. We have to pay our workers. We have to pay for the buildings that are built and the equipment to be supplied. We are thinking of instituting a system of charges. At the moment, I think it is a very negligible sum of 25 cents for those who go to the Outram Road General Hospital for dental treatment. This is likely to be raised shortly. We do not want to make it a very punitive charge, but I think we should try to make it slightly more realistic. You will notice that my colleague, the Minister for Finance, is pushing me on to make it as stiff a bill as possible, but I think we have to gradually increase charges for services rendered - they will still be token charges - otherwise there will be a tendency to expect things free, and therefore to abuse the situation.

Mr Teong Eng Siong: (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I thank the Minister for his reply, and I beg leave to withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The sum of $117,000 for Head 32 ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.

Head 33 -

The following amendment stood in the name of Mr Teong Eng Siong -

That the total sum to be allocated for Head 33 be reduced by $100.

Mr Teong Eng Siong: (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I am not moving.

The increased sum of $228,010 for Head 33 ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.

Head 40 -

The following amendment stood in the names of Mr S. V. Lingam, Mr Tang See Chim, and Mr Lim Cheng Lock -

That the sum to be allocated for Head 40 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 103.

The Chairman: Mr Lingam is not here. Mr Tang See Chim is also not here. Mr Lim Cheng Lock.

Mr Lim Cheng Lock: Mr Speaker, Sir, I move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 40 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 103.

Mr Speaker, Sir, subhead 103 is "Loans to Housing and Development Board" in which for the year 1967 a provision of $45 million has been entered. Sir, every year the Government is financing the Housing and Development Board with loans for building of houses for the people. And each year, too, a certain amount of subsidy, which amounts to over $8 million for this year, is provided for the Housing Board.

The subsidy for a $20 one-room flat by the Government is $15.65. The subsidy for a two-room flat is $11.80. The subsidy for a three-room flat is $6.60. Sir, whilst it is appreciated that a subsidy is necessary for flats for the poorer sections of the people, I feel that it is time for the Government to reconsider the overall subsidy granted to the Housing Board.

During the last Budget debate I urge the Government to get the Housing Board to make more houses available for purchase by the people. I think the Government has not given serious consideration to my suggestion. When home ownership for the people was started in 1964, some 2,068 homes were made available to the public; in 1965, 1,416 units; and in 1966, i.e., this year, I believe the figure is more or less the same as for last year.

Mr Speaker, Sir, there are people who are anxious to purchase homes either on a cash basis or through arrangements provided by the Housing Board. I feel that everyone who applies to buy a home from the Housing Board should be given every opportunity of doing so, since the Housing Board is building so many houses, most of which are for rent to the people. And there is no reason why everyone who wants to purchase a home through arrangements with the Housing Board should be denied the opportunity of doing so or should be kept on the waiting list.

Furthermore, I would urge the Government to think seriously of making, home ownership easier for the people.

Mr Lim Kim San: Mr Speaker, Sir, rightly my colleague should reply to this question, but -

The Chairman: I am sure your experience in the Board will stand you in good stead, Mr Lim!

Mr Lim Kim San: It will give me great pleasure to reply. Much as we like to review the subsidy to the Housing Board, I do not think that we in any way have infringed the principle that the poor should be helped more and the not-so-poor should be helped less. From the figures that I gave in replying to the debate on the Budget Statement, you will notice, Mr Speaker, Sir, that the one-room units which are rented by the very poor are subsidised to the extent of more than 75 to 80 per cent of the rental; and when you come further down to the three-room units where the rental is $66.50, the subsidy is between $2 and $6. All these subsidies are given to people who we consider should get some element of housing subsidy, because they are people whose personal income is less than $500 per month and whose total family income is not more than $800. Of course, when the time comes when there is fuller employment in Singapore, we may reconsider this question of subsidising people who are renting the three-room units and paying $66.50 rent per month and who are being subsidised to the extent of between $2 and $6.

Now, the Member for Cairnhill (Laughter] - I am sorry, the Member for River Valley; the confusion arose because Cairnhill and River Valley used to own one branch together! The Member for River Valley proposes that more houses should be made available for sale and that everyone who wants to buy a house should be allowed to buy one. I think our policy is to sell only to those who are eligible to buy. There is a limitation to the income of the applicant, i.e., if he belongs to a higher income group, he is not allowed to buy. I believe what the Member has in mind is that everyone who is eligible to purchase a housing unit should he given a chance to purchase one, and that more of these houses should be made available for sale.

Here again, Mr Speaker, Sir, one has to weigh whether to satisfy all those who are eligible to purchase houses fro the Housing Board by allowing them so purchase, or to give a chance to those who can only afford to rent houses from the Housing Board to so rent. We only build a limited number of about 10,000 to 12,000 units, and, at the moment, I think we have a few thousand units on the register waiting to be rented out. Therefore, if we satisfy those who want to purchase, we will have less for renting. So it is a question of weighing priorities - who should the first option and where they should go. Much as we like to, we find it i possible to meet the demands of all those who are eligible to purchase houses.

The last query put up by the Member for River Valley is something which cannot understand. His request is we should make home ownership easier. I do not understand what it means. If he can clarify it, perhaps I may be able to reply.

The Chairman: In view of the time, perhaps he can clarify it on another occasion.

I think this is a convenient time suspend. I will continue with Mr Lim Cheng Lock's amendment on resumption.

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

Mr Speaker: I will suspend the sitting of the House and resume at 5.40 p.m.

Sitting accordingly suspended at 5.13 p.m, until 5.40 p.m. Sitting resumed at 5.40 p.m.

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

Debate in Committee of Supply resumed.

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

Head 40 (contd.) -

Mr Lim Cheng Lock: Mr Speaker, Sir, just before the suspension the Minister for Finance was giving a reply to my question. One of the reasons he gave was that because there is a big demand by people who want to rent houses, therefore, the houses available for sale to people who are eligible are thereby reduced. I cannot share his opinion, Sir, because if more of such homes are made available to people who are eligible to own these homes, then the number of people who demand houses to rent would correspondingly decrease. Mr Speaker, Sir, I have here a pamphlet produced by the Housing and Development Board with regard to home ownership for the people. It is a very attractive pamphlet. It states here:

`In February 1964, the Minister for National Development announced a home ownership for the people's scheme and entrusted the Housing and Development Board with the responsibility for implementing it. The basic objective of this scheme is to encourage property owning democracy in Singapore and to enable Singapore citizens in the lower middle income group to own their own homes.'

Mr Speaker, what I am asking the Minister for Finance and also the Minister for National Development to do is to get the Housing Board to consider seriously what they preach and put it into practice. Just now the Minister was asking me what I meant by making the scheme easier. I realise this is a serious matter and has financial implications. But, at the present moment, the arrangements and the regulations for those who are eligible to buy these homes are quite restrictive, and I was asking the Minister whether he could look into the conditions which would make it less restrictive for the people to own homes.

5.45 p.m.

Inche Mahmud Awang: (In Malay): Mr Speaker, Sir, the vote for the Housing and Development Board should not be made disappointing by the Government. For example, applicants who wish to get one-room flats urgently have been offered two-room flats by the Board which they do not want and which they cannot afford to rent. This also applies to applicants who ask for flats in a certain area which they like, but because they want them rather urgently, they are offered flats in other areas. This development vote should also improve the situation by meeting the requirements of the applicants for flats, as I have said earlier. This vote should make the people happy, particularly the applicants for housing flats.

The Chairman: Mr Lim, we are three and a half minutes short of the guillotine time.

Mr Lim Kim San: Mr Speaker, Sir, I think it would clear the mind of the Member for River Valley if I were to explain to him that the people who are renting the houses and the people who are able to purchase the houses are two different groups of people. Therefore, if you satisfy one group fully, you may not he able to satisfy the other group. And if he would more carefully read the pamphlet which he quoted, he would notice that it is mentioned therein that we want to bring about a house-owning democracy by encouraging the lower middle income group to own houses, and these houses could be sold only to this group. It is because of this objective that we drew up certain rules and regulations to prevent abuse. As a result of this, we have a group of people who otherwise would not find it possible to own houses. Because of this policy now, there is a group of people who own their own homes. Otherwise, they would be in no position at all to purchase any house of their own.

To come to the question of satisfying applicants for flats. I think it has often been mentioned here that we can provide an applicant with a house if he is not choosy, because the number of houses that are available is limited as against the number of applicants. Therefore, if a person is in real urgent need of a house, he cannot designate the locality in which he wants to rent the house. Maybe it is because there are none available and therefore it is not possible to accede to every wish of the applicant.

Mr Lim Cheng Lock: Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg leave to withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

5.50 p.m.

The time allotted for Head 40 having expired, the following amendment, standing in the names of Mr Teong Eng Siong and Inche Mohd. A riff Bin Suradi, was not proceeded with:

That the total sum to be allocated for Head 40 be reduced by $100.

The sum of $98,000,000 for Head 40 ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.

Mr Teong Eng Siong: (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to ask a question. I have not moved my amendment to Head 40.

The Chairman: I am sorry, but the time for discussion of Head 40 has expired.

Mr Teong Eng Siong: (In Mandarin): I regret it very much.

The Chairman: Quite true. But I have got to stick to these guillotine times; otherwise we will never finish.

Head 41 -

Now, on Head 41 you have a motion, Mr Teong. The time allocated for discussion of this head is five minutes both for your speech and the Minister's reply.

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

That the total sum to be allocated for Head 41 be reduced by $100.

Under this head the vote is $2,586,000 to provide for the setting up of quarters for Customs officers and the Jurong Customs Stations. I would like to ask, firstly, whether the setting up of the Jurong Customs Stations is to meet the needs of our exports by pioneer industries, and whether these stations can facilitate our external trade. When will these stations be built? Secondly, how much is the rental to be paid for the quarters in these Customs Stations?

Mr Ho Kah Leong (Jurong): (In Mandarin): I would like to ask the Minister whether he is aware that the Customs Section in the railway station at Tanjong Pagar is located in an open space and not on the platform. This has caused certain inconvenience and trouble to the travellers on the railway and when it rains -

The Chairman: Are you referring to the Customs Station at the railway station?

Mr Ho Kah Leong: Yes, the Customs Station.

The Chairman: I do not think this is the concern of the Minister of Finance. That is the Malaysian Customs Station, is it not?

Mr Ho Kah Leong: I suppose have one, Sir.

The Chairman: Please proceed.

Mr Ho Kah Leong: (In Mandarin): According to what I know, the platform belongs to the Malaysian Government and their officers have refused to give a place to our Customs officers to car out their work. So I would like to ask the Minister whether we could all space on the platform for our own Customs officers.

The Chairman: Mr Lim Kim San, one minute.

Mr Lim Kim San: To answer the Member for Sembawang, the development to be carried out for building Customs stations and quarters Customs officers in Jurong is because of the rapid expansion of the industry complex and also because of the n Jurong wharf from which goods to be off-loaded.

Since I have one minute, I will reply to the Member for Jurong. It is true that our Customs has not got proper facilities to examine goods arriving rail from Malaysia. At the moment, we have not had permission from the Malaysian Government, who owns the Malaysian Railways, to open a Customs House there, but we will try our level best to see whether they can accommodate us and make things easy. Failing that, we will have to think of another way to put up proper facilities to e amine goods coming in from Malaysia.

Mr Teong Eng Siong: (In Mandarin): I thank the Minister for his explanation, and I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The sum of $2,586,000 for Head 41 ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.

The Chairman: As we have lost all the time we gained on Question Time, may I plead with Members to try to keep strictly to the guillotine time, so that I am not compelled to exercise my powers more than absolutely necessary?

Head 50 -

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

That the sum to be allocated for Head 50 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 201.

The Chairman: Mr Lingam is not here. Amendment No. (2)*, Mr Teong Eng Siong.

(* The same amendment also stood in the name of Mr Ho Kah Leong.)

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

That the total sum to be allocated for Head 50 be reduced by $100*.

Under this head the vote is $1,021,520. The allocation for the Permanent Television Centre is $170,000, and that for Improvement to Television and Broadcasting Services is $851,500. Our Government has made some achievement in the provision of television services so that our people can enjoy the same facilities as those enjoyed by people in advanced countries. The television station is not only aimed at providing high-class recreation and amusement programmes to our people but also to instil in the people a sense of national consciousness and patriotism. But, in the past, has the television station achieved these two high objectives? During our debate on the cultural programmes put up by this television station, it would seem that these two objectives have not been realised. I personally feel that there should be many changes in the television programmes in order to improve the contents to achieve these two objecttives. More films of an educational nature should be screened and nonsensical programmes should be reduced.

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Culture (Mr Fong Sip Chee): Sir, the Member for Sembawang has suggested that we should include more healthy and constructive programmes and discard unhealthy and unconstructive programmes. Is he implying that the present programmes are unhealthy and unconstructive?

The Chairman: Mr Fong, that does not assist my problem very much. My problem is that Mr Teong's speech, unfortunately, should have come during the debate on Broadcasting in the Main Estimates. Here we are dealing with development. The Minister is asking for $851,500 to improve the Television and Broadcasting Services.

Mr Teong Eng Siong: (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I agree with you. But since we have the Television and Broadcasting Services, we must have the programmes.

6.00 p.m.

What is the use of a television station without sufficient good and constructive programmes? So I hope we will get praise from all quarters when we debate this same item next year.

Another point is this. I would like to ask the Minister who is in charge of educational television which will be started next year ---

The Chairman: Mr Teong, I am afraid I must stop you. We have just discussed educational television under the vote for the Ministry of Education. I think I gave you every opportunity to say what you wanted under that head. Need we now address ourselves on educational television all over again? The Minister for Culture and Social Affairs is not asking for any money for educational television under this vote.

Mr Teong Eng Siong: (In Mandarin): Sir, if that is the case, I will not touch further on it.

I would like to ask a further question: how many television sets do we have at the present moment?

The Chairman: I will not permit the Minister to answer that question, because it is clearly outside this head.

The Question is,

"That the total sum to be allocated for Head 50 be reduced by $100."

Mr Ho Kah Leong.

Mr Ho Kah Leong: (In Mandarin): Sir, with regard to the setting up of a Permanent Television Centre, I would like to ask the Minister whether there is provision for coloured television and when will the people of Singapore be able to enjoy coloured T.V. programmes?

I would also like to ask him whether there are plans to facilitate the production of local programmes in order to reduce the number of unhealthy programmes and whether certain programmes, i.e., "Mandarin Mixture" will be discontinued?

The Minister of State for Culture (Mr Lee Khoon Choy): Mr Speaker, Sir, I do not think it is necessary for me to reply to the Member for Sembawang. He seems to be talking again about yellow culture, and the same can be said of the Member for Jurong who spoke partly about a certain item in the T.V. programmes.

Briefly, I would like to say that we have to cater, as I have said, for all sections of the population. We cannot afford to give all the time to high-brow programmes to cater for people who go for high-brow art. We also have to consider those who prefer "middle-brow" or "low-brow" programmes.

As for programming, we believe in a pragmatic approach. We are not a Communist country where we can be dogmatic and fix dogmatic programmes for one year or for ten years to come. It depends on the inspiration of our programme directors and on events that occur from time to time according to the needs of our people.

As for coloured T.V., the present tension - the new building can cope with coloured T.V., but we have immediate plans to install it, because very large expenses may be involved. Even if we have coloured T.V., it only benefit the well-to-do who afford to buy sets which can show coloured T.V. However, if science provide us with more economical coloured T.V. sets and every average far can afford a set, we will not hesitate introduce coloured T.V. for the benefit of our population's better taste.

Mr Teong Eng Siong: (In Mandarin): Sir, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The increased sum of $1,021,520 Head 50 ordered to stand part of Development Estimates.

Head 52 -

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

That the total sum to be allocated Head 52 be reduced by $100.*

(* The same amendment also stood in the name of Inche Mahmud Awang.)

Under this Head, a sum of $200,010 is allotted for a Branch Library Queenstown. This is only right proper because the population there is increasing. I would like to commend the Minister on his foresight and appreciation of the needs of the people in that area. But I would add that should also look after the needs of people in other areas, because the aim of the Government is to raise standard of education of the people in general and not a section of our population.

Sir, I would suggest that the provision for next year should include setting up of branch libraries in all rural areas. In this connection, I wish to raise two points. First, does department have any plan to intro more mobile libraries? In other words, before branch libraries can be set up, the department can send out more mobile libraries to the rural areas to educate the people.

Second, I would like to ask when the air-conditioning unit in the National Library can be installed so that the people there can read in comfort.

The Chairman: The Question is,

"That the total sum to he allocated for Head 52 be reduced by $100."

Inche Mahmud Awang is not here. Mr Lee Khoon Choy.

Mr Lee Khoon Choy: Mr Speaker, Sir, the building of the Queenstown Branch Library, as stated by the Member for Sembawang, is part of the Government programme to provide more libraries not only in Queenstown but in the rural areas. The number of readers is expected to exceed our target of 120,000 by the end of this year. This is too big a number for our National Library. There is already serious over-crowding, and decentralisation is necessary. Apart from the National Library, there are two part-time branch libraries in Siglap and Joo Chiat community centres, and a mobile library which stops for two hours a week at four community centres, namely, Tanjong Pagar, the West Coast, Nee Soon and Bukit Panjang community centres. As a result of the expected expansion of the mobile library service in 1967, 12 additional community centres will be served. The proposed Queenstown Branch Library will be the first full-time branch library of the National Library to serve an estimated population of 160,000. It is hoped to build more branch libraries in other larger housing estates in the course of the next few years.

Mr Teong Eng Siong: (In Mandarin): In view of the Minister of State's answer, I beg leave to withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The increased sum of $200,010 for Head 52 ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.

Head 54 -

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

That the total sum to he allocated for Head 54 be reduced by $100.

The allocation for this head is $375,000 for the building of another Junior Approved School. I would like to raise three questions. First, how many Junior Approved Schools for boys are there, and how many Junior Approved Schools for girls are there? Second, what are the subjects taught in these schools? Third, what are the procedures regulating admission to the Home for the Aged in respect of vacancies and age limit?

The Minister for Culture and Social Affairs (Inche Othman Bin Wok): Mr Speaker, Sir, in reply to the questions by the Member for Sembawang, at the moment, we do not have any Junior Approved Schools for boys or for girls. We intend to build one in 1967, and this is the new Junior Approved School for boys below the age of 14. At the moment, we have a Senior Approved School, that is, the Gimson School for Boys at Clementi Road which caters for boys between the ages of 14 and 16. We consider it highly desirable that the younger boys should be separated from the older boys, as the former require different training and treatment facilities from the older boys, and it is also necessary to prevent the smaller boys from falling under the adverse influence of the bigger and more experienced boys.

We propose to build the Junior Approved School on land available at Clementi Road near the Gimson School for Boys, and it will provide facilities for the training and rehabilitation of some 80 delinquents committed for such training by the courts. The building is of semi-permanent material with an estimated life-span of 30 to 40 years. With regard to the training of these boys, besides academic lessons, they are taught handicrafts and carpentry, and so on, to equip them with the necessary knowledge when they leave school and go back to society.

6.15 p.m.

As for the third question on vacancies for people in the Home for the Aged, I believe he asked what are the qualifications for anyone to apply for entry into this Home. Sir, at the moment, we have one Home for the Aged at Woodlands which caters for 500 persons. The capacity is now almost full, and we consider it necessary to put up another similar home. So we intend to build another one sometime next year. As for the qualifications, any man or woman over the age of 65, with no dependants and nobody to support him or her, can apply for admission to the Home. If the Member himself is interested, I think it will be more than 20 years from now before his problem arises, and by that time we will have more Homes for the Aged and he has no need to worry about admission to one of them!

Mr Teong Eng Siong: (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, I asked this question because of certain queries received by me. That is why I wanted to find out. Anyway, I thank the Minister for his reply and I beg leave to withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The sum of $375,000 for Head 54 ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.

Head 55 -

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

That the sum to be allocated for Head 55 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 102.

The Chairman: Amendment No. (1) -Mr S. V. Lingam is not here. Amendment No. (2)*, Mr Sim Boon Woo. He is not here. Mr Ng Yeow Chong.

Mr Ng Yeow Chong (Mountbatten): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 55 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 107. *

Mr Speaker, Sir, under this subhead there is a provision of $100,000 for Improvement to Beaches. The Government should be praised for its wise move to make this provision under Five-Year Plan 1966-70 to improve beach resorts.

Sir, swimming in our island nation is an integral part of the outdoor activities among our young and citizens. This House will recall that the 1966 Development Estimates debates in December 1965, the Parliament Secretary to the Minister for So Affairs assured the House that beaches would be beautified and amenities provided.

I am delighted to know that the plan to improve our beaches is now beginning to take shape and will materialise the sum so provided in 1967. Sir, now wish to seek further information on what the Minister plans to do a how this sum could be best used. I wonder if the project will include building of beach huts, or what are commonly known as chalets, for seaside picnickers where they can change and relax At present I notice that at certain places swimmers have to change their clothing behind bushes and some even have do it in their cars. However, if there are beach huts or chalets which can be hired out to picnickers on a daily basis, they will certainly provide privacy to swimmers, particularly to the ladies.

At present we have many camp sites and toilet facilities near the seaside, but these are not adequate and unsuitable for changing purposes. Many picnickers, particularly ladies, are not served with any facilities for privacy. I hope the Government will consider building proper beach resorts and creational amenities to meet the needs of our citizens as well as to attract tourists.

Will the Minister consider using this sum to provide not only facilities changing rooms but also individual chalets or wooden huts for those who want to hire them for the day? Speaker, Sir, you will agree with that good recreational amenities will help to rejuvenate our citizens in building a strong and viable nation.

Inche Othman Bin Wok: Sir, the need for better recreational facilities on our beaches is becoming urgent, and it is proposed to make a start at the Changi Beach which has proved extremely popular with the local population. The Ministry proposes, for a start, to construct 20 chalets with shower baths and toilet facilities at Changi Beach, which will be rented out to the public at modest charges. The intention is to provide holiday facilities with a reasonable degree of comfort for members of the public in the middle and lower income groups.

If this pilot project proves a success, plans will be made for further similar projects both at Changi Beach and other beaches on the Island.

Mr Ng Yeow Chong: Sir, in view of the Minister's assurance given to this House, I beg leave to withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

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

That the total sum to be allocated for Head 55 be reduced by $100.*

(* The same amendment also stood in the name of Madam Chan Choy Siong.)

Mr Speaker, Sir, under this head the sum asked for is $660,000 in order to build 10 children's playgrounds and to beautify the beaches, etc. This is a praiseworthy plan because children are the future masters of our nation. So they must have places to breathe fresh air and exercise their muscles, so that from young they will start to build a healthy body. I am fully in agreement with this plan and I endorse it.

However, I would like to ask two points for clarification. Firstly, about the 10 children's playgrounds. Where are they to be built? Have the sites been chosen for the two parks? If no sites have been chosen, I suggest that at least one must be in the rural areas. Secondly, Mr Speaker, I would ask the Minister whether he can build one children's playground in Sembawang, because at the 15th m.s. there is a big piece of vacant land serving several kampongs. I can tell him that this place is just near the Work Brigade Camp and I would like him to look into the matter.

Madam Chan Choy Siong: (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, I like to touch on matters relating to this head. Since we are asking for so much money for the development of more children's playgrounds and more parks, I do not know whether the Minister will agree with me when I say that, at the present moment, the existing parks are not ideal. They have not reached a satisfactory standard. For example, Kallang Park is a place where many people go every day to breathe fresh air and where their children can play. If we look at this place carefully, we will notice that it does not look like a park. It looks like a factory site because ship-repairing is going on there. And we find a lot of lorries and factories also. So this place does not look like a park at all.

What I mean to ask, Mr Speaker, is that the Minister should turn this place into a real park and take steps to beautify it, because it is suitably located and is convenient to many people compared with other parks on the island.

At the same time, Mr Speaker, I would also suggest that in future when parks are to be built, provision should be made for oriental colours to be added to them. In other words, the parks must be representative of the characteristics of the nation, so that whenever local people or foreigners see them, they can tell straightaway whether they are oriental or occidental. Foreigners who come to the place will see that Singapore is a different country. We see in the parks of foreign countries that they have some national characteristics to represent their nations.

The Chairman: Madam Chan, there are two minutes left. If you want to hear the Minister, you will have to stop now.

Inche Othman Bin Wok: In reply to the queries by the Member for Sembawang, Sir, 10 simple children's playgrounds at an approximate cost of $5,000 each will be built in Singapore under the provision. But I am sorry I am not able to tell him at the moment just where the sites are going to be. About the children's playground in Sembawang which he requests, I regret to say that it is not proposed at this time to construct children's playgrounds in the rural areas because there are plenty of open spaces there.

In reply to the Member for Delta, Sir, I agree with her that the standard .of Kallang Park is not as it should be. But, as you know, Sir, the National Stadium will soon be built at Kallang Park and with this scheme the park will be beautified. I think the Minister for National Development will be telling the House about the plans for the future of Kallang Park. I do ask the Member for Delta to bear with me for some more minutes until the time when the Minister for National Development comes to tell this House about Kallang Park.

Mr Teong Eng Siong: (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, the Minister is building more playgrounds in the urban areas, and I think that is uneconomical.

6.30 p.m.

The Chairman: Order. Time has lapsed. Mr Teong, do you wish to withdraw the amendment?

Mr Teong Eng Siong: (In Mandarin): Yes, I beg leave to withdraw. But I hope the Minister will consider building playgrounds in the rural areas.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The sum of $660,000 for Head 55 ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.

Head 56 -

The following amendment stood in the name of Madam Chan Choy Siong -

That the total sum to be allocated for Head 56 be reduced by $100.

The Chairman: Madam Chan.

Madam Chan Choy Siong: I am moving.

The sum of $100,000 for Head ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.

Head 60 -

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

That the sum to be allocated for Head 60 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 101.

The Chairman: Mr Sim Boon Woo is not here.

The sum of $478,600 for Head 60 ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.

Head 62 -

Mr Lim Cheng Lock: Mr Speaker, Sir, I move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 62 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 201.

Mr Speaker, Sir, subhead 201 is respect of multi-storey car parks wish to seek information from Minister on the provision of $300, for the year 1967 as to where one these multi-storey car parks is to sited. Is it going to be in the Orchard Road commercial area in the Constituencies of River Valley and Cairnhill?

Mr Rajoo: Mr Speaker, Sir, Minister said yesterday in this House that he had plans to build a multi-storey car park at Colombo Court hind the City Hall. We also heard I say that the plans are being thwarted by the residents of that area who have refused to move. Since the development programme is in the best interest of the public, may I ask him to take positive steps to push it through? I would also like to ask him whether he has plans for further multi-storey parks in strategic areas in Singapore such as Clifford Pier or Shenton Way.

Sir, commerce and industry is the life-blood of our nation. It is quite necessary that every possible encouragement and facility should be given to the business community in promoting their business and trade. The heart-land of Singapore business lies in Change Alley, Market Street, Cecil Street and Robinson Road. Since the road frontages in these areas have been marked Out with car parking bays, big business firms having stores and godowns and a big turnover of business in these areas are deprived of loading and unloading facilities during office hours. The Multi-storey Car Park in Market Street was anticipated to relieve the parking problem considerably in that area, and although this car park now operates to full capacity, yet the road congestion in the area is not removed. If an immediate solution is not possible at the moment, will the Minister consider reserving the frontages of shops and big business firms for loading and unloading purposes if these firms are prepared to pay the rate under the car park system?

Mr Lim Guan Hoo: (In Mandarin): I would like to ask the Minister to explain whether he is prepared to consider setting up a multi-storey car park in Sembawang?

Mr Teong Eng Siong: (In Mandarin): I think the Member for Bukit Merah should be more concerned with his own constituency, instead of talking about Sembawang.

The Minister for Law and National Development (Mr E. W. Barker): Mr Speaker, Sir, if we can start from the last query: the answer is that I have no plans to build any car park in Sembawang. But to go back existing car parks in the central business districts have, in fact, reached saturation point, with the result that parking schemes have to be extended to the periphery of the city. Although car parks have been incorporated in the urban renewal programme as well as the comprehensive planning of traffic movement and transportation, they would take some time to be built. In order, therefore, to ease the rapidly worsening parking problem brought about by the phenomenal build-up of motor traffic as well as to free the road for a smoother flow of traffic, Government has decided that more multi-storey car parks should be constructed without delay. In view of the very high land values in the central area of the city the development of multi-storey structures solely for car parks is not considered desirable, and instead multi-level and multi-purpose buildings with provision for two levels below ground floors for car parking as well as shopping and office accommodation are to be preferred. What we intend to build is, if I may go back, below ground level an underground car park; above ground level - one or two storeys -shopping, and above that accommodation for offices.

The Member for Farrer Park has asked me a direct question whether I intend to build a car park at Clifford Pier. The answer is yes. This car park is being given priority. We have no squatter problems there. The land is vacant. At the moment, it is being used for parking in the open. We intend to build a car park there soon. That will be the first. There are others. I mentioned the one at Colombo Court yesterday, and the Member for Farrer Park today asked why we do not take more positive action against squatters sitting on the site. We have taken some action. In fact, most of the tenants who use the buildings only for residence have vacated. It is the shopkeepers on the ground floor who are being stubborn, and short of evicting them overnight and putting them on the road - a procedure which we consider highly undesirable - there is no other means to get them out except by persuasion. We have tried this. So far it has failed. Perhaps in the near future we will have to take more drastic action.

The other sites for car parks are in Phillip Street. Here we will have to acquire certain valuable land and then again the question of eviction will arise. Some old shop-houses will have to be demolished and again that will take time.

Mr Lim Cheng Lock: In view of the -

Mr Barker: I have not finished. The Member for River Valley wants to withdraw, but -

The Chairman: I think his concern was to get on to the other heads before guillotine time.

Mr Barker: I will not be long, Sir. We have also plans to build a car park near Elgin Bridge and another at the junction of Penang Road and Penang Lane near Fort Canning. This is probably in River Valley.

Mr Lim Cheng Lock: In view of the explanation, Sir, I beg leave to withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The Chairman: Mr Sim Boon Woo, amendment No. (2)* He is not here. Mr Sim Boon Woo, amendment No. (3)+ He is not here.

• Amendment No. (2) reads as follows:

That the sum to be allocated for Head 62 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 501.

• Amendment No. (3), which also stood in the name of Mr. Lim Cheng Lock, reads as follows:

That the sum to be allocated for Head 62 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 601

Mr Lim Cheng Lock: Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 62 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 601.

Mr Speaker, Sir, in view of the Ministry of Culture's promotion of golf through television, may I inquire from the Minister whether there are plans to include a miniature golf link in the National Sports Stadium?

Mr Barker: Mr Speaker, Sir, at the moment there are no plans to build a golf course at Kallang, not even a miniature golf course. I say at the moment. But I have been approached by one of the golfers in Singapore who has asked me to put up a golf course around Kallang Park. He would be satisfied with nine holes and he said that this golf course would bring in a lot revenue and attract tourists. But at the moment I say we have no plans. T plans are, if I may run through the shortly, initially, to build an open stadium to accommodate 50,000 spectators. The stadium will cost between $20 million and $25 million. Piling has commenced and the piling work should be completed by the middle of next year.

6.45 p.m.

After the stadium has been completed, attention will be given to the following projects in the complex:

(1) a covered stadium to accommodate 10,000 spectators;

(2) an open swimming pool;

(3) a rifle range;

(4) a permanent exhibition hall;

(5) floating restaurants; and

(6) a multi-storey hotel.

There would probably be a ferry service jetty and a mass transport terminal. There would be plenty of playgrounds for children. To go back to the Member for River Valley whether or not a golf course - even a miniature one - will be built, this will depend on the future thinking of my planners.

Mr Lim Cheng Lock: Mr Speaker, Sir, on the development of this National Sports Stadium, has the Minister give any thought to who will be responsible for the running of this sports stadium and whether it will be a corporation, and what are its financial implications?

Mr Barker: Though I am in charge of the building of this stadium, it operation will be under the Minister for Social Affairs and Culture. I do not think he has any plans at the moment for the actual running and operation of the stadium. But when the time comes and the stadium is built, I can assure the Member for River Valley that consideration will be given to his idea of forming a corporation to run the stadium.

Mr Lim Cheng Lock: In view of the explanation, I beg leave to withdraw, Sir.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

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

That the total sum to be allocated for Head 62 be reduced by $100.

I will only ask five questions. Firstly, when are the plans for multi-storey car parks expected to be completed? Secondly, what are the plans for urban redevelopment for which there is a provision of $15 million? Thirdly, when will the National Sports Stadium be completed? Fourthly, will there be health facilities in the multi-storey car parks? In other words, will there be any bathrooms or toilets on each of the floors? Fifthly, will there be enough facilities for the National Sports Stadium with a capacity of 50,000 persons?

6.50 p.m.

The Chairman: Order. Time is up. Mr Teong, do you wish to withdraw the amendment?

Mr Teong Eng Siong: (In Mandarin): I withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The sum of $43,500,000 for Head 62 ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.

Head 63 -

Mr Ng Yeow Chong: Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 63 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 301.

Sir, I notice that under this subhead there is a sum of $180,000 provided for a Fisheries Training Centre to be developed from the existing Fisheries School, which, as I understand, was built in 1953 with sums contributed jointly by five Governments, namely, Britain, Malaya, Brunei, Sarawak and Singapore, and Singapore's contribution was 35 per cent. The School was only used for three years and after that it was totally neglected and is now in a deteriorating condition. Now the Primary Production Department has decided to develop it into a Fisheries Training Centre with this provision of $180,000 for the year 1967.

Sir, I do not for a moment oppose the principle of developing a Training Centre for the fishing industry. But certainly a better site elsewhere can be located for this purpose, such as Punggol, Kangar or one of the offshore islands which are more suitable for fishing, marine research and training centre. As for this particular site, i.e. Changi Point, which has the best beach in Singapore, I do not see why it should be wantonly wasted on a School for Fisheries instead of converting the present building and its surroundings into a first-class beach recreation ground in order to attract tourists who can spend millions of dollars on their visit to Singapore.

Now that Singapore is on the world tourist map and the Government is spending millions of dollars to encourage tourists to come here, surely the Minister will reconsider changing this site in favour of a recreational beach resort for our citizens and tourists.

As far as I can visualise, Changi Point should have hotels, restaurants, beach chalets, parks, children playgrounds and such other facilities which are common features in well-known countries where tourism thrives, e.g. Hawaii, Honolulu or even Long Beach in California. This project can either be developed by Government or by the private sector.

I wonder if the Minister, in view of the increasing tourist trade, will seriously reconsider an alternative site for the Fisheries Training Centre in order to preserve the best part of our beach from being improperly used. I cannot imagine a fisheries school in Waikiki Beach or in Long Beach.

Mr Barker: Mr Speaker, Sir, the Fisheries Research Station in Changi was originally established and maintained by six Governments. They are the British, Malaya, Brunei, Sarawak, Borneo and Singapore Governments. It was through no fault of the Singapore Government that the Fisheries Research Station at Changi was not put to use. The building was owned by the British Government, and for some years even the National Trades Union Congress used it as a holiday bungalow. But even they decided to give it up. Recently it was handed over to the Singapore Government by the British Government.

The decision to convert it into a Fisheries Training Centre is based on the fact that this building was specially designed for training and research purposes. Since we have to build a Fisheries Training Centre to promote and encourage deep-sea and off-shore fishing, it will cost the Government considerably more money if we have to build a completely new building on another site. The Centre will have to be properly equipped and constructed with laboratory facilities and other services, and these are already available at the Centre in Changi. I do not dispute the fact that Changi beach is a proper site for development of beach facilities. However, the Centre is occupying a very small area at the end of Changi Point. It should not cause much distress to persons who wish to use the adjacent beach at Changi. I think it would be difficult to develop Changi to compare with Long Beach, Hawaii or Honolulu. There are other methods to attract tourists, but I will not go into them at the moment.

Mr Ng Yeow Chong: In view of what the Minister has said, I beg to withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

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

That the sum to be allocated for Head 63 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 302.

The Chairman: Mr Sim Boon Woo is not present.

Mr Teong Eng Siong rose -

The Chairman: Mr Teong, Can make one suggestion? Even if you start to move your amendment now, Minister will not have time to reply. Under the heads that are coming, your amendments are down last in respect of each head. Therefore, may I suggest that you try to say what you want say on any particular subhead that comes up before on an amendment by some other Member, because with tight schedule, it may turn out that guillotine comes before you rise to move your amendment, which happens to be last?

Mr Teong Eng Siong: (In Mandarin): Sir, what I want to raise is quite different matter. I beg to move,

That the total sum to be allocated for Head 63 be reduced by $100.

I would like to ask the Minister why the vote of $5,981,060 for next year is an increase over that of this year, and for what purpose?

7.00 p.m.

Mr Barker: The increase in the provision is because there are many more projects for this year. We are expanding very rapidly in all departments, and particularly in these departments, --- animal husbandry, agriculture and fisheries. We are putting up a new fish market at Jurong, which formed the subject of a question a few weeks ago and the central abattoirs. These cost quite a bit of money.

Mr Teong Eng Siong: (In Mandarin): Sir, I beg leave to withdraw amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The increased sum of $5,981,060 for Head 63 ordered to stand part of Development Estimates.

Head 64 -

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

That the sum to be allocated for Head 64 be reduced by

$10 in respect of item 006 of subhead 201.

That the sum to be allocated for Head 64 be reduced by $10 in respect of item 007 of subhead 201.

That the sum to be allocated for Head 64 be reduced by $10 in respect of item 008 of subhead 201.

That the sum to be allocated for Head 64 be reduced by $10 in respect of item 001 of subhead 205.

The Chairman: Mr Lingam is not here. Amendment (5)* - Mr Lim Cheng Lock.

Mr Lim Cheng Lock: Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 64 be reduced by $10 in respect of item 002 of subhead 208.*

Mr Speaker, Sir, at present Orchard Road, particularly around Orchard Circus, is already congested with traffic at peak periods, and with the extension of the commercial area and development of luxury hotels in the Orchard Road area, can the Minister inform this House whether in the planning of all these development buildings, consideration has been given to the increase in vehicular traffic? Can he also inform this House when the conversion of Orchard Road into a one-way traffic system will begin?

Mr Barker: Sir, in order to reduce somewhat the congestion of traffic along Orchard Road, we will be introducing a one-way traffic system along that road at the beginning of next year. Starting from Tanglin Circus, it will be one-way traffic down past Hotel Singapura, along Orchard Road, past the Lido Theatre, right down to the Circus in front of the Istana, then along Stamford Road into town and round the Padang. Then back towards Orchard Road, there are several streams. One, from say the junction of Elgin Bridge along River Valley Road, right up Oxley Rise, down towards the Circus in front of the Straits Times building, then up Irwell Bank Road towards the Circus and then into Grange Road and from Grange Road back to Tanglin Circus. That will all be one-way. In between, say, Grange Road and Orchard Road, roads like Paterson Road, Killiney Road, Oxley Road, some will be completely one-way and some will have traffic going both ways but they have to turn if they are in the wrong direction either at the Orchard Road side or the River Valley Road side.

Because of the one-way traffic, we have had to cut down some of the palm trees which are part of the beauty of the City in front of the Istana Negara. Some people thought we were cutting down those palms to put up another fountain. Unfortunately, we are not. We got rid of the palm trees because of the one-way traffic. There will be traffic lights at this junction and the traffic police were of the view that if the palm trees were left there, they would interfere with the lights. So it was with much regret that we decided to get rid of these palm trees which were, if I remember correctly, planted by the Japanese during the occupation of Singapore.

Mr Lim Cheng Lock: In view of the explanation, I beg leave to withdraw, Sir.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Mr Lim Cheng Lock: Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 64 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 307.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I wish to draw the Minister's attention to the present traffic congestion at River Valley Road, Kim Seng Road and Irwell Bank Road. What plans are there to ease the traffic congestion at this junction?

In view of the one-way traffic system which will come into operation next year, is the Minister satisfied that it will not further impede the flow of traffic in that area?

Mr Barker: Mr Speaker, Sir, I am well aware of the traffic congestion at the two areas referred to by the Member for River Valley. The first is at River Valley Road and the second is at Irwell Bank Road. I am well aware of this congestion because I pass along these roads every day.

As I have stated before, we hope that the introduction of a one-way traffic system along these two roads will somewhat lessen congestion. In addition - the Member for River Valley will be pleased to know - we have plans to widen both roads at these junctions which are congested. In addition to widening the roads where possible, we will be introducing slip streams into the roads so that traffic can go along and slip into side-ways on to the main road. Like the Member for River Valley, I too hope that the introduction of the one-way traffic system and the widening of the roads at these congested junctions will considerably reduce traffic problems at these two spots.

Mr Lim Cheng Lock: In view of the explanation, I beg leave to withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

7.10 p.m.

The Chairman: It is ten past seven.

The time allotted for Head 64 having expired, the following amendment, standing in the name of Mr Teong Eng Siong, was not proceeded with:

That the total sum to be allocated for Head 64 be reduced by $100.

The increased sum of $9,015,070 for Head 64 ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.

Head 67 -

Mr Lim Cheng Lock: Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 67 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 103.

Mr Speaker, Sir, under subhead 103, there is a provision of $1,200,000 for improvement to Government Land and Provision of Amenities. Can the Minister inform this House what improvements to Government land and what provision of amenities are envisaged and for whom?

Mr Barker: Mr Speaker, Sir, the amount provided under this vote is to be utilised for works on Government owned land and premises. This is necessary because Government-owned land and premises have to be kept good and proper condition to prevent deterioration, otherwise more repairs will have to be undertaken in the future to make good the defects.

The work to be carried out under vote is as follows:

(1) Installation of modern sanitation to buildings and quarters;

(2) Installation of traffic signs painting of road-lines within Government precincts, for example, the General Hospital;

(3) Erection of fencing on Government land where necessary;

(4) Renovation of fountains;

(5) Construction of retaining to prevent landslides;

(6) Making up of access roads leading to Government buildings;

(7) Installation of water meter Government quarters and institutions.

Mr Lim Cheng Lock: In view o explanation, I beg leave to withdraw, Sir.

Amendment, by leave, withdraw

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

That the total sum to be allocated for Head 67 be reduced by $100.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like Minister to explain to this House expenditure with regard to subheads 102, 104, 202 and 208.

Madam Chan Choy Siong (Delta): (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, regard to this vote, I do not see allocation for the building of fount I remember raising this point in House a few months ago.

7.15 p.m.

The Chairman: Time is up. Mr Teong, I am afraid if you do not withdraw the amendment, I will have to put it to the House.

Mr Teong Eng Siong: (In Mandarin): Sir, I beg leave to withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The sum of $10,735,000 for Head 67 ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.

Head 68 -

Inche Mohd. Ariff: (In Malay): Mr Speaker, I seek your guidance. Can I speak on amendments (1)* and (3)+ standing in my name?

(* The same amendment also stood in the name of Mr Sim Boon Woo.)

• Amendment No. (3) which also stood in the name of Mr. S. V. Lingam, reads as follows:

That the sum to be allocated for Head 68 be reduced by $10 in respect of item 003 of subhead 101.

The Chairman: Will you move the first amendment? You may then address the House on the other amendment as well, so that the Minister can, at the appropriate time, answer your questions. You need not move each and every amendment that is related.

Inche Mohd. Ariff: (In Malay): Thank you, Sir, I move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 68 be reduced by $10 in respect of item 001 of subhead 101.*

(*The same amendment also stood in the name of Mr Sim Boon Woo.)

Mr Speaker, Sir, according to col. 187 of Hansard, Vol. 25, No. 4, dated 17th August, 1966, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for National Development replied that:

`the roads in the Kampong Kembangan Constituency other than those named in the question which will be made up under section 19 of the Local Government Integration Ordinance, 1963, are as follows ... Of these, Lorong Marzuki and Lorong Marican will be made up this year,'.

It seems that at Lorong Melayu, Jalan Hussein is not included in the plan. Can the Minister clarify the position, please?

Another matter which I wish to know is about the land acquired under section 19 of the L. G. I. O. Do the land owners get compensation in respect of the land taken away from them, or are they to be denied payment?

Regarding roads, the Parliamentary Secretary has given a list of roads which will be considered by the Urban and Rural Services Committee at its future meetings. This is contained in Hansard, Vol. 25, No. 2, dated 21st April, 1966, at cols. 43-6. However, up till today only one or two roads have been built Kampong Kembangan is a low-lying area and it is appropriate that special consideration should be given to it when the Committee is considering the making up of roads.

Sir, the Parliamentary Secretary has also stated in Hansard, Vol. 25, No. 1, dated 23rd February, 1966, at col. 8, that action would be taken against lorry owners responsible for damaging Jalan Perwira. But until today Jalan Perwira has not been repaired. Can he explain, to this House whether Jalan Perwira, which has been damaged by lorries carrying sand, will be repaired?

Regarding supplies of electricity and water, the Prime Minister has said that standpipes have been misused and water wasted and that Government has plans to install individual water pipes. I wish to know whether individual water pipes, as requested by residents in Upper Jalan Perwira, can be installed expeditiously. Also, can the applications for standpipes at Jalan Ladang Community Centre be replaced by supplying individual water pipes, so that the residents can obtain this amenity?

Likewise, Mr Speaker, regarding the supply of electricity at Lengkong 6, 7 and 8, and also at Upper Jalan Perwira, can these applications be expedited?

[Mr Lim Cheng Lock in the Chair]

7.19 p.m.

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for National Development (Mr Ho Cheng Choon): Sir, just now the Member for Kampong Kembangan has complained about the road that has been approved to be made up under section 19 of the L.G.I.O. as mentioned in my reply to him, and that this road up to now has not been made up. In this connection, I would say that in 1966 there were 158 private streets to be made up under section 19 of the L.G.I.O. Because of the large number of private streets to be made up, it is impossible to complete all the projects within the year, as much work is involved in the making up of private streets under section 19. For instance, before a project is carried out, the P.W.D. has to get a clearance from the Chief Planner on the arrangement of the road. They have then to carry out a survey and also to request the Commissioner of Lands to proceed with the acquisition of land under section 21 of the L.G.I.O. There may also be some problems relating to the resettlement of squatters, and other matters. When all these matters are completed, the P.W.D. has to serve a notice on the occupier, make a notification in the Gazette and insert an advertisement in the local Press. We have to give the resident one month's notice to seek his views - whether or not he has any objection. After that, the P.W.D. has to insert an advertisement in the Press for public tender.

But I can tell the Member for Kampong Kembangan that not only was the making up of these private streets in his constituency not carried out, but those few private streets in other constituencies which have to be made up were also not done. I can assure him that those private streets will be made up as soon as possible.

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

7.24 p.m.

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for National Development (Mr Ho Cheng Choon): Regarding the supply of water mains to the residents, if the Member can give me more details, I can bring the matter up for discussion at next month's meeting of the U.R.S.C.

Inche Mohd. Ariff: (In Malay): I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

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

(2) That the sum to be allocated Head 68 be reduced by $10 in respect of item 002 of subhead 101.

The Chairman: Amendment No. (2), Mr Lingam. He is not here. Amendment No. (3)+, Inche Mohd. Ariff. Is it correct that you are not moving?

(+ See footnote at cols. 1031-2.)

Inche Mohd. Ariff: I am not moving, Sir.

The Chairman: Mr Lingam is not here. Amendment No.(4)*, Mr Gonzales.

Mr R. A. Gonzales (Serangoon Gardens): Mr Speaker, Sir, in moving this amendment*, may I also be allowed to speak on the other amendment++ standing in my name?

++ Amendment No. (5) reads as follows:

That the sum to be allocated for Head 68 be reduced by $10 in respect of item 007 of subhead 101.

The Chairman: Yes, Mr Gonzales. It will help us save some time.

Mr Gonzales: Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head be reduced by $10 in respect of item 006 subhead 101*.

Mr Speaker, Sir, visitors to Singapore and even Singaporeans, are amazed the progress that is being made Singapore. One day they find that there is nothing but swamp land, and in a few months or even days - if they visit the same area again - they find nothing but multi-storey buildings, roads all the other amenities that go w development. It seems to me that a lot of money is, however, wasted in providing footpaths and cycle tracks every time a new road is built. I am not saying that these should not be provided. In fact, I think they are essential for poor pedestrian and cyclist in Singapore if they are to keep out of the way some speed maniacs with which every country is plagued, and of which Singapore has more than its fair share.

What I am against is that when these are provided at some expense, we s see cyclists cycling and pedestrians walking on the road. I can think of some reasons for this. One is probably due to the fact that some of our cyclists and pedestrians have not got the sense to make use of the facilities provided. Another reason probably is due to the fact that footpaths and tracks are taken up by hawkers. A further reason is that the tracks and footpaths are in such poor condition that cyclists and pedestrians are forced to make use of the road.

I think you will agree with me, Sir, and you may have noticed it yourself, that no sooner is a cycle track made than up come the P.U.B. or the Telephone Board or the P.W.D. to dig it up, and by the time they have finished their work, it is not fit to be used by anyone. You may have also noticed, Sir, that due to lack of maintenance there is more grass growing on these tracks than on the road verge.

I agree that it would take an army to educate the masses that they should make use of the facilities provided. It will take some time to make the people realise that footpaths and cycle tracks are to be made use of. I would suggest to the Ministers - not one Minister but several Ministers concerned - that they step up the campaign for safety on the roads. Cyclists should be fined for not making use of cycle tracks, and pedestrians pulled up or fined for not making use of footpaths and crossing the roads at any point they wish. Only when we accomplish this can we consider that the monies spent on footpaths and cycle tracks are well spent.

On the question of roads or drains, I would like to ask the Minister how much was spent on making up of drains in the rural areas during the year 1966. We heard the Minister for Health the other day mentioning in this House that nearly half the city's rubbish could be found in drains. We find that in the rural areas roadside drains which are made up today may not be there the following week. Drains made in the rural areas are usually not lined and dependent on the type of weather, and especially during the rainy season you will find that they are filled up with earth that is washed off the roads within a matter of days, and all the money spent on making up these drains has - as what one would say - gone down the drain.

7.30 p.m.

I would like to suggest that the Minister consider the possibility of planning roadside drains with concrete slabs or other suitable material. It would be more expensive initially, but the money saved in continually desilting the present-type drains will more than warrant the initial expenses. Furthermore, Sir, it will save the expenses of having continually to resurface roads in the rural areas which are being eroded during the rainy season, because the drains are not deep enough to carry away the excess water.

Mr Ho Cheng Choon: The Member for Serangoon Gardens has just mentioned footpaths and cycle tracks. He says this is a problem. The Urban and Rural Services committee is provided with this vote for public roads which are much used by pedestrians near schools, market places, places of entertainment and worship. These are usually much used by vehicles also. To cater for the use of pedestrians and even cyclists, footpaths and cycle tracks are constructed. Footpaths for pedestrians are normally five feet wide and footpaths-cum-cycle tracks for both pedestrians and cyclists are 12 feet wide.

Sir, it is not true that when the P.U.B. or some other statutory board want to undertake some project, they have to damage the footpath, and after the project has been completed, this damaged footpath is left as it is. In fact, after the project is completed, the damaged footpath is repaired again.

As regards the starting of a campaign for road safety, I notice that the Ministry of Social Affairs has set up a Safety First Council recently.

Inche Othman Bin Wok: This Council was set up by the Ministry of Defence, Sir.

Mr Ho Cheng Choon: I thank the Minister for his clarification. I think the Safety First Council can look after this problem. This year the Government has spent $87,820 on repairing drains in the rural and city areas.

A point has been raised by the Member. He has suggested that we must build more concrete drains instead of earth drains, as we are doing now in the rural constituencies. This is a good suggestion, but comparing the construction of a road and that of a drain, the construction of a drain will cost much more than that of a road. A road in the rural constituency is more important than a drain. Because of limited funds, more concentration should be given on the repairing of roads. Roads should come first.

Mr Gonzales: Mr Speaker, Sir, I think the Parliamentary Secretary has misunderstood what I said. I said that if drains were to be made better than they are today, we would spend less on roads. I was not saying that roads are not important. I said we could spend less on resurfacing roads, as excess water could be drained away instead of its draining away on to the road itself. In fact, we would have drains on roads and not drains on the side of the road, as has happened.

The Chairman: That is a suggestion on which I am sure the Parliamentary Secretary will need professional advice, and I have no doubt he will put it to the engineers of the Public Works Department. If that is done, would you agree to withdraw this amendment, Mr Gonzales?

Mr Gonzales: May I beg leave to withdraw, Sir?

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The following amendment stood in the name of Mr R. A. Gonzales -

(5) That the sum to be allocated for Head 68 be reduced by $10 in respect of item 007 of subhead 101.

The Chairman: Mr Gonzales, amendment No. (5) .

Mr Gonzales: I am not moving. The following amendment stood the name of Inche Mohd. Ariff Suradi -

(6) That the sum to be allocated Head 68 be reduced by $10 in respect of item 008 of subhead 101.

The following amendment stood in the names of Inche Mohd. Ariff Suradi and Mr S. V. Lingam -

(7) That the sum to be allocated Head 68 be reduced by $10 in respect of item 010 of subhead 101.

The following amendments stood in the name of Inche Mohd. Ariff Suradi -

(8) That the sum to be allocated Head 68 be reduced by $10 in respect of item 011 of subhead 101.

(9) That the sum to be allocated Head 68 be reduced by $10 in respect of item 012 of subhead 101.

The Chairman: Inche Mohd. Ariff, amendments Nos. (6) , (7) , (8) and (9) .

Inche Mohd. Ariff: (In Malay): I am not moving.

The following amendment stood in the name of Mr Tang See Chim -

(10) That the sum to be allocated for Head 68 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 101.

The Chairman: Mr Tang See Chim, amendment No. (10) . He is not here.

Amendment No. (11) , Mr Teong Siong. May I suggest that, in order to give Inche Rahamat an opportunity to speak, you speak for five minutes, Teong, Inche Rahamat speaks for five minutes, and the Minister will have seven minutes to reply.

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

That the total sum to be allocated Head 68 be reduced by $100.

Sir, the allocation of $2,715,000 shows an increase over that for last year. This vote is meant to be used various construction projects in rural areas, including the building of roads, drains, footpaths, lighting, etc. I would like to offer my congratulations to the Minister on his continued efforts and consideration for the welfare of the rural people. The progress and achievement in the rural areas have been seen by all. There is a new picture to be seen generally throughout the rural area. This should be to the credit of the Government.

I have now several points to which I hope the Minister will pay attention. I hope next year there will be better progress in the rural areas and that he will pay attention to the construction work carried out there by the various Ministries to speed up the development plans.

Inche Rahamat Bin Kenap (Geylang Serai): (In Malay): Mr Speaker, Sir, in carrying out projects in the rural areas, the U.R.S.C.'s attention should be drawn to the increased vote. The Committee has made several improvements in the construction of roads, street lighting, drains, etc., particularly in the rural areas. During the colonial regime and also during the Alliance Government of Lim Yew Hock and U.M.N.O., these areas were neglected altogether, including Geylang Serai, which was previously represented by an U.M.N.O. member. He was also a Minister in the Lim Yew Hock Government. Through the efforts of the U.R.S.C. under the P.A.P. Government now, gradual improvements have been made. However, we still find some defects which should be remedied by the U.R.S.C. The fundamental problem is that of finance, although a vote has been allocated for each constituency for one year. I do not know where the fault lies. I will give an example. For instance, the expenditure for the construction of a road is $24,500. While the vote for that constituency is more than the amount quoted, that road cannot be built by the department concerned on the ground that there is no money. What has happened to the vote allocated for each constituency for the projects? Similarly the allocation of votes for each constituency differs, for instance, between the rural areas and the city area. But such votes must be based on the conditions and circumstances of each constituency, which should be put right because it happens that the conditions in the rural constituencies are better than those in the city area.

Mr Speaker, Geylang Serai is a low-lying area with a total population of several thousands. This area is a slum area. The conditions there are bad, and the roads and drainage should be improved. The Geylang Serai Constituency has not previously enjoyed any amenities, either from the colonial Government or the Lim Yew Hock Government. At that time the area was dark because there was no street lighting. The roads were bad. People had occasion to call the roads by certain names, because the users of the roads had to lift up their sarongs. Since the P.A.P. came to power in 1959, Geylang Serai has made considerable improvement, especially through the efforts of the U.R.S.C. which is established by the Government. We can see the results there. However, more consideration and more money should be given to this constituency in order to carry out the projects which have not been implemented there. Geylang Serai has received a vote of $53,090.

Mr Tay Boon Too: (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to speak on this head and to raise three questions. I hope the Minister will answer them. Firstly, I would like to know whether the Urban and Rural Services Committee has any plans to deal with the delay in the improvement in the rural areas. When a Member of Parliament of a constituency raises the question of improvement to be made in his constituency, his letter will first be considered by the Urban and Rural Services Committee. This will take about half a year to complete. So I see no benefit in this procedure.

Secondly, I would like to know whether the Urban and Rural Services Committee has any good plan to carry out the various projects in the rural constituencies according to the votes given to them. For instance, in my constituency, the vote is already exhausted before it can be used to provide more street lights.

Thirdly, I would like to ask the Minister whether after the votes have been allotted, there is any planning for the development of the various constituencies; whether the department concerned has any consultation with all the organisations and people concerned to formulate plans and to carry out the plans and projects speedily without red tape; and whether the department concerned can develop the various projects in the various constituencies evenly and on a balanced basis.

7.45 p.m.

Mr Lim Guan Hoo: (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to ask the Minister something. The Member for Sembawang has, all along during the course of the debate, been withdrawing various amendments which asked for the reduction of $10 or $100 from the votes. Sir, I feel this is a waste of our time.

Mr Teong Eng Siong rose -

The Chairman: Mr Lim, is your question addressed to me or to the Parliamentary Secretary? Perhaps I could call upon him to reply.

Mr Lim Guan Hoo: (In Mandarin): Sir, I was directing my remarks at Members in general.

The Chairman: I think I had better call upon Mr Ho to reply.

Mr Ho Cheng Choon: Mr Speaker, Sir, in reply to the Member for Geylang Serai, I have to say that I quite agree that the Geylang Serai Constituency had been neglected before 1963 and that this backwardness is due to the inefficiency of the Lim Yew Hock Government and the colonial Government. From 1963 up to now, the Government has spent $600,000 on public amenities like street lighting, good roads, standpipes and other projects in this constituency. The Government is determined not only to look after the Geylang Serai Constituency, but also other rural constituencies.

In regard to the allocation of funds to the constituencies, the amount is based on the size and population of constituency and the area in which it is situated. For instance, Anson Constituency has 147 acres - .23 square mile - and the population is about 22,500. The vote for this constituency, which is in the urban area, is $12,828.

Geylang Serai, a suburban area, 595 acres - .93 square mile - and a population of 44,100. It is eligible for $53,991.

Jurong, in the rural area, has 18,867 acres - 29.48 square miles - and a population of 28,700 and is entitled $91,846. As I have just pointed out, funds are fairly allocated to e constituency. So I am afraid we can favour any particular constituency.

In reply to the Member for Paya Lebar, this is the first time I heard complaint that proposals to make up a road or some other project take year to be considered.

Mr Tay Boon Too: Half a year.

Mr Ho Cheng Choon: Half a year. If he could bring me this particular case, I will look into the matter. This year we have spent $40,237 on the Paya Lebar Constituency and the projects include making of roads, drainage, putting water mains and installing street lighting. Mr Speaker, I would suggest that Member concerned should, when putting up a proposal, send me a copy of ii that I can keep track of it and officer concerned should submit report directly to me.

Mr Teong Eng Siong: (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker. Sir, the Parliament Secretary has not answered my point relating to the assurance to be given to this House that his Ministry will speed up the various works. I am very happy about this.

Mr Ho Cheng Choon: Mr Speaker, all the projects approved by the Urban and Rural Services Committee have to be carried out. It may be a matter of three months or six months. But I want to bring to the attention of this House that the Member for Sembawang is a member of the Committee. So proposal he wants to put up is welcome. But I had better advise him to speak to the Committee.

Mr Teong Eng Siong: (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I am not representing my own constituency. I am speaking on behalf of all the areas concerned. But in any case I withdraw my amendment. I must thank the Parliamentary Secretary for the reply.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The sum of $2,715,000 for Head 68 ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.

The Chairman: The remaining heads of expenditure in respect of which no amendment stands on the Order Paper are Heads : - 03 $5,684,630 04 $ 153,000 05 $ 275,200 06 $ 150,000 11 $ 341,000 51 $ 212,000 53 $ 125,000 57 $ 420,030 58 $1,172,310 61 $4,000,000 65 $3,090,010 66 $9,320,010

Question, "That the respective, original and increased sums stated for those heads of expenditure stand part of the Development Estimates for 1967," put, and agreed to.

The Chairman: Mr Lim, I take it that Head 90 is not to be moved, and that it is only for the information of the House?

Mr Lim Kim San indicated assent.

Question, "That the sum of $249,247,580 shall be supplied to the Government under the heads of expenditure for the public services shown in the Development Estimates for 1967 contained in Paper Cmd. 27 of 1966," put, and agreed to.

Resolution to be reported.

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

Mr Lim Kim San: Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to report that the Committee of Supply have come to a certain resolution.

Resolution reported -

That the sum of $249,247,580 shall be supplied to the Government under' the heads of expenditure for the public services shown in the Development Estimates for 1967 contained in Paper Cmd. 27 of 1966.

Mr Lim Kim San: Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That Parliament doth agree with the Committee on the said resolution."

Question put, and agreed to.

Resolution accordingly agreed to.