I

I shall be grateful if the Parliamentary Secretary can enlighten this House.

Mr Chan Chee Seng: Mr Speaker, Sir, an approved foster mother is paid a monthly fostering allowance at the following rates:

(a) for caring of babies up to the age of four years - $50 per month;

(b) between four years and six years old - $60 per month;

(c) between six years and ten years old - also $60 per month;

plus $120 yearly for school-going children for school expenses. With this allowance, a foster mother is expected to clothe and maintain the foster child under her care as well as to meet other incidental expenses. Those mothers who take care of babies under one year also receive a free supply of vitamins and two pounds of milk powder monthly from the Maternal and Infant Welfare Clinic which the child attends. Although foster mothers do not gain materially, they do get great personal satisfaction in participating in the scheme.

Parents are encouraged to make contributions towards the maintenance of their children who are fostered out to ensure that they maintain a continuing interest and responsibility towards their children. The amount of contribution varies with the financial circumstances of the parents. Their contributions are utilised to offset the allowance payable by the Department.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: Sir, in view of the not unsatisfactory reply given by the Parliamentary Secretary, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave withdrawn.

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

That the sum to be allocated for Head 1102 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 3009.

Sir, in moving this amendment, I wish to seek enlightenment from the Minister for Social Affairs on the item "tell-tale clock" used in the Estimates. This item was not in the 1969-70 Estimates, but there is a provision of $160 for it in the 1970-71 Estimates. I would like the Minister to tell a tale as to what a "tell-tale clock" is!

Inche Othman Bin Wok: Mr Speaker, Sir, a tell-tale clock is a clock which tells tales!

Mr Ng Kah Ting: Sir, what tales does a tell-tale clock tell?

Inche Othman Bin Wok: Sir, a tell-tale clock is a special watchman's clock which consists of a clock housed in a leather sling carrying case with a key for opening the clock case, a key for winding up the clock, and twelve station keys with individual chains attached for punching the time, and one year's supply of charts with twelve-hour graduations.

The use of a tell-tale clock will ensure regular patrols by the night watchman on duty and thus minimise the risk of unauthorised persons entering any premises in the Ministry at night. With a tell-tale clock, the night watchman cannot sleep or ponteng throughout the whole night when he is supposed to be on duty. Sir, I think some M.P.s also need this clock!

Mr Ng Kah Ting: Sir, in this connection, can the Minister say whether tell-tale clocks will also be provided for other Ministries and departments where night watchmen are engaged, because it is apparent that without them, night watchmen may go to sleep?

Inche Othman Bin Wok: Sir, it is a very good suggestion.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: Sir, since the Minister has accepted my suggestion, I hope he will bring it to the attention of his Ministerial colleagues. In view of the very satisfactory explanation of the Minister, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

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

(8) That the total sum to be allocated for Head 1102 be reduced by S 100.

The Chairman: Amendment (8), Madam Chan is not here.

The sum of $9,080,200 for Head 1102 ordered to stand part of the Estimates.

Head 1103 -

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

That the sum to be allocated for Head 1103 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1001*.

(* The same amendment also stood in the names of Mr Hwang Soo Jin and Mr Lim Soo Peng)

Sir, this item is in connection with the Chief Fire Officer. There were several fires lately, particularly during the Chinese New Year period. According to statistics, there were 1,300 cases of fire last year and the loss ran to hundreds of thousands of dollars.

I would like to speak on the measures the Fire Brigade can take in order to prevent any occurrence of fires and to teach the people how to prevent fires. For instance, perhaps we can set up volunteer fire-fighting teams in various parts of Singapore. If a fire were to occur in a certain area, a fire-fighting team could deal with it at the initial stage without waiting for the arrival of the Fire Brigade. In the past, there were several fire-fighting teams in various parts of Singapore, and they provided a useful service. I do not know whether they are still in existence, and if they are, whether drills and exercises are conducted for them.

Sir, our island is well developed. There are many, many blocks of flats. In the past, there were kampongs with attap and plank houses which caught fire. At present, we still have kampongs with attap and plank houses. Can the Fire Brigade teach kampong folks the art of fire-fighting and get them organised into fire-fighting teams?

Sir, I have also received complaints about the delayed arrival of fire engines at the scene of a fire. In future, I hope that fire engines can arrive at a fire site as fast as possible.

6.45 p.m.

There were some complaints that about half an hour would elapse before a fire engine could reach the fire site, and when it finally arrived the building had already been razed to the ground. I hope the Minister will supervise the Fire Department and keep it efficient so that a better fire-fighting service will be provided.

Mr Hwang Soo Jin (Jalan Kayu): Mr Speaker, Sir, first of all, I would like to draw the House's attention to Command Paper No. 36 of 1969. This little book of 16 pages contains the Fire Department's Annual Report for 1967. The Fire Department has apparently taken two years to prepare it. What was the reason for the delay? Could it be that the department was too busy fighting fires?

Mr Speaker, Sir, the past few years have witnessed tremendous changes in the landscape of Singapore brought about by rapid industrialisation and intensive urban renewal schemes. In place of the small backyard type of workshops, we now have factories involving capital investments of millions of dollars. The traditional terrace-type of two- to three-storey shophouses are also giving way to high-rise buildings of 20, 30 and even 50 storeys. With all these changes, I feel that it is time the Fire Brigade adopted a rather more realistic and enlightened approach to the subject of fire prevention and fire fighting.

As far as fire prevention in the context of legislative control is concerned, I do not know when last we reviewed our rules and regulations. But I do know that the existing regulations are based largely upon a set of rules applicable in the United Kingdom. I do not know to what extent these foreign rules are relevant to local conditions. However, I feel that there is some urgency for us to take a good look at them, not only to ensure that they are adequate for our purposes, but also to see that they do not involve the private sector in unnecessary waste of money on some fanciful and expensive equipment which may be totally unsuitable for use in tropical countries.

I will now turn to fire-fighting. Going through the latest available Annual Report of the department for the year 1967 to which I have just referred, I see that apart from a 65-foot Snorkel and two Turntable Ladders of 100 feet each, our Fire Brigade does not appear to be particularly well equipped either to fight a fire which may occur beyond the fifth or sixth floor of a multi-storey building or to save people who may be trapped on the higher floors of such a building in the event of a fire.

Mr Speaker, Sir, perhaps the Minister will inform the House what plans he has in hand to bring our Fire Brigade up to date in keeping with present changes.

Mr Lim Soo Peng: Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise to share the sentiments expressed by my colleague, the Member for Jalan Kayu. It does not appear that there has been any revision of our fire prevention rules and regulations fast enough to keep pace with modern industry. Every year new construction methods are evolved and new materials are used. However, we seem to apply the same rules and regulations on fire prevention which, in many instances, seem to have caused annoyances and frustration to industrialists who have set up new factories or plants here.

Sir, I am not advocating a reduction in the standard of our fire-prevention requirements. What I am quarrelling with is that the civil servants concerned will just go on saying that certain rules and regulations must be complied with. Sir, these must not only be complied with but also intelligently complied with. The rapid industrialisation, the various forms that our factories may take, as well as the enormous range of products now being manufactured, make it impossible for comprehensive rules to be drawn up for every type of factory and every type of product, let alone our present set of fire-prevention rules and regulations. Sir, I would request the Minister to give this matter his constant attention.

Inche Othman Bin Wok: Mr Speaker, Sir, let me deal first with the Member for Havelock and the Member for Jalan Kayu on the question of using the same old rules on fire prevention for new factories and plants. Sir, it should be noted that it is only fairly recently that we have large-scale industries, high-rise buildings, hotels and shopping complexes in Singapore. Therefore, there are no rules and regulations for these premises. It is necessary then to refer to the various building codes, fire codes and codes of practice of other countries that are industrially advanced and whose industries are heavily built up. However, I wish to emphasise that any information derived from these sources is used only as a guide. It is not strictly adhered to. Some of the by-laws of the Fire Department are out of date. Of course, they are being revised to bring them into line with accepted standards.

I would also like to inform both Members that the Ministry has set up an Ad Hoc Fire Prevention Requirements Appeals Committee which hears appeals from members of the public who are aggrieved at the fire-prevention requirements of the Fire Department. We have considered quite a number of appeals. Sir, and in some cases we have allowed the appeals, as long as there is a minimum guard against fire risk for these factories.

Coming to the Singapore Fire Brigade Annual Report for 1967. I regret very much that it has come out two years late. I suppose this was due to pressure of work in the Fire Brigade, but this will be remedied immediately.

With regard to the query from the Member for Sembawang, I would like to assure him that from the time of receiving a fire call to the time of turn-out, it usually takes the fire-engine crew between 45 and 60 seconds to be ready to go to the fire. The Member complains that in some instances the fire engines were late in arriving at the site of the fire. It takes 45 to 60 seconds for the crew to be ready and dash off to the fire. However, the time the fire engine takes to reach the scene of the fire depends on various factors, such as the distance of the fire from the fire station, whether there is heavy or light traffic on the road, one-way routes, weather conditions and road obstructions. Even fire engines have to obey the traffic rules! However, every effort is made by the fire engine to arrive at the scene of a fire as quickly as possible.

I come now to the question of giving lectures to fire-fighting teams. There are still in existence, fire-fighting teams in some villages in Singapore. Officers of the Fire Brigade do give lectures on fire fighting and fire prevention not only to kampung fire-fighting squads but also to youth organisations, schools, hospitals, factory employees, Government employees, the Armed Forces, and the Vigilante Corps. If Members of Parliament are interested, these officers can also give talks on fire prevention to them. The Department also participated in a Home Safety Exhibition sponsored by the National Safety First Council in 1969 and will also take part in another one in May this year. Any individual or organisation which requests advice on matters of this nature is given all the assistance the Fire Department can offer.

Mr Hwang Soo Jin: Mr Speaker, Sir, I have raised the question of fire fighting and rescue equipment, but it has not been answered.

Inche Othman Bin Wok: Sir, the equipment of the Fire Department is reviewed constantly to suit the conditions in our country. I will take note of the suggestion made by the Member for Jalan Kayu.

Mr Teong Eng Siong: (In Mandarin): Sir, can the Minister say what is the fastest time a fire engine takes to reach a fire site?

Inche Othman Bin Wok: Sir, if the fire site is next door, it takes the fire engine only one second to reach it. If it is in Sembawang, it may take some time.

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

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Mr Sim Boon Woo: Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move.

That the sum to be allocated for Head 1103 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 2005.

Sir, a provision of $255,600 is being asked for the rental of fire hydrants in our Republic. Surely, Sir, with this large sum of money available, we expect the fire hydrants to be maintained in tip-top condition. On 28th February this year, there was a fire in Changi Village. The only fire hydrant was located at one end of the village and had water lasting only four minutes to fight the fire. This was an alarming fact and should be noted by the Minister. While the firemen were looking frantically for another source of water supply, the fury of the fire was such that it licked through nine shop buildings and damaged property valued at more than half a million dollars. As a result, tremendous distress was caused to the victims. I gather that if there had been enough water pressure in the fire hydrant, The Royal Air Force Fire Service which was on the scene of the fire within minutes, could have put out the fire in the particular shop from which it started and it would not have damaged the other shops. It would have been confined to that shop alone.

7.00 p.m.

Sir, will the Minister for Social Affairs take immediate measures to see that the fire-fighting facilities required by the Republic's Fire Brigade are adequate and efficient enough to prevent any tragic mishaps of the above magnitude in future?

Inche Othman Bin Wok: Sir, I have said just now, in answer to the Member for Jalan Kayu that the Fire Department always reviews its fire-fighting equipment and brings it up to date to ensure that it is effective in fighting any fires in the state. Similarly I want to assure the Member for Changi of this.

In regard to the fire at Changi, there is one double pillar hydrant opposite the premises that caught fire. On being tested, after the fire, it was found that the hydrant had a flow of approximately 370 gallons of water per minute, which is quite good but insufficient to deal with a fire of that intensity. In order to obtain additional supplies, a pump was set into the river about a quarter of a mile away to draw water. The R.A.F. also came to help with large water tanks from Changi Airfield.

It must be understood that if a water main produces a pressure of 370 gallons per minute, any additional hydrants fed by the same main will only result in a decrease of pressure. So in order to provide more pressure, it will be necessary to provide a larger main or to lay an additional water main.

I would also like to inform Members that all fire hydrants are installed by the Public Utilities Board, and they maintain the hydrants.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: On a point of clarification, Sir. Since the Minister has mentioned that all fire hydrants are maintained by the Public Utilities Board, may I ask whether he will raise this matter with them - that all fire hydrants, especially those in the rural areas, do have enough water pressure to meet any situation, particularly outbreaks of fires?

Inche Othman Bin Wok: As far as I know, Sir, generally the water pressure from the water main and hydrants throughout the island is adequate, although it varies from place to place. However, we are in close liaison with the P.U.B., and we will bring this matter up.

Mr Sim Boon Woo: Sir, will the Minister also bring up with the P.U.B. the question of installing bigger water mains not only in Changi but also in all parts of Singapore?

Mr Ho Kah Leong: Especially in the rural areas.

Mr Sim Boon Woo: Yes, especially in the rural areas, so that fire disasters can be minimised.

Inche Othman Bin Wok: Sir, bigger water mains mean more money. At the moment, there are 4,269 fire hydrants, and we have to pay a rental of $60 per annum per hydrant.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: Sir, I think the money that we pay for the maintenance of fire hydrants is well worth it. Is it not so?

Inche Othman Bin Wok: It is a matter of opinion.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: It is not a matter of opinion.

Mr Sim Boon Woo: Perhaps this matter of chasing out squatters by fire can be easily done! However, be that as it may, we have got to tolerate them. I beg leave to withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Mr Hwang Soo Jin: Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 1003 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 2053.

Sir, judging from the provision of $32,000 asked for this subhead, it does not appear to me that we are going to get more ambulances. In the light of the increased incidence in industrial as well as road accidents, I am just wondering whether the Minister has any plans to expand our ambulance fleet. I would also like to find out from him whether all our ambulances are equipped with radio telephones, so that they can be more effectively deployed.

Inche Othman Bin Wok: Sir, the number of ambulances for the year 1970-71 is not being reduced. We are maintaining the same number. It is not being reduced because the number of casualties that the ambulance service carries remains approximately the same, that is, in the region of 20,000, of which about 85 to 90 per cent are accident cases, the rest being medical cases. At the moment the Singapore Fire Brigade maintains 10 ambulances for this service.

All ambulances as well as fire engines are equipped with a V.H.F., or Very High Frequency, radio system, and are in contact at all times with the control room at the Central Fire Station.

Mr Hwang Soo Jin: I beg leave to withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The sum of $2,865,350 for Head 1103 ordered to stand part of the Estimates.

Head 1104 -

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

That the sum to be allocated for Head 1104 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1050.

Sir, I seek your permission, in my discussion, to range over the next amendment* as well.

• The amendment reads as follows:

(2) That the sum to be allocated Head 1104 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1051.

The Chairman: Very well.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: Thank you, Sir. These two subheads concern English Language Allowance and Good Conduct Allowance. Sir, I hope I am wrong in assuming that we are paying the Prisons staff the sum of $7,200 for English Language Allowance and $12,000 for Good Conduct Allowance. Can the Minister please clarify the nature of these payments?

Mr Chan Chee Seng: Mr Speaker, Sir, the English language allowance is a non-pensionable allowance of $10 a month paid to the warder grades in the Prison service, as recommended by the Prisons Inquiry Commission of 1948. Only those who are in possession of a Standard V English Language Certificate, or those who sat and passed this examination whilst in the service, may draw this allowance.

In 1964 this practice of paying the English language allowance was stopped. However, those who have been paid this allowance are allowed to continue drawing this allowance until they retire from the service. At the moment, 53 warders are still drawing this allowance. No other language allowances are paid.

The Good Conduct allowance may be awarded by the Superintendent of Prisons, in accordance with the rules of good conduct, to warders, corporal warders and wardresses. This allowance of $2 a month may be given to any officer of the above grades of three years' service or over, who has served for two years continuously without being punished for being asleep on duty or being under the influence of alcohol or drugs while on duty, or without being punished for a serious offence against discipline, or for an offence for which he has been punished by forfeiture of three or more days' pay, or fined an equivalent sum in a court of law, or reduced in rank, class or grade. This allowance may be withdrawn if an officer is convicted for two or more offences.

A further allowance of $2 per month may be given to an officer who has been drawing one good conduct allowance for three years, and has not been punished for any of the serious offences mentioned above.

A further allowance of $2 per month may be given to an officer who has been drawing two good conduct allowances for three years, and has not been punished for any of the serious offences mentioned above.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: Sir, I am happy to note that the practice of paying the English language allowance to Prison warders was stopped in 1964.

I am surprised to hear, however, that the Good Conduct allowance is still being paid to Prison warders. I would have thought that Prison warders should maintain good conduct at all times! Therefore, in this respect, I urge the Minister to do away with this allowance, and instead increase the pay of these warders. If at any time they do not show good conduct, then proper disciplinary action could be taken. Why should we give good conduct allowance as a form of inducement? I hope the Minister will clarify this.

Mr N. Govindasamy: Mr Speaker, Sir, my colleague, the Member for Punggol, was surprised to hear of this situation, but as for me I am shocked! This business of Good Conduct allowance crops up in every Ministry that employs uniformed staff.

Sir, the people who are in prison are normally people of bad conduct. I cannot see the logic in paying good conduct allowances to the staff who look after them. And if I heard the Parliamentary Secretary correctly, we pay this Good Conduct allowance to those officers who do not sleep on duty, or those who are not drunk. My God! I agree with the Member for Punggol that disciplinary action should be taken against offences committed, instead of paying Good Conduct allowance as an inducement.

Sir, I remember reading an article in yesterday's newspaper that the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau is probing into the activities of warders. As I understood from the report, it was the public outcry against the Prison administration that brought about the investigation by the C.P.I.B. Will the Minister care to explain to the House now the reasons for the probe by the C.P.I.B. and if he will consider doing away with this Good Conduct allowance?

The Chairman: The Minister, or his Parliamentary Secretary, will reply on the matter of Good Conduct allowance, and nothing else.

7.15 p.m.

Mr Chan Chee Seng: Mr Speaker, Sir, payment of the Good Conduct allowance is something like the payment of the English Language allowance. It has been the practice for a long time. Partly the provision is to encourage initiative and good conduct. Is the Member for Punggol suggesting that we should cancel the Good Conduct allowance?

Hon. Members: Yes!

Mr Ng Kah Ting: Sir, that is exactly what I mean. Prison warders are expected to show good conduct at all times, and therefore the payment of Good Conduct allowance does not arise. The Member for Telok Blangah was shocked and I was surprised at this allowance, but now I am more shocked than surprised! Therefore, I would urge that if the warders deserve any salary increases to induce them to put up better performances and show initiative, then put up a different salary scale for them so that they can go on to this salary scale on the basis of merit and performance.

Sir, I am not very happy with the reply given by the Parliamentary Secretary. I would urge Back-benchers to say "Aye" when the Question on my amendment is put, so that this provision is voted out of the Estimates.

Mr Lim Cheng Lock (Kampong Kapor): Mr Speaker, Sir, if I may help the Minister and the Members. I believe that Good Conduct allowance is similar to the one that we have heard from the Minister for Communications.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: Just now the Parliamentary Secretary has said that the practice of paying the English language allowance was stopped in 1964. If that is the case, why cannot the payment of the Good Conduct allowance be stopped also?

Inche Othman Bin Wok: This is a good suggestion and we will take note of it.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: Since the Minister has said that it is a good suggestion and that he will take note of it, I ask that a vote be taken on this amendment which I do not intend to withdraw.

Question on the amendment put, and negatived.

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

That the sum to be allocated for Head 1104 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 2014.

Sir, in moving this amendment, I just wish to seek elucidation from the Minister for Social Affairs in regard to deportation expenses. Last year there was a provision of $1,880 and this year it is only $10. I would be grateful if the Minister could inform this House of the number of persons deported last year and whether there will be any case or cases that will warrant only a $10 token provision for 1970-71.

Mr Chan Chee Seng: Since 1965 the Prisons Department has paid for only one deportation which was in respect of an air passage to Amsterdam for a banishee, amounting to $1,548.

As no expenditure has been incurred since 1966, a token vote of $10 only is provided in the Ordinary Estimates for 1970-71 should there be a need for such expenses. Persons are deported to their country of origin as directed by the Police or immigration authorities.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: In view of the Parliamentary Secretary's reply, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The sum of $5,437,440 for Head 1104 ordered to stand part of the Estimates.

Head 1201 -

Mr Ho Kah Leong: (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, since the Minister is not here, can I wait till tomorrow to move my amendment?

The Chairman: No, you are not allowed to do so. Will you please carry on with your amendment?

Mr Ho Kah Leong: (In Mandarin): In that case, Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 1201 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1001*.

(* The same amendment also stood in the names of Madam Chan Choy Siong and Mr Lim Cheng Lock)

On the 19th of this month, Backbenchers in this House rose to speak on the fact that there were certain civil servants who were arrogant and discourteous in their treatment of members of the public, and the Minister for Finance agreed to look into the matter. This is very pleasing news, and we can say that it is one of the achievements of this sitting.

Today, I would like to speak on certain other matters. Although the Minister concerned is not here, what I would like to say is this. Besides their arrogance and discourtesy, some civil servants have also other defects and deficiencies. For example, showing a lack of co-ordination and liaison among the various Government departments. When a matter involves more than one department, each department tries to shift the responsibility to another department. In the end, it is the members of the public who suffer. This is indeed a very sad state of affairs.

Mr Speaker, Sir, let me cite a few examples to support my complaint. When farmers want to build pigsties and chicken pens, they have to obtain permission from various departments such as the Land Office, the Chief Building Surveyor's Office and the Primary Production Department. The past regulations stated that the height of these structures should not exceed 6� feet. If chicken pens were built according to the prescribed height, chickens could not be reared because the height was too low. After representations were made by the farmers, it was agreed that the height would be increased to eight feet. This new regulation came into force more than a year ago.

Recently some farmers made applications to build their chicken pens. Their application forms went round the various departments, and finally ended up in the Chief Building Surveyor's Department. Their applications were not approved because the height of the chicken pens was more than six feet three inches. From this we can see that there is no liaison among the various departments although they come under one Ministry. What has been agreed by one department has not been communicated to the other departments. The farmers are at a loss as to what should be done. They have wasted a great deal of time making inquiries in various departments. This lack of co-ordination and liaison among the various departments has caused a great deal of inconvenience to the public.

Another case involved me. In 1967 I was a member of the Urban and Rural Services Committee which was responsible for the Punggol, Sembawang and Nee Soon areas. I have gone to these areas many times. After a term of one year, I was not appointed to the Committee again. However, the Electricity Department of the Public Utilities Board still regards me as a Committee member and sends me notices of completion of projects. Is this not a joke? I am no longer a member of the Committee but they still send me these notices!

The year before last, the exercise of removal of stand-pipes was initiated in order to economise on the consumption of water. This was a good move, but their removal should have been done in stages. That is to say, the department concerned should have made a careful investigation into how the removal of the stand-pipes would affect the people. If the stand-pipes were found to be redundant I have no objection that they should be removed. But the removal of stand-pipes without justification had caused a great deal of hardship to those who used them. I know that the question of removing these stand-pipes was dealt with by an Ad Hoc Committee. This Committee consisted of members from the Property Tax Department, the Public Utilities Board and other departments.

Mr Speaker, Sir, when it was notified that 89 stand-pipes were going to be removed in the Jurong area, the people through the Jurong Citizens' Consultative Committee, after considering the effect it would have on them, advanced several reasons to the Ad Hoc Committee requesting it to delay the removal of ten stand-pipes. But I do not know why the Ad Hoc Committee did not consider their request at all.

7.30 p.m.

The Citizens Consultative Committee's request was not even considered by this Ad Hoc Committee, and it removed the stand-pipes. I say that the members of this committee did not do their job carefully.

I shall give a few reasons why it was a mistake for the Ad Hoc Committee to have removed the stand-pipes. The first stand-pipe was situated at the end of Gek Poh Road. It was the only source of water supply for the residents in the village of Lorong Kabong which was opposite to Gek Poh Road. Perhaps the Committee saw that there were water mains in Gek Poh Road and so they removed the stand-pipe from this area. Recently there was a drought and the wells in this area dried up. The authorities had to use water wagons to supply water to the villagers. This goes to show that the removal of this stand-pipe was a wrong move.

Another instance - a pipe had been installed at the 13� m.s. Jurong Road, near a hawkers' centre. The hawkers here used to get water from the stand-pipe to clean their stalls at the end of their business. I do not know why this stand-pipe was also removed. Our Government started the "Keep Singapore Clean" Campaign and we should therefore encourage hawkers to clean their stalls at the end of their business. Can we say that this was the right thing to do to remove this stand-pipe?

A further example - a stand-pipe numbered 998 had been installed at Joo Koon Road. About 100 families depended on this stand-pipe for their water supply. When it was removed, the people appealed to the authorities to have it reconnected, but the request was not acceded to. The people pooled their resources and tried to install water mains, but that also did not receive the approval of the authorities. Recently, there was a drought and the wells dried up; there was not a drop of water. The Ministry of Health investigated and confirmed that the people suffered from a shortage of water and that the Government should reconnect the stand-pipe. This goes to show that, in the first instance, the removal of this stand-pipe was wrong. So I hope the Minister will see that this mistake is not repeated. He should rectify the mistakes of civil servants and, for the good of the people, reconnect all the stand-pipes that were wrongly removed.

Madam Chan Choy Siong: (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I have forgotten to bring my notes that I have prepared. Sir, can I speak on matters which come under the Ministry of Law?

The Chairman: Yes, you may.

Madam Chan Choy Siong: (In Mandarin): Sir, I want to raise two points. The first point is in connection with Magistrates and Judges. The term in Chinese for them is Fah Kuan. But if we use this term in Chinese, it loses the democratic meaning. The term kuan means a bureaucrat or an official. This term is in strong contrast to our system of parliamentary democracy, because it is used only in imperialist countries or colonies. In our Courts, the Magistrates and Judges should not be called kuan in Chinese. We do not call jurors kuan. Although we have abolished the jury system, we call them jurors as in Chinese, and we do not use the term kuan. But Magistrates and Judges are called kuan. They are all in charge of trial cases. If we can use the term yuan for jurors, I think we should use another Chinese term for Magistrates and Judges such as sern pang yuan or sern pang chan, that is, a person who is in charge of trying the case. For example, we should call the Chief Justice kau chi sern pang chan, that is, a senior official who tries a case. Therefore, we should revise the Chinese term for Magistrates and Judges, so that we can differentiate between their ranks. If we do this, it will be more appropriate because our country practises democracy. We should not give people the feeling that there are other people who are head and shoulders above them. If Magistrates and Judges are called kuan, it means that they control the people. I know many offenders and accused persons are tried in Court, and because of the solemnity and sternness therein, the accused persons who are innocent are not able to express their views. They are not able to declare or explain their innocence. Quite often, they are inhibited by the stern and solemn atmosphere of the courts. I hope we can revise the term kuan and that there will be an improvement.

Sir, another point that I want to speak on is in connection with the Ministry of Law. When Parliament passes Bills, many of them are directly concerned with the welfare and political rights of our people. But after the passage of these Bills, they are just published in a book and put in the Library of Parliament and in the National Library. The book looks like an article for exhibition. This is not the way to give the public a better understanding of the contents and meanings of our laws. The people of Singapore are not all specialists in law. Their knowledge of it is limited. Only lawyers are well versed in the law. The majority of our people do not know much about it. Even in a small matter involving the law, they are often at a loss as to what to do. Very often they have to consult a lawyer on points of law. Every time they consult one, they have to spend some money. Sometimes it is a simple matter and there is no need to consult a lawyer because it is a waste of money. Therefore, I suggest that the Ministry of Law should publicise the contents of our new laws over radio and on television in the four languages. The meanings of the various sections should also be explained so that the people will understand our laws better.

For example, when the Abortion Bill was passed, the Minister said that it was a valuable piece of legislation. But the general public do not know where the value of the Bill lies, especially the women folk who are interested to know the meaning and the contents of the Abortion Act. The Minister said that the Abortion Act would liberate our women. But they do not know how it will liberate them. If the Ministry of Law can liaise with Radio and Television Singapore to publicise the contents of Bills that have been passed, then they will be made known to the people of Singapore in greater and clearer detail. The business of the lawyers in Singapore will not, however, be seriously affected if this is done.

7.45 p.m.

Of course, lawyers know the law. But we believe in the maintenance of law and order and hence everybody should know something about it. Quite often people have to consult lawyers. However, their business will not be seriously affected if greater publicity is given to the contents of the Bills that have been passed. I hope consideration will be given to this suggestion so that our people will understand our laws better.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I would now like to speak on the following matters in connection with the Ministry of Law and National Development. First, our Government is in the process of implementing the urban renewal schemes. These are being undertaken by the Government as well as by private enterprise. Where the efforts made by the Government or by private enterprise are for the good of our country, we should support them. We should assist the Government in its objective of pulling down old buildings and building new ones. By giving support to this policy, we facilitate the task of nation building.

Of course, we cannot deny that it is only from the ruins that we can build something new. It is necessary to destroy the old buildings before we can reconstruct new ones. People who are affected by the urban renewal schemes should understand this.

A lot of people have been affected by the urban renewal schemes ever since they were implemented by the Ministry of National Development. From what I know, the people affected are dissatisfied with the urban renewal schemes because the Government does not give them adequate compensation for resettlement.

The Chairman: The Member has two minutes more.

Madam Chan Choy Siong: (In Mandarin): Because they have to vacate their shops and accommodation, they are entitled to compensation. But the rate of compensation is not adequate. For instance, very few shopkeepers in Chinatown have a large sum of money to enable them to move from one place to another. Very often they live from hand to mouth. They are beset with worries. When the Government allots a shop to them, the rent for it will come to a few hundred dollars. In addition, they have to incur expenditure for renovation and the installation of various appliances and equipment on the premises. The amount of money they have to spend is beyond the capacity of the average businessman. My suggestion is that, in addition to the usual amount of compensation, Government should allow them a choice of two alternatives. We either give them a sum of $10,000 or $20,000 or --

The Chairman: The time is up. Mr Lim Cheng Lock.

Mr Lim Cheng Lock: Mr Speaker, Sir, in speaking on this amendment, I am drawing the Minister's attention, through his Parliamentary Secretary, to the subject of the maximum total family income qualification for renting or purchasing Housing Board flats. The present regulations are such that people who wish to rent or purchase Housing Board flats must not have a total income exceeding $1,200 per month. I am aware that this qualification has been revised recently to allow more people to take advantage of this revision to rent or purchase their own house. It is quite right that in the beginning when the Housing Board commenced to build houses for the people it had to restrict the allocation of houses to those in the lower income group so that they could enjoy this facility first. But over the years, our standard of living has risen and the incomes of people have also risen. Recently we have introduced legislation increasing contributions to the Central Provident Fund. Will the Minister consider revising this maximum further, so that the total family income is fixed at a higher figure to enable the middle of the middle income group to enjoy this facility also? At the present moment, I would say that, with over a hundred thousand flats built by the Housing Board, the needs of the lower income group are more or less satisfied. I think the people in the middle of the middle income group who are at present denied this facility should also be given a chance to rent or own houses under the Housing Board scheme.

The Chairman: Are there any other Members who wish to speak on this?

Madam Chan Choy Siong rose -

7.55 p.m.

The Chairman: All right, the Member may speak.

Madam Chan Choy Siong: (In Mandarin): Thank you very much. I was saying just now that the compensation given to those who are evicted under the urban renewal schemes should be reviewed. At the moment, the compensation given is not adequate. Those evicted should have a choice in accepting compensation. In addition to the scheme of granting alternative shopping premises to those who are evicted, there should be another scheme whereby those evicted may opt to receive cash compensation to the value of $10,000, $20,000 or $30,000. In this way, those who are evicted have a choice of two alternatives. This is a better way to compensate those evicted. Not every one of them is rich. They do not have a big amount of ready cash at a moment's notice.

In my constituency, many small merchants have been evicted from their premises following the implementation of the urban renewal schemes. They have been resettled in Toa Payoh and Queenstown. Since they have no cash in hand, they have to borrow money at high interest rates. It is not possible for them to get an overdraft from the banks. Very often they have to close down their shops soon after they opened business in their new place. That is why the banks are not willing to give them an overdraft. As a result, these people have to borrow money at a high rate of interest. Sometimes they avail themselves of loans provided by the new finance companies called "Chit fund" companies. The interest charged by these companies is of course, very high. The time for repaying the loan by instalments comes very quickly. Before they can make any profit from the loan capital, these people will have to pay several hundred dollars in part settlement of the loan. They are even forced to commit suicide!

My suggestion is that these evicted people should be given the choice of receiving cash compensation to help them resettle in other areas. It is not just a simple matter of providing them with alternative shopping premises. Everything is different in a new environment. They may not be able to pursue their old way of life. They may not be able to earn their living as before.

The Housing and Development Board is building more high-rise flats and is earning a good reputation in this respect. On the other hand, this is having an adverse effect on the people. As regards private development --

8.00 p.m.

The Chairman: Moment of interruption.

Madam Chan Choy Siong: I suppose I can continue tomorrow!

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

Inche Othman Bin Wok: Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to report that the Committee of Supply has made further progress and beg leave to sit again tomorrow.

Mr Speaker: So be it.