ESTIMATES OF EXPENDITURE FOR FINANCIAL YEAR 1ST APRIL, 1971, TO 31ST MARCH, 1972

Order read for resumed consideration in Committee of Supply [4th Allotted Day].

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

2.39 p.m.

Head 1101 -

Mr N. Govindasamy (Telok Blangah): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 1101 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1001*. (* The same amendment also stood in the name of Mr Cheong Yuen Chee.)

Sir, I am moving this amendment in order to seek some clarification of the policy of the Ministry, it is with some temerity that I do so, as I am fully aware that the housing programme of the Housing and Development Board has been accorded world-wide acclaim. The Housing Board's achievements dominate the low profile of Singapore's skyline with the presence of more than a hundred thousand housing units, many of them in blocks of high-rise flats which the Board has put up since its inception. The magnitude of the Board's achievements can be further gauged by the fact that nearly 30 per cent of our population are housed in the Board's flats. We are given to understand that the Board is constantly making plans to catch up with the past accumulated demand, and coping with future anticipated demand for public housing.

Sir, all these heart-warming data, plus the proud claim that the Board is building one unit per every half-hour, undoubtedly make for a very effective advertisement of Singapore's image abroad. However, to the many thousands of citizens who are unfortunate enough to be still on the waiting list of the Board, they may wonder whether the housing shortage is ever likely to be solved. It is not uncommon to hear that an applicant has to wait for as long as even one and a half years before he can be housed. The only persons who are lucky enough to move into the Board's flats without having to wait their turn are those unfortunate, or rather fortunate enough, to be evicted as a result of the Government's development programme. In other words, the popular impression seems to be that we build houses only in sufficient numbers to meet the requirements of the urban renewal scheme. Added force is given to such impression by the fact that the disposal to private developers of well located plots of land vacated under the urban renewal scheme has proved very profitable to the Government. We in this House know that such an impression, though invariably popular, is erroneous and misconceived. A blunt denial, no matter how authoritative, is not sufficient to counteract it. A more concrete answer is required of the Board, otherwise the purpose of the urban renewal scheme will continue to be misconstrued. I understand and appreciate the great strain being placed on the Housing and Development Board as a result of the spiralling increase in the prices of privately-built houses and the rents of privately-owned houses. In addition, the decision to permit purchase of the Board's flats by making use of the Central Provident Fund contribution and the raising of the maximum income limit on eligibility have helped to swell up the Board's waiting list. Thus, if we continue at the present rate of building just sufficient housing units to take care of persons rendered homeless under the urban renewal scheme, the waiting list for public housing is likely to become longer rather than shorter.

2.45 p.m.

What is worse is my fear that our building programme may not even be able to keep up with the urban renewal programme. Unless the Board is able to step up its building programme, I do not think there can be any satisfactory solution to the problem of mounting pressure in the demand for public housing as long as private housing remains exorbitantly priced.

Another matter on which I require clarification is the Ministry's urban renewal programme. I am sure Members of this House are aware of the Telok Blangah New Town project. This is to cover a vast area of about 932 acres. That it is a tremendous project cannot be denied, and in a project of such dimensions, many problems and vexations are to be expected. It is also to be expected that a great deal of planning has to be thought out and many preparatory measures in the form of land acquisition and eviction of residents and arrangement for their alternative accommodation have to be carried out before the first pile of the project can be sunk into the ground. My complaint is directed not to the fact that such a project will cause hardships for some of my constituents, but to the fact that unnecessary hardship has been caused. What is alarming is that the nature of such hardship seems to indicate insufficient planning of the project. The project was divided into several phases of development. Thus, the process of land acquisition and eviction of residents had been effected in accordance with the order of development of the various sections comprising the project. Suddenly it was decided that the order of development must shift from one section, where eviction had already begun, to another section which was originally to be the last phase of development. As a result, there is considerable confusion and suffering among the residents of the whole area, whether they remain in or move out of the area. Chief tenants of houses refuse to repair houses and the requests by subtenants for Housing and Development Board accommodation are denied as they are not deemed to be evicted tenants as a result of the shift in priorities. On the other hand, other residents who are not supposed to move out until much later are suddenly required to move at short notice. All these unnecessary hardships could have been avoided if the order of development had been properly planned without having to make changes half-way through the project.

Sir, people residing in an area prefer to remain in it for various reasons. Some of them because of their business associations, employment, children's education, and others merely because of the social contacts they have made.

The Chairman: You have one more minute, Mr Govindasamy.

Mr N. Govindasamy: Sir, in the case of the Telok Blangah project, may I say that no such consideration was given in planning it. Unnecessary hardships could have been easily avoided if the planning had been thorough and if the original plan had not been changed, as I have mentioned earlier, half-way through the project.

Mr Cheong Yuen Chee (Toa Payoh): Mr Speaker, Sir, it is a well-known fact that the achievements of the Housing and Development Board in public housing have earned praise, both locally and internationally. However, there are some matters concerning public housing that require the attention of the Minister. There are various problems facing flat-owners and tenants in Toa Payoh that give rise to irritations and misunderstanding. One of this is the Housing Board's attitude in prohibiting flat-owners from making improvements to their own flats no matter how minor they are. As a flat-owner surely one can be permitted to make improvements to enhance one's own property provided such improvements do not alter or damage the structure of the building. Flat-owners always have difficulties with the Housing Board over the fitting of louvered windows, metal grills, gate canopies and even colour schemes for such fittings. As a matter of fact, the Board is now taking legal action against several flat-owners for installing louvered windows in preference to the casement type installed by the Housing Board. No one in his right senses would take the trouble to make alterations to existing fittings or install new fittings which obviously cost money if they do not serve a useful purpose. If a flat-owner feels that the fittings installed by the Housing Board are not up to his expectations, he should be allowed to change them. We should encourage flat-owners and tenants to keep the environment attractive instead of discouraging them.

The other problem concerns defects like cracked floors, cracked ceilings, and choked and leaking pipes. Here the dispute is who should be responsible for repairing such defects. The Board maintains that if the occupier has been in residence in a flat for more than six months, it is not responsible for such repairs. I believe there is one such building regulation which favours the Board. It is absurd for the Board, on the one hand, to disclaim responsibility for repairs to these defects and, on the other hand, to discourage owners from improving their flats. The defects mentioned usually appear after the six-month period of residence. Representations were made to me by the flat-owners and complaints were brought to the notice of the Board, but so far no satisfactory solution has been found. Most of these defects are due to the negligence on the part of the Board's contractors. Debris is conveniently dumped into drainage pipes and toilets, thereby choking the whole system and affecting several floors in some instances. The Board should exercise more stringent supervision of the contractors and impose penalties if they are found to be negligent, like barring them from further contracts for a period of time.

Here again, Sir, I would like to mention the irresponsible attitude of some contract workers in defacing and dirtying partially completed buildings in Toa Payoh. It is not uncommon to find human excreta in some of these buildings when visitors go up there to have a look at them.

As regards hawkers, the present policy of the Housing Board in allocating stalls to bona fide hawkers only has caused hardships to some residents, particularly those staying in one-room flats. With more one-room flats coming up in Toa Payoh, more people will be taking up petty hawking as a means of supplementing their income. There are residents who because of tragic circumstances, have to take to hawking to earn a decent living. There are others who are unemployable for various reasons. It is better to allocate stalls to such people than to let them subsist on public assistance. Because of a shortage of stalls and unsuitable location, there is an increase in the number of unauthorised hawkers in Toa Payoh. The location of the market near Block 18 has also given rise to numerous complaints from residents. Due to the close proximity of this market and the hawker stalls, residents have complained of flies and noise nuisance coming from the stalls day and night. The noise starts from 5 am, in the morning when stallholders arrive in the market to prepare for the day's work. At night, the cooked food hawkers also join in. The noise from the conversation of stallholders in the early hours of the morning and the banging of frying pans at night disturbs the peace of the residents. As a result, many of them have indicated that they wish to sell their flats and go elsewhere. I would suggest that future sites for markets and hawker centres should be so located that they are further away from the residential area.

With regard to car parks, much has been said in the local press about inadequate car parking facilities in Toa Payoh. I must say that, overall, there are adequate parking areas in Toa Payoh, but the location of such parking areas leaves much to be desired. Here, the planners have failed to make a proper assessment of the situation. Large and spacious car parks are located near to the one-room and two-room flats, for example, near Blocks 45, 44, 28, 30 and 99. Car parks near the sold properties are much smaller. Common sense will tell us where the demand for parking space is. Block 99 is mainly used by unauthorised hawkers. To solve the problem, I would suggest that the Board restrict the parking of buses, commercial vehicles and taxis to the larger car parks which are less used and to review the demarcation of the smaller ones to ensure optimum usage of the space available.

On the question of play areas, in reply to a question raised in the previous sitting, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Law and National Development (National Development Division) stated that play areas are now provided by the Board on the ground floor of flats. This is indeed welcome news, particularly to the lower-income group. However, may I point out to the House that the play areas mentioned are located in the west sector of Toa Payoh. There are none in the east sector where there are more people of the lower-income group. There are 20 blocks of one-room flats in the east sector compared to seven only in the west. In order to meet the recreational needs of residents in the east sector, may I suggest that the Board consider resiting some of the ground floor residents in the one-room flats so that these flats could be converted into play areas?

One question that always irritates tenants is the applications for transfers. Most applications for transfers are from smaller to larger units or from larger to smaller units. There is a tendency for the Board to treat all applications alike, irrespective of whether it is a deserving case or not. The usual reply is that all vacant flats are reserved for resettlement cases and applicants are requested to wait for their turn, which can be for months or years. I see the need for the Board to reserve vacant flats for resettlement cases. But allowing a transfer does not fill such vacant flats. It merely creates another vacancy elsewhere. For instance, there is a case of a family whose two children were murdered. Their application for a transfer to another flat or an early allocation of a sale flat met with the same negative response.

As regards the lifts, it appears that the policy of the Board, in accepting the lowest tenders for lifts, has resulted in poor quality lifts being installed in the Board's flats. Frequent breakdowns, inadequate ventilation, rusty interiors, inferior fittings like indicator knobs where the signs are obliterated after a short time of usage, are fairly common. When you enter a lift in a Housing Board flat, you have a feeling of insecurity. Whether the lift will move up or get stuck halfway is a matter of interest. It is never a smooth journey when you travel in a Housing Board lift. Sometimes the lift vibrates or emits a grumbling noise which sends shivers down your spine. I hope, Sir, the Minister will look into these problems and try to rectify them wherever possible.

3.00 p.m.

The Minister for Law and National Development (Mr E. W. Barker): Mr Speaker, Sir, do I have just 10 minutes?

The Chairman: That is right.

Mr Barker: It is rather difficult in 10 minutes to deal with two dissatisfied Members of Parliament who have raised so many points. Perhaps I can deal with them in turn.

The Member for Telok Blangah seeks clarification of the Housing and Development Board policy and questions the long wait of one and a half to two years before one gets a Housing and Development Board flat, either as a tenant or as a purchaser. It is admitted that the waiting period for allocation of flats is at least one and a half to two years, sometimes even longer. It was different in the 1960s when the demand for housing, either from resettlement or other cases, was about equal to the number of Housing and Development Board flats built. The position today is entirely different and I put this down to the extensive concessions granted by the Government early last year, especially the availability of the Central Provident Fund monies. Previously one had to wait until one reached 55 years before drawing that money. Now everybody is rushing to use his Central Provident Fund money, and hence the desire to purchase Housing and Development Board flats.

Last year alone the Board received 12,324 applications for rent and 20,598 applications from purchasers desiring to buy flats, making an unprecedented total of 32,922 applications in one single year. At the start of 1970 there was already a backlog. And we had to deal with another 33,000 applications. Last year the Board built a little less 1han 14,000 units. It cannot build 28,000 units within one year. That is not all. It is difficult enough building 14,000 units, but there are plans to increase this to about 20,000 units annually by 1975. This year the Board hopes to build about 17,000 units. Even if it succeeds in this plan and builds 17,000 units, it is a far cry from the 32,922 applicants who registered for flats last year. The position is not hopeless. We have broken the back of the housing problem in Singapore, but the Member for Telok Blangah used a different word, "solve". By "solve" it means that we must be able to provide a flat to anyone who wants a flat. The position today is that the demand far exceeds the supply.

The Member also grumbled about the hardships that his constituents are undergoing as a result of this planning for the new town in Telok Blangah. He says that it is a gigantic problem, so on his own admission it is not easy.

Mr N. Govindasamy: There is no planning!

Mr Barker: The plans are there, otherwise you would never have a new town, but I think there is a little confusion here. There are plans. The work is going according to phases, but certain areas were cleared to make way immediately for urgent projects. For instance, two areas within the town were cleared for the development of the P.U.B. substation and the Singapore Telephone Board Exchange. Hence eviction. Yet another place was cleared for the cutting of a hill as well as an access road to this hill in order to provide for the Pasir Panjang Reclamation Scheme. These clearance projects were undertaken and they might have given the Member the impression that there have been no plans. I can assure him that there are plans. They are well laid-out plans, but any plan to be implemented must be a flexible one. You cannot say, "I am moving in here on this day and there on that day." Circumstances change and if there is hardship we regret it. In order to avoid more hardship, I would suggest that the Member call at the Ministry of National Development and look at some of the plans, which I assure him we have in the Ministry. I do not know how much time I have for the Member for Toa Payoh.

The Chairman: You have three minutes more, Mr Barker.

Mr Barker: Three minutes. Perhaps I should assure the Member for Toa Payoh that I will look into his complaints. I do not think all his complaints are true. There is such a demand for Housing and Development Board flats and yet the Member says that the lifts are no good, the walls are cracking, there is dirt all over the place, the market is too close to the flats, the car parks are in the wrong place, and the playgrounds are in the wrong place. If all these are true, I do not know why everyone wants to go to Toa Payoh. I do not know why we had 32,000 applications by last year. Something must be wrong! In one breath the Member says that some of his poorer constituents who occupy one-room flats would like to supplement their income by being hawkers. In the next breath he says the hawkers make too much noise at night or in the market in the day. But there are difficulties. Everyone wants to be a hawker nowadays.

The Minister for Health (Mr Chua Sian Chin): We are short of labour!

Mr Barker: Yes, we are short of labour. The building industry is short of labour. Hawking is one way of supplementing their income. It is hard work, of course, but there is plenty of money in it.

Perhaps I should deal with the business of minor changes of awnings. In multi-storey housing, strict discipline must be maintained for the common good of the residents. You can have your minor repairs provided they are within the building, but if you put an awning on to the common corridor or to some other common area, then the neighbours grumble. If you want to put a gate or a grill, put it in your own house, but do not trespass on to the common area because if you do your neighbours grumble.

The Chairman: Mr Barker, your time is up.

Mr Barker: That is all, Sir.

Mr N. Govindasamy: I am glad the Minister agrees that the applicants will have to wait one and a half and sometimes even two years to get a Housing and Development Board flat. This is the point I made, but there are also one or two other points.

Mr Barker: They have to do with planning?

Mr N. Govindasamy: Yes, planning, but I would like to come to urban renewal. I admit this is a gigantic project. I admit there are bound to be problems in a project of such vast dimensions, but I have, as the Minister knows, gone to the Housing and Development Board and looked at these plans. My objection is to the chopping and changing of a decided pattern of a plan, in the sense that one area was laid down for the first phase of development and you moved out the people from there, and then half-way through, perhaps for some good reason, it was decided to move the phase to another location where the people would be evicted. So you have the situation where half of the people were evicted in the first location, and the other half still remain behind, thereby creating unnecessary problems. If there had been planning, if this change in phase development had not taken place, there would not have been these problems.

Sir, I also admit that the backlog in the Housing and Development Board is bound to increase as a result of using C.P.F. funds for purchase of houses. The high-cost houses developed by the private developers will again further --

Mr Barker: Is that the fault of the Housing and Development Board?

Mr N. Govindasamy: No, but we have got to cope up with the requirements which we are not able to do. Perhaps there may be other causes too. May I suggest one or two other causes which may have resulted in this big backlog? One could be that at present there is no means of preventing members of one family from making separate applications and using one another in substitution of their respective applications for one flat. In one family of six people, two or three can make separate applications. The enforcement of the income ceiling for eligibility for the Board's flats militates against fixed wage-earners, people who earn monthly incomes in the form of salaries. It benefits business people who are likely to claim very small incomes and the Board is not in a position to check and provide flats only to those whose wages do not exceed the requirement. Similarly through the absence of a cross-check between the Board and the Property Tax Department, property owners, people who own houses, may be also allotted flats. Not all attap dwellers are really impoverished. Hawkers may be people who earn very much more than what they claim to earn. There is no check to prevent them from applying for these flats.

Mr Sim Boon Woo (Changi): Be careful of what you say.

3.15 p.m.

Mr Cheong Yuen Chee: Point of clarification, Sir. The Minister has said that the fittings which I have mentioned are regarded as an encroachment on a common area. I beg to differ; they are not. They are actually installed within their own premises.

Dr Augustine H. H. Tan (Whampoa): Mr Speaker, Sir, can I raise -

The Chairman: Can the Member wait until the Minister has answered?

Mr Barker: Sir, can the Member for Whampoa give me the courtesy of dealing with these two points first before I hear him?

The Member for Telok Blangah grumbles about separate applications being made, or not being made, I am not sure.

Mr N. Govindasamy: Certainly "being made".

Mr Barker: We catch up with the loopholes that exist in the system. Cross-checks are now being made with the Property Tax Division. If anyone who already owns property is caught making an application for a Housing Board flat, he will not only lose his flat, but he is liable to be prosecuted.

As for the income of hawkers, why does the Member not ask the Minister for Finance how he checks on them? I do not think he has any means of checking on them. If the Member has any suggestions how we can check the income of these hawkers, we will be happy to consider and to implement them. These are the problems - there are loopholes.

I can tell of another loophole. There are grouses that when you buy a Housing Board flat, it really does not belong to you. You cannot do this, and you cannot do that, as the Member for Toa Payoh has said. Fair enough. We have introduced a rule which says, "If you want to sell a fiat, go ahead and sell it, provided you sell it to someone who qualifies to buy that flat and he is already on the register." This has led to abuse. Mr X gets a flat today and sells it tomorrow at a handsome profit of $5,000. These are loopholes which we will plug. So the Housing Board is now considering imposing a limitation on the resale of Housing Board flats, and anyone who sells a flat will not be allowed to apply for another flat for the next five years.

As for the planning of Telok Blangah, my instructions are that, except for the specific projects which I have mentioned, there should be no chopping and changing about. I think the Member for Telok Blangah will agree with me when I say that no one likes to shift on his own. And when he is evicted, he wants to come back. The usual excuses are that they have got used to the district, the school is nearby, and the market is nearby. They do not tell you that their wives' mahjong friends are close by, too! No one likes to move, but unless we move them there will be no urban renewal. Do you want progress, or do you want stagnation? If you want progress, you have to evict them. So you compensate them, but they are not satisfied. You provide them with Housing Board flats, they are also not satisfied. They want a flat of their particular choice. They want the fifth floor, and they want a corner flat. And everybody wants that flat. We cannot satisfy everybody.

Dr Augustine Tan: Mr Speaker, Sir, may I raise two points concerning the economics of our hawker centres? I think the Minister for Health might be interested in this too.

Mr Chua Sian Chin: I will give you a hearing!

Dr Augustine Tan: Sir, it seems to me that for want of space the Housing Board is able to think only in terms of large hawker centres sited in rather remote places. This means that there is little business turnover for the large numbers of hawkers congregated at the newly-built hawker centres. Why cannot the Board think in terms of small hawker centres which although they can accommodate fewer hawkers, are sited at places more likely to attract business? The appropriate choices for these places can easily be known by observing where the unlicensed hawkers site themselves, usually at corners of buildings, as one can see them.

The second point that I want to raise concerns the rentals charged for the hawker centres. It seems to me that the rentals are too exorbitant for some of these hawkers. It seems to me too that at some of these hawker centres, the charges are so high that the hawkers pass them on to the consumer in the form of higher prices for cooked food, resulting in a rise in the cost of living for the lower income group. I hope both Ministers will take due note of this.

Mr Chua Sian Chin: What about the Minister for Finance?

Dr Augustine Tan: Furthermore, I think we ought to exercise leniency in regard to unlicensed hawkers. I know they are a nuisance, and I know their stalls do not look nice. They congregate in places where they might obstruct pedestrians, if not traffic, and so on. But until such time as we are able to educate or re-educate these people to turn to occupations that we want them to go into, that is, the factories, building construction, and so on, we have to let them earn their living. It is better they do unlicensed hawking than turn to crime or some other illicit business. Thank you, Sir.

Mr Chua Sian Chin: Are you speaking as an economist?

Mr Ho See Beng: Economist and socialist.

Mr Barker: Sir, I think that is a good suggestion. In fact, the construction of smaller hawker centres at strategic sites is being considered by the Housing Board, because a hawker goes out of business if he is in some lonely outpost.

As to the rentals charged, it can be looked at both ways. Some hawkers are making money hand and foot, but others are not. But we have to have one standard rate, otherwise they grumble.

As for unlicensed hawkers, the Government is sympathetic. The Government's policy is not to get rid of hawkers in Singapore. But licensed hawkers complain about unlicensed hawkers. For instance, you build a market for foodstalls. You license the hawkers therein. And as some of them were unlicensed before, you give them a licence. But other hawkers come in, and sell across the road. So the licensed hawkers say, "What are you doing about that? We will go out of business." An example is the little row of stalls we built opposite the entrance to the Botanic Gardens. Previously all, or most of them, were unlicensed hawkers selling under insanitary conditions. We put up a permanent hawkers centre and rented out the stalls quite cheaply. They were given water and electricity, and they are doing good business. But now unlicensed hawkers come along. And you must have read in the papers about the police chasing an unlicensed hawker and, in running across the road, knocking down somebody's child. Well, this happens.

Another example is the hawkers at the junction of Farrer Road, Dunearn Road and Bukit Timah Road, in Tanglin Constituency; and yet another one in Newton, in Cairnhill Constituency. These hawkers were all unauthorised or trespassing on someone else's land. They were not paying any rent, and were selling food in rather insanitary surroundings. We levelled the land, cemented the place, put up little stalls, and they are now paying rent at about $40 a month for a stall. If you sell cooked food, for which you pay a rent of about $1.50 a day, you are well in. On the other hand, if you merely sell sweets, for which you have to pay a rent of $1.50 a day, you might not make it. If you sell ice-water --

Mr Chua Sian Chin: You boom.

Mr Barker: - you are in. These are the differences, and it is difficult to play one against the other. But I can assure the Member that Government's policy is not to get rid of every hawker in Singapore. We have come to accept hawkers as part of the life of Singapore. In the past when hawkers were moved into shops in the Housing Board premises, they had to pay a high rent. As a result, the price of their food went up. Customers subsequently stopped coming, and then they went bankrupt. But they cater for a need. The Government realises this, and we will continue to build more and more hawker centres, so that they can hawk at very cheap rates, otherwise they go out of business. I am speaking generally, not only in respect of those built in Housing Board estates but those at Farrer Road, Newton Road, and the one at Orchard Road in front of the Cold Storage, which is the most popular in Singapore. They are doing a roaring business. There is another centre opposite the Singapore Polytechnic, which recently started business - a car park by day, and a hawkers centre by night. So once again may I assure the Member that we are not against hawkers. We have come to accept them as part of the life in Singapore. But we have to ensure that they sell food under sanitary conditions, so that when hon. Members eat at such places they will not get a stomachache or diarrhoea the next day.

Dr Augustine Tan: Sir, may I make a further point on the question of hawkers' rentals? I do realise that at certain hawker centres the hawkers are so rich that they can afford to go round the world. But at the same time, there are other places where the hawkers are so poor that the rentals which they have got to pay are really exorbitant. What I would like to suggest is to apply the simple law of economics - supply and demand - to each and every hawker centre.

Sir, with regard to unlicensed hawkers, we have to ask ourselves this question: why are there so many unlicensed hawkers? This is a situation which reflects upon the success or failure of our educational policy, our health measures, and our ability to educate the public on these matters. Sir, at one time I agreed with the Housing Board and the Hawkers Department in the Ministry of Health to control unlicensed hawkers in my constituency. But there came a time when several of them approached me, saying they were widows with seven or eight children each to take care of, and with tears in their eyes showed me summonses of $15 each. Sir, I cannot take any such action now nor can I support such action.

Mr Barker: Sir, if I am not mistaken, the summonses do not come from the Ministry of National Development. The Member for Whampoa is sympathetic towards these people. So am I! The law has to be imposed, otherwise there will be chaos. He can philosophise, but I have to deal with realities. But if he can point his finger at a particular hawkers centre where the rents are too high, and is able to make a case out for the lowering of such rents -

Mr Chua Sian Chin: He can easily get a job.

Mr Barker: - we will consider lowering the rents, provided, of course, it will not have repercussions in other centres making the same demand. However, if the business is not so good, I think common sense should tell them that they should change their business.

Mr Chua Sian Chin: Get a job.

Mr Barker: Jobs are easy to find, but I do not know what the Minister for Health has got to offer them.

The Chairman: Mr Chua, I believe you want to say something?

3.30 p.m.

Mr Chua Sian Chin: Mr Speaker, Sir, the Member for Whampoa has raised a matter under a subhead which is not within my time to answer. Otherwise I would like to answer him more fully. But with the permission of the Minister for Law and National Development I just want to say this. If, as the Member for Whampoa has stated, summonses should not be issued to unlicensed hawkers, then he would be asking the Government to be discriminatory as far as imposition of the law is concerned. My colleague has said that unless that is done, there will be chaos. What is the meaning of the rule of law then? He has quoted an example of how some unlicensed or licensed hawkers are not able to make ends meet. I agree that the situation could be given sympathetic consideration five years ago when there was a large unemployment situation, but it should not be so at the moment. They do not have to hawk as a matter of necessity, because there are always jobs ready for them. If the hawker is a widow, and I am sure the Ministry of Labour will support me, there is a shortage of domestic servants, and she can become one. I know that it is not easy to get a domestic servant nowadays. Why hawk then?

Dr Augustine Tan: Sir, we are a free and open society and people can choose any kind of job they want. And so does the Minister for Health!

Mr Chua Sian Chin: We are concerned with the law.

Dr Augustine Tan: I understand the law, Sir,I am not advocating that the people should be allowed to violate the law. I am advocating compassion in the application of the law. It seems to me that when a person is earning $100 a month and he is fined $15 per offence, that is 15 per cent of his income. If a person from the middle income or upper income group were to face a fine of 15 per cent of their income, they would raise hell not just in this House but in the newspapers too.

Mr Barker: The fines are imposed by the magistrate in court. The magistrate hears the facts from the prosecutor and imposes what he considers a suitable fine. To discuss here whether a fine of $15 for someone earning $100 is good or bad seems somewhat irrelevant. Of course, I would agree that if I were drawing $100 a month I could not afford to pay a fine of $15, especially if it is quite frequent. But we are talking in general terms. I think our magistrates have enough common sense to listen to the facts and impose what they think is a proper and reasonable fine.

Mr N. Govindasamy: Sir, I beg leave to withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Mr Low Guan Onn: Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 1101 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1061.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I fully support the policy of the Government in carrying out its urban renewal scheme to make our city greener, cleaner and more beautiful to attract more tourists and to create a more modern metropolis in South-east Asia. However, I would like to comment on the implementation of this policy which involves the acquisition of lands belonging to the private sector. In the process of acquisition of private lands belonging to individuals, much criticism, acrimonious complaints and dissatisfaction have been expressed by the public over the arbitrary prices paid for such lands which have no relationship to the market price which can be obtained for their lands. Private landowners welcome and are very happy and willing if lands are requisitioned to build roads and other public projects for national use. However, the lands acquired by the Ministry of National Development for the private sector have been re-tendered for sale at prices five to ten times more than the original price paid for, and it is in such cases that genuine grievances have been expressed. The owners feel that they have not been fairly compensated and that they are being exploited in order to make the rich people richer, especially when land has been sold with all the built-in incentives provided by the Government. Can the Minister for Law and National Development explain to this House by what criteria lands which are to be acquired for development are evaluated and the price arrived at? Is the valuation undertaken by a Government or an independent valuer? Although there is legal machinery by which dissatisfied landowners can appeal to the Appeals Board, more often than not the aggrieved party is not prepared to go to court to get a judgment because they know that it is a foregone conclusion and, at the same time, the legal expenses involved are too costly. Can the Minister give more sympathetic consideration to landowners, especially small landowners, who own small plots of land, so that in future acquisition of land a more equitable price is paid for land to be developed by the private sector?

May I also suggest that landowners be given a period of grace for half a year to one year to develop the land themselves if they intend to do so before acquisition?

Mr Speaker, Sir, urban renewal schemes will be undertaken in many other areas. I am very concerned with those areas bounded by Kallang Road, Lavender Street, and Jellicoe Road where small- and medium-sized engineering works are situated. Many of these engineering workshops have been in existence for two or three generations. The business has been passed down from grandfather to father, and from father to son. The skills also have been passed on from the elders to the children. They have been acquired through the hard school of experience and through trial and error.

Mr Speaker, Sir, will the Minister give the House an assurance that when these areas which I have mentioned are acquired for urban renewal, he will provide a suitable area with clean and cheap factory buildings for these engineering works so that they can survive? A reasonable rental can be charged for these new workshops. At their present sites they pay low rentals and their overheads are low. These engineering works are the mainstay in providing the supporting manpower skill and high productivity, especially as sub-contractors to the big engineering, ship-repairing and shipbuilding firms. Without them the big firms will find great difficulty in competing with other countries in fabricated metal work and other engineering services. I hope the Minister will bear in mind that these firms are firmly rooted and every effort should be made by the Government to enable them to continue their trade. They will then be able to upgrade their skills and acquire new know-how it will be a big loss to our Republic without them because they make a real contribution to our economic growth.

Mr Barker: Mr Speaker, Sir, first may I thank the Member for River Valley for giving me an opportunity to explode a myth? This myth is the general misconception that Government acquires land cheaply and sells it at high prices. It is admitted that in the past year or so the Government has acquired quite a bit of land. Most of this acquisition has been made for purposes of defence. Our soldiers need training grounds, and, therefore, large tracts of land have been acquired. However, it is not true that we acquire land and pay the owner whatever we like. The Land Acquisition Act itself provides that land can be acquired for public purposes but at the market rates. The Government Valuer values the land, but that is not the end of the matter. The owner of the land acquired has his own valuer and, if he is dissatisfied, there are provisions by which he can ask for a hearing before the Appeals Board where the two valuers can set out their cases. They can give their reasons why the land should be $10 a square foot or $20 a square foot. A High Court judge sits on the Appeals Board and he decides the case accordingly.

But to go back to the question of Government acquiring land cheaply and selling it dearly. One reason for this misconception perhaps is that no one likes his land to be acquired by Government. It does not matter whether it is acquired cheaply or dearly, he does not like it. However, we have to acquire land for public purposes. Perhaps people have this false impression because they are not aware of the following factors. The land which is bought by Government is usually encumbered. It costs a lot of money and it takes a lot of time to clear the land of these encumbrances. It is only the Government that can evict the squatter occupiers. If the land is subject to rent control, it is very difficult and virtually impossible for the landowner to evict his tenant. In some cases, the tenant demands hundreds of thousands of dollars. Therefore, one of the factors is encumbered land which has to be unencumbered. The Government's offer to the private sector in respect of urban renewal sites includes many concessions. First, there is the easy repayment of the purchase price: 20 per cent down payment with the balance repayable over ten years without interest. This works out roughly at a saving of approximately 35 per cent of the land premium. Second, there is reduced property tax which is one-third the normal rate. The normal rate is 36 per cent. The property tax for the urban renewal sites is 12 per cent payable over 20 years. Therefore, many people buy them. There are a lot of purchasers willing to buy them. The owner pays only 12 per cent property tax for the next 20 years. The Housing Board flat-owners pay 23 per cent property tax now, after long communication and conferences with the Ministry of Finance. Previously, Queenstown flat-owners paid 23 per cent and Aljunied flat-owners paid 36 per cent. Now there is a flat rate. In any case, even Housing Board flat-owners pay more than the 12 per cent property tax in respect of the urban renewal sites. There are also other reasons. The land acquired is usually fragmented with small and narrow frontages which cannot be developed. These little pieces of land are collected by the Government and put together into one big complex and then sold.

3.45 p.m.

Again, when Government sells land, it sells at "net", if I can use the phrase. `You do not have to set aside part of your property for drains, canals or roads. Everything is laid on. All you do is build on that land. The planning work has been done. In fact, the land offered is almost immediately ready for construction. And last but not least, the simulated plans provided by the Urban Renewal Department give the developer expert advice on the optimum use of the land. I have not given you all the factors. But these are the major factors why the three urban renewal sales that we have had have been successful and why the public is prepared to pay more and more for these sites.

As for the assurance asked for by the Member in respect of resettlement of the small industries at Lavender Street, Geylang Road and Jellicoe Road, he need not worry now. No clearance programme has been initiated for urban renewal purposes as it is the intention of Government to ensure that there is suitable alternative accommodation available before full-scale relocation takes place. But the widening of Lavender Street by the Public Works Department will affect a few cases in this locality, and this cannot be helped as the road widening is urgently needed. There will be about seven cases affected -four carpenters, two repairers of engines and one business of detergent packing. We will look for suitable alternative accommodation for them.

Mr Low Guan Onn: Sir, I thank the Minister for his reply and I beg leave to withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The sum of $462,710 for Head 1101 ordered to stand part of the Estimates.

Head 1107 -

Mr Tay Boon Too (Paya Lebar): (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 1107 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1005*.

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

Sir, every Singaporean knows that our Government has been able to lead us on to the bright and glorious path of national development. As a result of the prosperity of our country, certain problems of communication were created. Two years ago, Upper Paya Lebar Road was widened in order to facilitate the laying of sewer pipes. Some attap houses in Lorong Tai Seng were demolished and the sewers were laid.

Paya Lebar Airport will have to accommodate the Boeing 747s and, as a result of the need to expand the airport, some houses in Paya Lebar will have to be demolished. There is no doubt that these development projects have affected the people in my constituency who have to make sacrifices. We have to be very careful in dealing with the problem of resettling people who are affected by these projects. We should not carry out plans rigidly and without any flexibility, thus driving them to the brink of despair and hopelessness.

Sir, I would like to point out clearly that, as a result of such development projects as road-widening and sewerage works, many houses and shops have been demolished. Many of my constituents have expressed their distress and great disappointment when they see their houses brought to the ground. However, after lengthy persuasion on the part of the local leaders and myself, the great majority of them have come round to the point of view that the national interests must come first. The question now is how to resettle properly those who are affected by these development projects. Because of improper handling by the officials of the Housing and Development Board, many problems which were originally capable of solution have become more and more complicated and have caused great inconvenience to many of our people.

Sir, when a person who has been affected by resettlement applies for Housing Board accommodation or shop premises, he has to fill in an application form to indicate his choice of premises. These people have accordingly indicated their preference for the location, the lot numbers and the addresses. However, what they have been allocated in the end turns out to be completely different. Their original choice has been given to other people. This situation has made me doubt the statement that these people are, in fact, given preferential treatment.

Sir, compulsory reallocation of shop premises cannot work because much depends on the customers. For example, if a coffee shop has been given an isolated corner to carry on the business --- I have received complaints from coffee-shop owners on this score it has only itself to serve and no other customers, and it will have to wait for the day to fold up its business.

On the problem of allocation of premises to those affected by resettlement, we must find them a better solution and give them a better choice. Only in this way can we say that we are fair and impartial. Many people have been delayed or disappointed by the method and the way in which allocations have been made. However, the Public Works Department, especially the Roads Section, does not seem to be aware that these people have not been allocated their new premises and have issued summonses to them asking them to appear in court. I have emphasised this point before. These people have already agreed to move away but they have not been allocated any premises yet. Therefore, they are still there. This anomaly quite common and people who are affected by resettlement have complained to me very often about this.

Sir, the right hand of the Government does not seem to know what the left hand does. Because of this, we seem to have lost the spirit and the quality of the P.A.P. when we first came to power. I complained to the department concerned about this. The reply was that those who were affected by resettlement were in the wrong. Or else I would get a perfunctory reply full of high-sounding language and beating about the bush. On behalf of my constituents. I would like the Minister to instruct his departmental heads that they should not be overbearing. Otherwise he will become embarrassed if a complaint is again raised in this House.

Mr Ho Kah Leong (Jurong): (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to raise one or two points in this respect. In my constituency, more than half the area is designated for industrial or military use. In these areas, people have become very hard pressed. First, the period given for development is not fixed. Some of them say this area is to be developed in two years, but after five years, nothing seems to have been done. During this period, the farmers will have received notice to cease further cultivation of their land and their huts, however decrepit, cannot be repaired. Most of them do not have water and electricity supplies and they are not going to have any. If the drains are blocked and the roads damaged, no repairs are carried out. Only until the Citizens' Consultative Committee have repeatedly brought up their complaints that the roads are in poor condition that any action has been taken and only very minor repairs have been carried out. Needless to say, these minor repairs do not help to solve the problem.

4.00 pm.

Sir,I have noticed that the policy of allowing no major repairs but permitting only minor repairs seems to have been changed. Three roads in my constituency are in a horrible and shocking condition. They are Lorong Kemabal, Joo Koon Road and Jalan Tuas. The people have recently submitted their applications for urgent repairs to be made to these three roads. I do not know why permission has not been given. I wish to point out to the Minister that the first two roads are used daily by thousands of people in my constituency. The third one is the only road that leads to an army camp. Many of the parents whose children are doing national service in the camp have to make use of this road to go to the camp. I fail to understand why even minor repairs to these roads are not approved. This has given rise to a great deal of discontent and unhappiness. I would like to ask the Minister whether it is true that minor repairs cannot be carried out in areas designated for industrial or military development, and what is the reason for this.

Mr E. W. Barker: The Members for Paya Lebar and Jurong are again singing their annual tune, playing the same organ-grinder.

For the information of the Member for Paya Lebar, I do not understand Mandarin, but according to the interpretation I received, he mentioned "despair" and "hopelessness". I also heard the word "inconvenience". I think that is the proper word. I travel to Paya Lebar quite frequently, but I do not see any "despair" or "hopelessness" on the faces of the constituents in Paya Lebar. "Inconvenience" yes, because they are living next to a busy airport which is being extended. If they choose to live near an airport, they have got to put up with some degree of noise.

As for road widening, we have been attempting to complete that job for the last few years, but we have not managed to do so in spite of the fact that I have sought assistance from the Member -his constituents are pretty tough - they will not move, so the road widening is still

Mr Tay Boon Too: (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, a point of clarification. In my speech, I said the local leaders and myself have tried our very best to convince and persuade the people in our constituency to look after the national interest, but my point is that the Housing and Development Board has not allocated any place for them to go to. The Minister says that the road has not been widened because the people will not move. It is not that the people do not want to move, but because the Housing and Development Board has not allocated any place to them. Are you asking them to go on to the road?

Mr Barker: Sir, to come to the point, the position in Paya Lebar is this. A total of 335 families were affected by road widening. A total of 272 families found their own accommodation or accepted the accommodation offered by the Housing and Development Board. There are still remaining 63 families. They were offered accommodation in several Housing a n d Development Board estates, but they declined to accept it. They have requested accommodation as follows: 24 families want flats in MacPherson Estate or the Kallang Basin; 36 families want shops, and all want to go to the Kallang Basin, two motor vehicle workshop owners request locations which are not even available, and one light industrial factory wants another allocation which is also not available. Priority for allocation of accommodation in the Kallang Basin is given to those families affected by the Sims Avenue Extension and the Pan-island Expressway cutting across Paya Lebar Road We have not got enough flats. So the request of these 24 families asking for flats in the Kallang Basin and 36 more asking for shops in the Kallang Basin cannot be met. We have not got them.

As for the summonses, we cannot proceed with the building of the road unless they move out. Yes, they have agreed to move out, but they want the moon, but we have not got the moon, so we have to prosecute them.

If I may now turn to the Member for Jurong. He grumbles about military and industrial extensions in Jurong. The Member is fortunate. His constituents can easily find jobs in Jurong.

Mr Ho Kah Leong rose -

Mr Barker: Sir, I will give the Member for Jurong an opportunity to seek clarification or ask me further questions, but I have not dealt with him in just one sentence. The Member grumbles about repairs, that only minor repairs are being carried out. To cut it short, proposals to effect minor repairs to Joo Koon Road and Lorong Kemabal, costing $2,000, and to Jalan Tuas, costing $1,400 were deferred. They were considered by the Urban and Rural Services Committee but were deferred due to lack of funds and also because Jurong Constituency had spent all the funds allocated to it. In fact, it had overspent. So there are no more funds to provide for further kampong road repairs and pavings. Other Members in this House will be interested to know that for the last financial year a sum of $61,284.65 was approved for repairing and paving kampong roads within Jurong Constituency. This is the highest sum given to any constituency in Singapore.

Mr Sim Boon Woo: Sir, why not Changi?

Mr Barker: This is not all. This is just for kampong roads and pavings. On the whole, a total sum of $219,124.65 was approved for carrying out various projects and services within Jurong. This again is the highest sum given to any constituency. If I can mention it, Choa Chu Kang has the second highest sum - $208,000. I am not saying that we should not spend money in Jurong or Choa Chu Kang. It is only right that we should, because both Jurong and Choa Chu Kang are in the rural areas. The rural areas are relatively undeveloped compared to the urban areas, like Hong Lim, or the semi-urban areas, like Tanglin. [Laughter] Do not laugh, because Tanglin is partly rural. We have ten kampongs or more, but all I am trying to say is this. I am surprised. We have spent so much money in the Member's constituency, which proves again that he is hardworking but do not come here and grumble about lack of repairs.

Mr Ho Kah Leong: (In Mandarin): Sir, a few points of clarification. The first point is that the Minister said we sing the same tune every year. Why is it that we have repeatedly to bring up our points? It is because the departments concerned have not really seriously considered what we have proposed and therefore we cannot help but harp on the same tune.

The second point I wish to clarify is that I am not against my constituency being developed for industrial and military use.

The third point, as the Minister himself agreed, is that Jurong is a relatively undeveloped constituency and, therefore, we need more funds for road repairs and other facilities and so on But in drawing up plans for minor repairs, the three roads which I have mentioned require urgent minor repairs because they are in a shocking condition. As the Minister has said, it is only a few thousand dollars. I hope he will approve the expenditure of this sum.

Mr Tay Boon Too: (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, before I withdraw my amendment, I would like to clarify a few points. On the matter of summonses, those people who are affected by resettlement have not been allocated accommodation, so summonses should not be issued to them. The Minister has said that the Kallang Basin has no vacancies. I would like to ask, why then is it that the project in Paya Lebar is to be started first? Is it because the "Member for Sims Avenue," is working under the Minister? Is it because of that that the people in Sims Avenue are given preferential treatment? Is it because, as I have said, the "Member for Sims Avenue" is working under the Minister?

An hon. Member: It is the Member for Geylang East!

Mr Barker: I did not catch what the Member asked. Could the Member please repeat what he said about my relationship with the "Member for Sims Avenue"?

4.15 p.m.

Mr Tay Boon Too: (In Mandarin): Sir, what I am trying to say is that Upper Paya Lebar should not be developed without first giving priority to the resettlement of the people affected in the case of the shops in the Kallang Basin which were allotted to those affected by the Sims Avenue Scheme, I think it was because Sims Avenue is in the constituency of the Member for Geylang East, who is in the Ministry of National Development.

Mr Barker: Sir, let me deal with the Member's last allegation first. That is not true. I had no dealings with the Member for Geylang East in this case as he was not concerned with the Sims Avenue extension. I think the Member for Paya Lebar has done him a wrong. Those people who were affected by the Sims Avenue extension were the constituents in Geylang Serai, Kampong Ubi, and, to some extent, Kampong Kembangan. We decided to give them priority because we considered the extension of Sims Avenue and the Paya Lebar Expressway as matters which must be completed quickly. So between one part, which is in Paya Lebar and the other part, which is in Sims Avenue, we had to decide whom we wanted to move first. We decided against the constituents in Paya Lebar. That is all.

As for the Member for Jurong, we have already spent so much money on his constituency. But I can assure him that after this budget session, if we have any savings, we will spend more money to repair the roads which he has complained about.

Mr Tay Boon Too: (In Mandarin): Sir, in view of the detailed answer given, although I am not completely satisfied, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Mr Ho Kah Leong: (In Mandarin): Sir, I beg to move.

That the sum to be allocated for Head 1107 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1101.

Sir, I have already done my duty by repeatedly raising in this House the problem of the serious decline in agriculture in Singapore. On numerous occasions, too, I have repeatedly suggested certain proposals for the improvement and reformation of our agriculture. The speaker may be persuasive, but so far, unfortunately the listener is rather indifferent. I hope I will not find it necessary to repeat again what I have said in this House in future.

The Primary Production Department was established over 11 years ago. But has it seriously considered the crux of the problem relating to the farmers? Has it seriously considered how it should help the farmers? Sir, before the department started to exercise farm licensing, it claimed that it was not in a position to assess the true position of the farmers. Therefore, on the 16th October, 1968, to be exact, the department carried out farm licensing. All the data on the farmers were gathered, but in spite of their establishment strength of 1,218 members, the Primary Production Department has not been able to disclose any plans for agricultural development in Singapore. If at all any help is given, it is only for the big-time farmers. Little assistance is given to the small-time farmers. When I last visited my constituency, I formed the impression that the small-time farmers are still on the brink of poverty. They lead a very simple life and they use very old methods of farming and livestock rearing. They work throughout the day and only manage to live from hand to mouth. They make up the majority of our farming population, and therefore the problem of improving their standard of living is a very serious matter, deserving the attention of the Primary Production Department.

Mr Speaker, Sir, although our country is unable to implement the scheme of "land to the tillers," our farmers should at least have some form of security in respect of their land. At the present moment, farmers are occupying land under Temporary Occupation Licences, a system inherited from the days of colonial administration. The T.O.L.s are granted to the farmers on a temporary basis, and they can be withdrawn at any time. Sir, if they are withdrawn, the farmers will be left without any land to till. Since a total area of 581 square kilometres (permit me to use the metric here) for the various zones, like the industrial zone, the Golden mile zone, the motor repair zone, and the high-class residential zone, has been drawn up in the Master Plan, how is it that there is no agricultural zone? Can we not give our farmers some kind of lease that is more tenable so that they can be assured of land to till without having to worry about the withdrawal of the T. 0. L.s?

Sir, for several years the Primary Production Department has been carrying out a feasibility study of our offshore islands for agricultural purposes; in particular, Pulau Ubin and Pulau Tekong, with a total area of about 28 square kilometres. But why has it been so quiet about it? Does it not have any plans?

The main problem confronting the farmers is finance. The farmers' crops are subject to price fluctuations, and they require financial assistance for any development or expansion. I have, therefore, suggested to the Minister for Finance to establish a Farmers' Bank to grant loan facilities to our farmers in times of need. Since the Ministry of Finance has not indicated whether or not it is prepared to accept this proposal, perhaps we may consider converting the Primary Production Department into a statutory board so as to avoid all the unnecessary administrative restrictions imposed on it as a Government department, in this way the Primary Production Department, as a statutory board, will be able to have, in addition to its existing functions, a Finance Division to deal specially with financial matters to assist the farmers. The banks and other financial institutions in Singapore are prepared to grant loans only for commercial and industrial purposes. They are not prepared to grant loans for agricultural purposes, particularly to the small-time farmers. So they have no choice but to resort to money-lenders or to rely on tontines to raise funds. Sometimes they even have to borrow from the grocers or the animal-feed dealers. And if any epidemic breaks out among their livestock, or their harvest is poor, or if there is any price reduction in agricultural produce, they will be heavily in debt. But when times are good, their profits have to be used to purchase agricultural implements, seeds and fertilisers. So they have no savings at all and there is no capital accumulation. So whatever techniques you can create or devise for the farmers, they are not able to take advantage of the technical assistance offered because of lack of finance, if the Primary Production Department still stagnates in its function to provide technical assistance to farmers, it is of no help at all. In fact, even in the dissemination of technical assistance among the farmers, the department has not been very effective.

I will therefore say that financial assistance is of greater importance to the farmers than anything else, and I urge the Government to convert the Primary Production Department into a statutory board, so that it will be in a better position, through the proposed Finance Division, to help our farmers financially. With adequate finances, they will be able to take advantage of whatever new developments, techniques, or technical aid is offered to them. At the same time, I would also like to suggest that the Finance Division of the Primary Production Department (as a statutory board) set up some sort of a crop insurance scheme, so that when the farmers are faced with problems such as a decline in prices of agricultural produce, they will not have to lose very much. This problem is particularly evident at the present moment as their prices are manipulated by the middlemen, The prices in the market are quite good, but because of the manipulation of the middlemen, all that the farmers get for their crops is very little. So the Government should assist them in this respect.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I hope the Minister will give serious consideration to my proposals. Farmers make up about nine per cent of our population, that is there are about 175,000 of them, and so they deserve our assistance.

Mr Teong Eng Siong rose -

The Chairman: May I remind Members that the guillotine time for this Head is Five o'clock. Mr Teong.

Mr Teong Eng Siong: (In Mandarin): Sir, I am in full sympathy with the Member for Jurong who has spoken of the problems of the farmers. The farming industry in Singapore forms quite an important sector of our economy. At a time when our agricultural produce brings in an income of about $200 million, their contribution to our economy cannot be overlooked or underestimated.

Sir, what assistance has the Government given to our farmers? Speaking dispassionately, over the past few years the Government has done quite a great deal for them through the Primary Production Department. The department teaches them how to improve their farming techniques, how to vaccinate their livestock, and other such things. At the same time, the department has also been conducting experiments, and the results of these experiments are made available to the farmers so that they will know how to breed their livestock. As a result of all these improvements, our agricultural produce has increased. But this does not mean that we have done enough for the farmers, or that we have done all that is needed to be done to help them. On the contrary, Sir, the Minister for Finance has pointed out in his budget statement a few days ago that our agricultural industry is now faced with many great problems. He has also said that over the past few years there has been an apparent decline in agriculture, if that is the case, I must appeal to the Ministry concerned to take early steps to try to solve the problem.

4.30 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, in my view, there are two problems facing agriculture. First, there is the shortage of land. As we know, consequent on the acquisition of land for industrial purposes, urban renewal and housing development, arable land is diminishing in area. In order to ensure the development and viability of our agriculture, I feel that the existing agricultural areas should be preserved for agricultural purposes. There should be no more acquisition of such land for other kinds of development. In order to solve the acute problem of land shortage, the then Minister for Finance last year during the budget debate proposed flatted farming as a method for rearing poultry. However, I do not know whether the Primary Production Department has made any study of this proposal. If so, what progress has been made on flatted poultry farming?

Mr Speaker, Sir, the land allotted to farmers now is barely sufficient for agricultural purposes. One acre of land allotted to a farmer is too small a size for the development of agriculture. Therefore, the farmers affected by land acquisition should be allotted a bigger area of land so that they can carry on with their farming, whether poultry or vegetable farming, and in this way they can contribute to our national income. The Primary Production Department has been allotted huge sums of money to carry out experiments and research projects. This is, of course, a good policy in principle, because it indirectly helps our farmers. However, the question is whether the results of the research and experiments will benefit every farmer and, if it does, to what extent?

I would also like to raise the question of the erection of chicken sheds. If a farmer puts up a chicken shed of a size in excess of the dimensions originally approved, no mercy will be shown to him. The shed will be immediately demolished, I hope that in future some sympathy will be shown to such cases. The authorities should not be too rigid about the measurements.

The next question I wish to ask is this. In view of the shortage of land, is there any plan to develop agriculture in our off-shore islands, and is there any plan for deep-sea fishing?

Mr Barker: Mr Speaker, Sir, first, may I deal with the question of flatted farming'? It was a suggestion by the then Minister for Finance. However, he is not in charge of farmers. I am in charge of them. But he is in charge of money. If you want to borrow money or if you want your farmers to be financed, do not ask me. Ask the Minister for Finance. The Member should get this clear. The Minister for Finance is concerned with finance, and I am concerned with flatted factories.

The Member for Sembawang has referred to the income of $200 million from farmers. Yet he says they are poor. I do not follow him.

Dr Augustine Tan rose -

Mr Barker: The Member wishes to enter into this debate?

Dr Augustine H. H. Tan: Mr Speaker, Sir, the fact that $200 million has been earned by the farmers does not necessarily prove that they are either rich or poor. It depends on the number of farmers among whom the $200 million is to be divided.

Mr Barker: That is accepted. But surely in Singapore there is not such a big number of farmers that this $200 million does not go a long way?

Dr Augustine Tan: I do not think we have the figures to prove or disprove the point. The Minister is trying to make out a case that the farmers are not poor on the basis of $200 million. That is not fair.

Mr Barker: I am not saying that at all. If the Member has been in this House for several years, he will hear Members saying the same thing every year - that the farmers are poor! When the price of eggs goes down. I am supposed to explain why it is down, and what am I doing about putting the price of eggs up. When the price of eggs goes up, some other Members of Parliament will ask me what I am doing about getting it down. Anyway, Sir, over the years, the Primary Production Department has developed a network of ten extension centres in the more important farming areas staffed by qualified officers. These officers visit the farms regularly and give on-the-spot advice to the farmers, whether they are big-time farmers or small-time farmers. They also organise training programmes and talks in the respective farming areas for farmers to obtain the most up-to-date information on farming techniques and the results of experiments and research. Information is also disseminated widely through the Department's news bulletins, pamphlets, rural film shows and rural news broadcasts. More specifically, the Pig and Poultry Training and Research Institute in Sembawang organises, within the station, talks and demonstrations on various aspects of pig and poultry rearing based on the results of research.

The Agricultural Division organises regular courses in mushroom cultivation for the public. On a more formal basis, the Farm School at Sembawang offers training courses in which advanced and proven techniques of farming developed from the Department's research programme are passed on to our young farmers.

I am afraid that land is in short supply in Singapore and it is really not possible to allocate more land to farmers. Land is needed for other projects. Hence, the price of land in Singapore is going up.

As for chicken sheds being demolished, these are minor matters. If they are not built to specifications, naturally they are demolished. The answer is, build according to the specifications, I do not know whether I have dealt with all the matters, but if Members want to raise something which I have not answered, please do so.

Mr Teong Eng Siong: (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker. Sir, the Minister has not listened to me carefully. I would like to raise again two questions which he has not answered. First, has he any plans for the development of agriculture on our off-shore islands? Second has he any plans for deep-sea fishing?

Mr Barker: There are plans for agriculture on the off-shore islands, but they are mostly concerned with the growing of orchids. However, they have not started yet. In fact, quite a bit of land in Pulau Tekong was recently acquired so that our army can train there. It meant the resettlement of some farmers there. Therefore, development on the offshore islands has not started. I think industry will begin first instead of agriculture.

As for deep-sea fishing, most of our fishermen are in-shore fishermen and they are reluctant to go far out. We have a training school in Changi to train them. A few of them have been trained. But, unfortunately, it is a hard life and very few would like to go far out to sea because it means being away from the family. But we are trying to do our best to encourage more and more fishermen to go into deep-sea fishing.

Mr Ho Kah Leong: (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, the Minister has not replied to the various questions which I have raised just now. However, because of the time factor I would not like to raise the same points again. But I hope that when the Hansard is out he will pay serious attention to my questions by reading them carefully.

The question of fisheries was raised just now and I would like to express my own opinion on it. Sir, 152 years ago Singapore was a small fishing village. It has now developed into a great metropolis in South-east Asia. We should be proud of the progress our country has made, but we should feel sad because Singapore is not self-sufficient in its supply of fish. According to the statistics in the 1969 Year Book, the quantity of locally-produced fish was 12,714 tons, whereas in the same period the quantity of imported fish was 41,951 tons. In other words, three-quarters of our fish consumed is dependent on foreign import. Thus every year there is a loss of millions of dollars in foreign exchange. We can see from the same year book that the number of fishermen registered in 1962 was 4,366, whereas in 1969 there were only 1,348 fishermen registered left. We can see from this that our fishing industry is declining. With the increase of our population, the demand for fish consumed will, of course, increase, whereas the catch of fish is decreasing. Based on the calculation of 60 pounds of fish consumed per person per year, by 1985 when our population will have reached three million, the consumption will be 80,000 tons, whereas by the year 2,000 when our population will be four million, the consumption will reach 107,000 tons. From this we can see that while our population is increasing every year our fishing industry is dwindling. The more dependent we are on imported fish, the less bargaining power we have over increasing prices. So now is the time for us to save our fishing industry and I hope that the Government will make a two-pronged approach to remedy the situation. The Government should seriously develop the deep-sea fishing industry and provide actual and positive assistance to our fishermen who are in dire difficulties.

4.45 p.m.

Sir, our island is surrounded by seas all round. In the seas, there are inexhaustible resources. Particularly in the Indian Ocean and the South China Sea there are rich fish belts waiting to be exploited. In the Indian Ocean, there are lots of tuna fish which is a great potential for our fish processing industry. The Government has not encouraged deep-sea fisheries in any way. On the contrary, by the end of 1969, the Government has withdrawn the pioneer status of the deep-sea fishing industry. It has spent a lot of money, in conjunction with the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organisation, to set up a Fishing Training School in Changi and also, under the aegis of the South-east Asia Fisheries Development Centre, to set up a South-East Asia Fisheries Research Centre to train our youth in deep-sea fishing. But then, although the Government has spent a lot of money, the trained youths cannot get any jobs because there are not enough deep-sea fishing boats. Is this all that the Government can do? In the end, all this is a waste of money. The Government should consider and encourage investments in deep-sea fishing and try to think out schemes to encourage its development. From the point of view of old-time merchants, an investment in deep-sea fishing is an uncertain investment. So the Government should provide more encouragement to this industry and take the lead. It should also establish joint ventures with local or foreign capitalists in this industry.

Our traditional fishing methods, such as kelong fishing, are out-dated and backward. Our coastal fishing areas are limited in fish supplies. So our fishermen have to venture out into the open seas to fish. But now and then we read in the newspapers about fishermen being robbed by pirates or detained in foreign countries. This happens when they meet with a storm or an engine failure and have to take refuge in neighbouring islands belonging to other countries. Sometimes they meet with pirates and they incur more losses than just imprisonment, fines and confiscation of their ship by foreign governments. But some of them, after having been robbed by pirates, did not report to our police, knowing very well that even if they did, they could not get any assistance from the Government because it could not do anything. Due to all these hazardous incidents the off-shore fishermen are faced with problems. Furthermore, the Government has not allotted them sites for resettlement. So all this has resulted in the dwindling number of fishermen in our country. Sir, now is the time for the Government to save our fishermen and give positive assistance to them.

The Minister for Culture (Mr Jek Yeun Thong) rose -

Mr Ho Kah Leong: (In Mandarin): I hope the Minister will be patient. He will have an opportunity to speak after I have spoken.

At least, the Government should consider the following points:

(1) We have all along maintained good relationship with our neighbouring countries. We should have some sort of fishing agreement with our neighbouring countries so as to allow our fishermen to fish in their territorial waters. At least, they should be given safe passage home and not be detained.

(2) We should send out more sea patrol boats or organise a kind of emergency sea relief fleet in order to protect our fishermen.

(3) As regards fishermen being robbed by pirates, the Government should give them financial assistance to ensure that they could continue with their old trade so that they may not be forced to change their vocation.

(4) The Government may perhaps set up a sort of air reconnaissance service to spot the location of fish from the air by scientific means. This would be better than the fishermen themselves spotting for fish in the vast expanses of the seas. Furthermore, with our own planes flying overhead, it would provide additional protection to the fishermen.

(5) The Government should allot certain areas near the sea coast for fishing villages so that fishermen who are evicted can be resettled there. If they are forced to live in Housing Board flats, they would have to change their vocation.

I hope the Minister can seriously consider my suggestions.

Dr Augustine Tan: Mr Speaker, Sir, the Members for Sembawang and Jurong have raised two very serious questions: one, regarding the use of agricultural land, and the other, the promotion of fisheries. Just because the demand for agricultural products and the demand for fish are both likely to increase dramatically in the years ahead does not necessarily mean that it will be economic for us to produce more in respect of agricultural products and more fish ourselves; in other words, to be more self-sufficient. Much of modern economic life depends upon specialisation, a division of labour. Sir, you can imagine the kind of life each one of us would lead if we were to build our own houses, make our own clothes and so on. We would be back in the cave age. In similar fashion, a country has got to specialise too. If we can use our labour and our resources more profitably in manufacturing and so on, I say by all means give up fishing and agriculture. Of course, there is a short-term problem as well, to the extent that the farmers and the fishermen get penalised. I would join them in their plea for some kind of Government assistance accordingly. But let us not lose sight of the long-term perspective for both these industries.

The Chairman: Mr Jek, I believe you wanted to say something?

Mr Jek Yeun Thong: Sir, the Member for Jurong just now was rattling off his speech so fast that the interpreter was unable to catch up with it.

Mr Barker: Mr Speaker, Sir, like the Member for Jurong. I myself was very disappointed when the pioneer status for deep-sea fishing was struck off the list of pioneer status industries. The Primary Production Department has done its best to encourage deep-sea fishing. There is the Fishing Training Centre at Changi, a joint Singapore-U.N.D.P. (United Nations Development Programme) project established in 1969 conducting two types of one-year courses: firstly, a deck course to train navigators and fishing technicians; and, secondly, an engineering course to train fishing vessel engineers. Prior to running these courses, the Fishing Training Centre conducted several short-term intensive courses of two to three months' duration for fishermen in late 1969 and early 1970 in seamanship, navigation, engine repair and operation of fishing gear. A total of 51 out of 75 fishermen satisfactorily completed these courses. The centre also conducted a one-week course in January 1970 for 32 captains of fishing trawlers based at Upper Serangoon Road. So the Primary Production Department is not sleeping on this matter. But as I said, our fishermen prefer to do in-shore fishing and I am ashamed to say that we import three-quarters of the fish we consume in Singapore.

Dr Augustine Tan: Sir, why should we be ashamed? It is simple economics.

Mr Barker: Sir, perhaps the Member misunderstood me. We are an island surrounded by water.

Dr Augustine Tan: So we should all be fishermen!

The Chairman: Dr Tan, can you sit down when the Minister is speaking?

Mr Barker: I am not here to battle with the Member for Whampoa on economics. We are an island surrounded by water and we only catch one-quarter of the fish we eat.

Dr Augustine Tan: We buy it.

Mr Barker: That is what you say.

Dr Augustine Tan: Mr Speaker, Sir, this is a very serious economic question indeed and I must have some time to reply to this.

The Chairman: Dr Tan, you have all the time until 5 o'clock. You can carry on.

Dr Augustine Tan: Sir, if we appeal to intuitive arguments of the sort that because we are an island, therefore we must catch all the fish that we eat instead of importing three-quarters of it, it just does not make economic sense. If our fishermen can do better, can earn more in factories, in manufacturing and so on, let them do it. If they can build ships, let them do it. But if our neighbouring countries can get the fish cheaper than we can, let them do it and we import it and use our resources better. Why does not somebody stand up and ask, "Why cannot we plant rice, plant more vegetables? Why build Housing Board flats?" Because this does not make economic sense. Just because we are surrounded by water, we just cannot appeal to arguments of that sort.

Mr Barker: The Member for Whampoa has put it very nicely. But we can always import fish from our neighbours provided fish comes in. We can always import water from our neighbours provided the water always comes in. When there is a blockade, what happens?

Dr Augustine Tan: Fish and water are two different things altogether.

Mr Barker: Fish and rice, too, are two different things. You grow rice on land.

Dr Augustine Tan: We cannot live without water. We can live without fish and we can always buy fish from other places. If they catch the fish, they have to sell it. But they do not have to sell us the water.

Mr Barker: I do not think we can take this argument any further. The Member for Whampoa has his point, and I have mine. We are surrounded by water and I say that we should catch more fish. I never said that we must catch all the fish that we eat. But we must catch more fish. I never said stop manufacturing, stop building Housing Board flats. That came from the Member for Whampoa.

Dr Augustine Tan: That is not fair. I never said that.

Mr Barker: That is what the Member was suggesting.

Dr Augustine Tan: If we take it to its logical conclusion.

Mr Barker: That is the Member's conclusion.

Dr Augustine Tan: Sir, this is getting to be a terribly fishy business!

Mr Barker: On the Member's interruptions!

The Chairman: I do not mind, I have got up to 5 o'clock. You can carry on. Mr Ho.

Mr Ho Kah Leong: (In Mandarin): Sir,I wanted to know why the pioneer status for the deep-sea fishing industry was struck off the list of pioneer industries. The Minister has not answered this point.

Mr Barker: Sir, I sympathise with the Member for Jurong. I am just as sorry as the Member that it was removed. But I had nothing to do with it. I was for it. It was the Ministry of Finance which is in charge of industries and pioneer status. They removed it. I had nothing to do with it. I was against its removal, like the Member. I suggest that at the appropriate time, the Member should ask the Minister for Finance. Why ask me? I am on the Member's side.

Mr Ho Kah Leong: (In Mandarin): Sir, in future, when I have the opportunity I would like to ask the Minister for Finance about this matter. Since the Minister for Law and National Development has assured us that he is on my side, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

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

(3) That the sum to be allocated for Head 1107 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1103.

The Chairman: Mr Sim, you have exactly one minute on amendment (3) .

Mr Sim Boon Woo: Mr Speaker, Sir, since the Members for Sembawang and Jurong have spoken on the subhead "Director of Primary Production", I am not moving my amendment.

5.00 p.m.

The Chairman: It is "guillotine" time.

The time allotted for Head 1107 having expired, the following amendments were not proceeded with:

Mr Ho Kah Leong:

(4) That the sum to be allocated for Head 1107 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1321.

Mr Ng Yeow Chong:

(5) That the sum to be allocated for Head 1107 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 3005.

The sum of $15,015,510 for Head 1107 ordered to stand part of the Estimates.

The Chairman: I propose to take the suspension now.

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

Mr Speaker: I suspend the sitting now and shall take the Chair again at 5.30 p.m.

Sitting accordingly suspended at 5.00 p.m. until 5.30 p.m. Sitting resumed at 5.30 p.m.

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

Debate in Committee of Supply resumed.

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

Head 1108 -

Mr S. Ramaswamy (Potong Pasir): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 1108 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1321*. (* The same amendment also stood in the name of Mr J. F. Conceicao)

Mr Speaker, Sir, I see that the Drainage and Flood Alleviation Schemes in the coming year will cost about $4.5 million. I do not see the Potong Pasir Constituency included in any of these schemes, nor does the Toa Payoh scheme --

The Chairman: Mr Ramaswamy, are you talking about the Development Estimates or the Expenditure Estimates?

Mr Ramaswamy: Sir, I am talking about subhead 1321 -- Roads, Bridges and Drainage.

The Chairman: On the Expenditure Estimates?

Mr Ramaswamy: Yes, on the Expenditure Estimates.

The Chairman: Yes, carry on, Mr Ramaswamy.

Mr Ramaswamy: Subhead 1321 -Roads, Bridges and Drainage. I wish to ask the Minister whether the Toa Payoh scheme includes the improvement of the drainage of Sungei Kallang and the alleviation of floods in that area. In the Potong Pasir area, whenever there are two inches of rainfall, Kampong Potong Pasir near Braddell Road is flooded up to one or two feet. During the 1969 flood, all the kampongs were under four or five feet of water. The floods were 12 to 15 feet high. The Government is taking flood alleviation measures in Bukit Timah and other areas. I just want to find out from the Minister whether he has any schemes for the alleviation of floods in the Potong Pasir area.

The Chairman: Perhaps it will be more appropriate, Mr Ramaswamy, if you ask this question the day after tomorrow when the Development Estimates come up. What I am trying to tell you, Mr Ramaswamy, is that you are talking on this subject in the Development Estimates today when we are on the Expenditure Estimates.

Mr J. F. Conceicao (Katong): Mr Speaker, Sir, if you wish, you may rule me out of order also.

The Chairman: I may have to, if you speak on the Development Estimates, Mr Conceicao.

Mr Conceicao: I just wanted to bring up this brief point to the Minister for National Development, whether he does not think that perhaps the quality of our road surfaces could be improved. I do not know what specifications the road builders adhere to, and how they compare with standards in other countries - am I in order, Sir?

The Chairman: Yes, if you will dwell on the Estimates of Expenditure, Mr Conceicao.

Mr Conceicao: This subhead is in respect of the "Mechanical Engineer" who, I thought, was supposed to be in charge of roads, bridges and drainage. If you think I am out of order, I will withdraw my amendment.

The Chairman: I think you can wait till the debate on the Development Estimates comes up.

Mr Conceicao: As you please, Sir.

The following amendments stood on the Order Paper Supplement -

Mr J. F. Conceicao:

(2) That the sum to be allocated for Head 1108 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1341.

Mr Cheong Yuen Chee:

(3) That the sum to be allocated for Head 1108 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1581.

The Chairman: Amendment No. (2) , Mr Conceicao.

Mr Conceicao: I am not moving, Sir.

Mr Cheong Yuen Chee: Sir, I am also not moving my amendment.

The sum of $12,604,810 for Head 1108 ordered to stand part of the Estimates.

Head 1109 -

The following amendment stood in the name of Mr Ng Yeow Chong -

That the sum to be allocated for Head 1109 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 2013.

Mr Ng Yeow Chong (Mountbatten): Sir, I am not moving.

The sum of $22,506,500 for Head 1109 ordered to stand part of the Estimates.

Head 1110 -

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

That the sum to be allocated for Head 1110 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1001*. (* The same amendment also stood in the name of Mr Sim Boon Woo)

Under this subhead I would like to refer to the deterioration in the efficiency of the Building Survey Division. I have received many complaints from people in my constituency that there has been an excessive delay in their applications to repair their houses. Let me quote an example. In my constituency, a certain person applied for permission to repair his attap hut. This hut is in an advanced state of dilapidation, and if repairs are not carried out immediately, it will not be safe to live in that hut. His application was submitted a long time, but he has so far received no reply. This goes to show that the efficiency of the Building Survey Division has deteriorated very badly. I hope the Minister will order investigations to be carried out and instruct the division to raise their efficiency. I hope he will ask them to speed up the processing of applications to repair houses.

Next, I would like to talk about the cumbersome procedure in dealing with applications. As far as I know, it is as follows. In the first place the applicant must go to the Ministry of National Development and inform the building inspector (Di-Niu) that he would like to repair his house. The building inspector will give him a form and ask him to go back and fill it. After filling it, it will have to be returned to the Ministry of National Development. A month later the person will receive a letter asking him to submit his property tax receipts, land rent receipts and two maps. These two maps are to be purchased from the Ministry of National Development. To purchase these two maps the person has to fill in another form. What gives these applicants a considerable headache is that they must supply the mukim and the lot number for the area in which the house is situated. Most of these people in the rural area are not familiar with these mukims and lot numbers. They have to consult the Di-Niu (building inspectors), and, more often than not, they cannot help. So the applicants are advised to refer to the landlord. After filling in the form --

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Culture (Mr Fong Sip Chee): Sir, point of clarification. The Member referred to the housing inspector in the Chinese colloquial term Di-Niu, which means land cow. This term is generally accepted outside the House, Sir, but as a gesture of respect to the civil servant, I think the Member should use the actual term of inspector, housing inspector or survey inspector, but not land cow!

The Chairman: How do you use it in Chinese, Mr Fong?

Mr Fong Sip Chee: Ji Char Yuan, Sir

Mr Teong Eng Siong: (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker. Sir, I think the Parliamentary Secretary is saying an unnecessary thing. It is up to the Speaker to tell me what to do. Is the Parliamentary Secretary the Speaker?

Mr Fong Sip Chee: Mr Speaker, Sir, I would have expected the Member, after several years in this House to understand the proceedings of the House. It is not my intention to take over the responsibilities of the Speaker. I think it is the duty of every Member to draw the attention of the Speaker to any irregularities in the House, whether in respect of speeches or the conduct of hon. Members.

The Chairman: I think Mr Teong Eng Siong is conducting himself quite well, except that he has used a colloquial term in Chinese which I shall excuse him for the time being.

Mr Fong Sip Chee: Mr Speaker, Sir, but the Member insists on using the term "land cow". I should like to see how this will go down in Hansard!

The Chairman: Mr Teong, will you stop using the term "land cow" and use "inspector" instead?

Mr Teong Eng Siong: (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I regret the Parliamentary Secretary interrupted me for no reason at all. Let me continue. After filling in the form the applicants have to purchase the maps. They have to wait for another week before they receive them. Together with the property tax receipts and the receipts for the land rents, they have to submit the two maps. After another two or three weeks, another letter will be sent by the Ministry of National Development asking for details of the renovation, whether it is going to be a complete renovation or, reconstruction, or merely involve the changing of the roof or walls. The applicants have to draw two sketches giving the specifications of the length and breadth of the existing house. Of course, they have no choice but to abide by the procedure. A few days later, the housing inspector or building inspector -- I hope the Parliamentary Secretary is satisfied with this term now - will arrive and check whether the house is according to the specifications. This is stage one of the application procedure. The applicants will have to wait patiently. After a month or so, they go and ask the building inspector what progress has been made. The reply is, "Hey, how can you expect us to work so quickly? We are very busy. Come back in two weeks' time." Two weeks later, the answer will be, "The application has been submitted to the Planning Department." The same old story - "Come back in two or three weeks' time." After the two or three weeks are up, the applicants again make inquiries. The answer now is, "Come back next week." At least this is good news. One week later, they go back and ask. The reply this time is, "Ah! The Ministry of National Development has approved your application. However, the plans have been submitted to the Ministry of Health, and we can proceed only after the Ministry of Health has given its approval." But that will take another two or three weeks. However, at long last they are granted a temporary licence to carry out repairs or renovations.

5.45 p.m.

All these delays here and there cause the applicants to go to and from more than ten times altogether. This is not the way to do things. I hope the Minister will consider simplifying the application procedure and assigning one or two officers to assist the applicant to fill in application forms for permission to carry out house repairs, and what is more important, to ensure that there are facilities to enable them to complete all the necessary procedure in one visit. This will save them a lot of precious time, which they can usefully spend on working in the farms. Sir, if the Building Survey Division is willing to help the rural people, it should be a very easy matter now because all the depart-. ments of the Ministry of National Development are housed in the same building. So it should not be too difficult to co-ordinate the procedure of applications and to instruct the departments concerned to liaise with one another.

The third point I would like to raise refers to illegal structures which are more than three years old. In the past certain people in the rural areas constructed houses in violation of the building laws. This was because they did not quite understand these laws. So in respect of these dwellings which are more than three years old, I hope the department concerned will consider the position sympathetically, otherwise summonses will be issued to them every six months, and the fines will increase with each summons. This will impose a very heavy financial burden on them. I hope the Minister will consider the plight of these rural people and help them solve their problems.

Mr Sim Boon Woo: Sir, I would like to associate myself with the Member for Sembawang in airing the grievances of the rural people in this House. But I do not agree with him and I cannot associate myself with him in the matter of unauthorised houses for which he is asking for consideration.

My question is very short and simple. What is the policy of the Chief Building Surveyor in granting permission to applicants who wish to repair their houses in the rural areas? In this respect, can the Chief Building Surveyor think of a more simple way to help these people get their houses repaired, such as cutting out red tape, as mentioned by the Member for Sembawang just now, which requires the applicant to go down town to the Chief Building Surveyor's office, then to the Planning Department, and then to the Health Ministry, and so on? I wish such a complicated procedure can be made simpler so that it will also help those Members of Parliament in the rural constituencies, including the Minister of State for Finance.

Mr E. W. Barker: Mr Speaker, Sir, I think the Member for Sembawang has somewhat exaggerated the position as regards the delay and the procedure. My understanding is that normally an application for repair of temporary houses is approved within two weeks from the time the application is made to the Chief Building Surveyor's Department. The procedure for submitting such applications is already quite simple. There seems to be no need to further simplify it. The procedure may be generally listed as follows. The applicant first goes to the Chief Building Surveyor's Department and the building inspector will help him fill in the application form. He is then immediately advised to purchase two copies of the site plans from the Development Control Division of the Planning Department. Next, the plans together with the ground rent or assessment receipt to prove ownership of the house, are then handed to the building inspector. After this, the building inspector will then visit the site, take measurements of the building and its location, and draw up the necessary plans for approval. Those are the three steps of the procedure.

As for the mukim number and the lot number, my sympathy goes to those people who do not understand what this is all about. But I think the Member for Sembawang will appreciate that no building plan can be passed unless the site is located. To do this, we must know the mukim number and the lot number. But as far as is possible, the building inspector will assist the applicant in this respect.

I think the confusion about the procedure really lies with what is meant by "repairs". The Member for Sembawang spoke about repairing a house which was in a dilapidated condition, If a house is in a dilapidated condition, seldom will the owner want to repair it. What he does is to demolish the building and put up a new one. This is where the, trouble starts. A simple application for repairs can be approved provided it is merely repairs. But more often than not, you will find the occupier applying to the department for repairs to his house when his intention is to demolish it and put up a new one. And when the building inspector subsequently makes a check, he finds that the rooms have been enlarged, the house has gone a little higher; and then there is trouble. I think this is the basis of the confusion that exists, because if a house is to be reconstructed, the signature of the land owner is required as he owns the land. You cannot build a house on his land without his permission. He will not give the occupier permission to build a new house nor will he sign the plan, but the occupier comes to the Chief Building Surveyor with an application for repairs. So there is trouble all round.

But if the houses are reconstructed on the same site with the same floor area as the original, the owner's consent is done away with. But in many cases the reconstruction is first carried out, and then the applicants go to the department to regularise the position. It is only in cases of reconstruction of concrete semi-detached or terrace houses that applicants are advised to engage an architect to prepare the building and site plans.

The Member for Sembawang also mentioned continuous court actions. It all starts with the builder being prosecuted for putting up an unauthorised building. The magistrate convicts him and fines him, and also makes an order that he should demolish that house. It is called a mandatory order. But, of course, he does not demolish the house. He will not comply with the terms of the mandatory order. Because of that, he is brought to court again and again. And, of course, as long as he does not comply with the order to demolish, subsequent convictions lead to bigger fines. If we are to drop the matter after, say, three years, then the position will become hopeless. He defies the law, he ignores the mandatory order, and after three years, when everybody keeps quiet, he has got away with it. So I think the Member for Changi is right on that score. But there have been cases where, after several convictions and on sympathetic grounds, the department has not taken any further action. But to do that in all cases would lead to many more unauthorised houses being put up, thereby getting the cloak of authority within three or four years.

Mr Teong Eng Siong: (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like the Minister to clarify two points. First, he has mentioned just now that the building inspectors will help the applicants to fill in the forms. As far as I know, they have not assisted the people from the rural areas to do that. These forms are in English, and because these people do not know English, they do not know how to fill in the forms. If the building inspectors had assisted them, I think this problem would have been solved. But since the Minister says that they do help, I hope that they will from now on actually assist them in filling up the forms.

In regard to repairs and renovations of old houses, these houses are in many respects in a dilapidated condition. All that the occupier wants to do is to replace some of the old parts of the building with new ones. They are not reconstructing the whole building. They want to renovate the building on the existing site. If the Minister says that this work does not require the approval of the landlord, I say that this is not so. In fact, the building inspectors often make it difficult for the applicants. Sometimes they kick them about like a ball from here to there. I think the Minister is not aware of this fact. I hope he will pay attention to this matter. This is a great inconvenience to the people in the rural areas.

6.00 p.m.

As a representative of the people in the rural areas, we have often encountered problems of this nature. I have the opportunity to understand these problems more clearly. I am speaking very slowly now. I hope the Minister can understand me.

The other point is this. Some houses which are more, than three years old do not have any building plans. At the time when the builders first constructed their houses, they were not aware of the building laws. As a result, they violated them. The Minister has said that one must look at these cases sympathetically, and that after one or two fines have been imposed, these offenders should not be fined any further. However, some of them have been fined more than three times. They still receive a fine thereafter. I hope the Minister will pay attention to this matter. He has already said in this House that he will consider these cases sympathetically. I hope he will instruct his Ministry to do so.

Mr Sim Boon Woo: Mr Speaker, Sir, I seek some clarification from the Minister. If a person wishes to repair a house by replacing the main pillars and changing the roof and, at the same time, replacing half of the planks, will it be considered a new house or a repaired house? The sides and the height of the house remain the same.

Mr Barker: Mr Speaker, Sir, if the repairs mentioned by the Member are carried out to the letter, it will not be considered by the department as reconstruction but under the phrase "repairs", provided, of course, the rooms are not extended. If you re-build your house, shall we say, on the same site with exactly the same area; that is, you completely demolish the house, and you put something new there but with exactly the same area as before, the department considers the work as repairs. But if you increase the size of the house by three square inches or three square feet and when the building inspectors measure it and find that the house is bigger, they will say it is a new house.

The Member for Sembawang seems to be at issue with me as to what happens in the Chief Building Surveyor's Department. My understanding is that the building inspectors are there to help members of the public. The Member's understanding is that they do not help them. However, since the beginning of' this year, my Parliamentary Secretary has been put in charge of the Chief Building Surveyor's Department and he can keep an eye on what is happening in the department from day to day. If the Member has any difficulties on this score, I would suggest that the Member contact him.

As for the court convictions, I do not think I need repeat what I have said. There have been convictions of even more than half a dozen times. But if there are sympathetic grounds on which we can drop the whole matter, we will do it. And this has been done in several cases. If the Member has any particular case in mind, he can draw my Ministry's attention to it and we will give it every consideration.

Mr Teong Eng Siong: (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I think the Minister is sincere in his reply to my question. However, there is another point on which I wish to seek clarification. This concerns the difficulties in the application procedure. The Minister says that I have exaggerated the case. I do not think I have exaggerated in the slightest degree, because what I know has been gathered from complaints by many people who have, in fact, gone through this cumbersome procedure. What I have said is based on facts, and nothing else. Since the Minister has given serious consideration to my question and has assured the House that his Parliamentary Secretary will now be responsible for the Chief Building Surveyor's Department and that every problem can he referred to him, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The sum of $819,150 for Head 1110 ordered to stand part of the Estimates.

Head 1202 -

Mr P. Govindaswamy (Anson): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 1202 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1001.

Mr Speaker, Sir, there are some junior doctors who resign from Government service after serving a couple of years. As a result, there are no immediate replacements for the vacant posts. It appears that the student doctors who are in the housemanship programme have to consult the senior doctors every now and then. In the end they are a burden to the senior doctors.

As a result of this pressure and if the senior doctors resign from the service, what will happen to the Hospitals Division? I, therefore, call upon the Minister to rectify the situation in the medical services, or else the standard in the hospitals will deteriorate.

I understand that some doctors work from 82 to 119 hours a week. If this is true, how can they manage to continue in Government service?

I believe that it is not financial considerations alone which have resulted in the resignation of doctors. It is, in fact, because of their poor conditions of service.

On the other hand, if too many specialist doctors resign from Government service, I fear that the many costly instruments and apparatus owned by the Government will not be properly handled by inexperienced doctors. If that is the case, these costly instruments may turn out to be a waste.

I presume some of the departments have insufficient staff when resignations or retirements occur, especially in the E.C.G. Department.

Mr Speaker, Sir, student nurses should be given proper training in good manners, politeness and etiquette, because I have seen some of them not performing their duties according to the above standards.

I also understand that it is compulsory for student nurses to stay in the hostel during their training periods. As a result, expenses are incurred by them for lodging, laundry, food, etc., even though they may stay near to the hostel. I would, therefore, suggest that staying in the hostel should not be made compulsory, because it will affect the take-home pay of the nurses.

There is another matter which I wish to raise but which probably does not come under this subhead. Anyway, I will mention it, although I do not know whether or not the Minister will reply to it. Sir, with reference to the Institute of Health at Outram Road, it appears that the conditions in the vicinity of the institute are more like those of a market than a hospital. I wonder whether some changes can be made to the institute so that this hospital for children will have a brighter appearance.

Sir, I also wish to know whether the Minister will consider introducing a health service system, as is being adopted in the United Kingdom.

Mr Speaker, Sir, a professor from New Zealand a few days ago mentioned the shortage of doctors in Singapore. This confirms what I have told the Minister, that there is a shortage of doctors in the Singapore General Hospital.

Mr Chua Sian Chin: Mr Speaker, Sir, I agree with the Member for Anson that we are short of doctors. In fact, when I made my speech last year, I did say so.

Taking his first point, when talking about the resignation of specialists, he has asked what will happen after that? Following the resignation of a specialist, the next most senior officer is immediately appointed to act in the post. This period is necessary to enable this officer to carry out the duties of the specialist and to enable the Ministry to assess his suitability for promotion. Promotion exercises are held about twice a year, as the Public Service Commission is not in a position to hold them more frequently. Furthermore, time must be allowed for officers who were considered not suitable in the earlier promotion exercises to prove their worth.

The Member for Anson has also mentioned some doctors who have been made to work from 82 to 119 hours. Though I agree that some of them have been asked to work long hours, I think 119 hours is a bit of an exaggeration. If we divide 119 by seven, we get 17 hours. I do not think that it is possible for any doctor to work 119 hours a week. Therefore, this is quite obviously a prima facie case of exaggeration. However, may I say that a survey of the working hours of doctors was carried out in August 1969. It showed that they were on duty from 42 hours to a maximum of 86 hours a week. The matter was looked into and in August 1970, on my instruction, a circular was issued to all heads of departments to the effect that whenever the exigencies of the service permitted, medical officers on night duty in a clinical unit should be given half a day off the next day. The position up to the beginning of this month showed that this was being implemented in 16 out of the 23 clinical units of the hospital services.

6.15 p.m.

Sir, may I just say something about the number of medical officers who are now working in the hospitals? In August 1970, the number of medical officers in service was 248 and on 15th March, 1971, the figure was 261. There has been an increase of 13 medical officers. In view of the improvement in the staffing position, instructions have been issued that with effect from 15th of March this year, all medical officers who are required to perform night duty will be given a half-day off the following day. This would result in the reduction of the total number of hours of duty by doctors by about four hours per week if an officer does one night duty per week, and by about eight hours per week if an officer does night duty twice per week.

As regards the nurses, I agree again with the Member for Anson that the student nurses - I do not know why the Member has picked on student nurses - should be properly trained and should be courteous, in fact, they are properly trained. I can say that the majority of them are courteous to the public. Not only student nurses but, in fact, all grades of the nursing staff are taught to be courteous at all times with the patients, with the public, their colleagues and their seniors, and this has been emphasised throughout their training period as well as in circulars and so on. The Member for Anson will agree with me that in any organisation there are bound to be some black sheep. I believe he will also agree with me that there are black sheep among postmen. That being the case, we have devised a method whereby all members of the staff of the hospitals have been asked to wear a name tag and, if there are any complaints, to let us have them. Has the Member for Anson any complaints about the student nurses?

Mr P. Govindaswamyindicated none.

Mr Chua Sian Chin: The Member has none. Therefore, may I say that the general statement made about discourtesy and so on is not very helpful to my Ministry.

The Member also made a comment that the Institute of Health is like a market. I do not know how he views it to be like a market. I agree with him that the building is quite old. We always welcome new buildings, but so long as we have none, we have to make the most of what buildings we have.

Finally, the Member mentioned the United Kingdom national health service. In other words, he wants us to bring private practitioners also within the health service. May I say that at the moment the Ministry of Health has about 27 outpatient dispensaries, and they are providing a service particularly to the low-income group, and I can say that the service is adequate. Therefore, at the moment we are not considering utilising the doctors in private practice and introducing a U.K. type of national health service.

Mr P. Govindaswamy: Mr Speaker, Sir, I quite agree with what the Minister for Health has said. But a professor from New Zealand has mentioned that even in New Zealand doctors in private practice are brought into the national health service for a certain period. Anyway, I do not want to prolong the matter.

As regards student nurses, the Minister has asked me whether I have complaints to make. These nurses are student nurses. They are not trained nurses. If they are trained nurses and if there are complaints, we can send them to the Ministry of Health. Student nurses are still students. Therefore, I would ask the Minister to advise the heads of departments to urge the student nurses to be courteous.

Sir, I have received another complaint about the nurses of Kandang Kerbau Hospital. It seems that they are rude to the patients. The Minister says that circulars are issued to the hospitals from his Ministry, and I ask the Minister to issue another circular to all the hospitals calling on the nurses to be courteous with the patients.

Sir, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Mr J. F. Conceicao: Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 1202 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1161.

Sir, I merely wish to inquire whether there are trained staff under the charge of the Senior Sister Tutor who can undertake the training of nurses in industrial health. With our expanding industrialisation, the question of industrial health has to be scrutinised more and more. It is possible that we may at some future date want to provide the services of industrial nurses in the factories in Jurong, and for that purpose I ask this question.

Mr Chua Sian Chin: Mr Speaker, Sir, at the moment, the Ministry of Health does not have a formal course in our School of Nursing for the training of industrial health nurses. The reason is that this subject is a very new one and the training of nurses in industrial health has to be undertaken overseas. In the initial period, however, the Ministry will be sending one staff nurse some time this year to be trained in industrial health nursing at the Royal College of Nursing in London. Others will follow later. Once a core of nurses specially trained in this subject has been built up, the Ministry may consider planning a special course of training in our School of Nursing. Assistance could, of course, be obtained from the World Health Organisation or other international agencies to formulate a programme when so required.

Perhaps the Member for Katong may be thinking of training nurses working in the industries in the private sector. If that is what he is thinking of, may I say that at the moment the Singapore Trained Nurses Association, in conjunction with the Society of Occupational Medicine, is currently running an introductory course in industrial health nursing for such nurses and others who are interested. Perhaps in the future if there is sufficient demand from industries to employ trained industrial health nurses, the professional bodies concerned, and perhaps the Extramural Studies Department of the University of Singapore, may join in to continue to provide such courses.

Mr Conceicao: Sir, I do not think any voluntary organisation or educational body can do the job as well as the relevant officers in the Minister's own relevant unit. I thank the Minister for his answer and I beg leave to withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Mr Hwang Soo Jin (Jalan Kayu): Mr Speaker, Sir. I beg to move.

That the sum to be allocated for Head 1202 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1733.

Sir, as our society becomes more urbanised and more industrialised and as the pace of life quickens, it seems inevitable to me that more and more people will crack up mentally. As a result, they are unable to adjust themselves and to come to terms with the tremendously increased pressure and changed circumstances of a modern society. This seems to be the sad story behind the statistics supplied by the Minister for Health to the Member for Katong yesterday. It will be seen that the total number of people who sought psychiatric help has gone up from 28,431 in 1968 to 39,847 in 1970. These are patients who attended the outpatient clinics. The increase is definitely quite frightening. I am rather surprised to see that in Woodbridge Hospital itself, there is only one psychiatrist. I cannot see how one psychiatrist can cope with the total number of some 3,000 inmates at any one time. Perhaps the Minister would like to clarify this point.

Mr Chua Sian Chin: Mr Speaker, Sir, I agree with the Member for Jalan Kayu that one psychiatrist cannot cope with so many cases. Therefore, there must be something incorrect about it. It is not correct to say that there is only one psychiatrist who is working in Woodbridge Hospital. In fact, we have three consultant psychiatrists. They are the person who is noted down in the Estimates as Psychiatrist (Grade G), referred to by the Member for Jalan Kayu, and the Medical Superintendent and Deputy Medical Superintendent of Woodbridge Hospital who are also consultant psychiatrists and are doing the duties of consultant psychiatrists. In addition to these three, we have three senior registrars in Woodbridge Hospital all of whom are in possession of the Diploma in Psychological Medicine and are, in fact, specialists in psychiatry, although they have not been appointed clinical consultants.

I agree that even this number of psychiatrists will not be sufficient in the next few years. At the moment, we have one officer in the United Kingdom undergoing training, and a further three medical officers will also be leaving this year to undertake courses in psychiatry in the United Kingdom.

Mr Hwang Soo Jin: Sir, before I withdraw my amendment I would just like to draw the attention of the House to the fact that about 50 per cent of the number shown against Woodbridge Hospital are apparently readmissions. This does seem to suggest that perhaps the treatment given at the hospital is not really good. I have heard complaints that patients are sent home too soon. In fact, I know of one particular case my constituent - who was beaten up twice by his son who was apparently let out too soon from the hospital.

Another point which I would like to mention is that I use Yio Chu Kang Road quite often and some nights on my way home, I was surprised to see some patients apparently doing a striptease by the roadside. They are not only a hazard to themselves, but also a danger to people driving along that stretch of the road. This is one matter which I feel might be due to the lack of supervision and possibly could be due to the shortage of staff at the Woodbridge Hospital.

6.30 p.m.

Mr Chua Sian Chin: Mr Speaker, Sir, unfortunately, the Member for Jalan Kayu has not understood the modern psychiatric approach of treatment of patients. In fact, it is the policy of psychiatric hospitals to have an open-door policy wherein patients are allowed a more open and free environment under supervision. This more natural environment helps the patients in the process of recovery. In many hospitals patients are encouraged to run their own wards and given the freedom to move in and out. It is not true that the inmates of the hospital are let loose, as was put forward by the Member for Jalan Kayu.

As regards readmissions, of course, it is best that if a patient has recovered a certain degree of sanity, he has a chance to return to his home. The idea behind it is that in their natural home surroundings they should get better faster. Unfortunately, there may be cases of relapse and so on. May I just say that if a patient is known to be unpredictably violent or shows a possibility of violence, he will be put in a more secure ward. I do not think the Member for Jalan Kayu should be very worried when he passes along Yio Chu Kang Road at night.

Mr Hwang Soo Jin: In view of the fact that the Minister seems to be aware of the problems involved, I beg leave to withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The sum of $52,753,270 for Head 1202 ordered to stand part of the Estimates.

Head 1203 -

The following amendment stood in the name of Mr Conceicao -

(1) That the sum to be allocated for Head 1203 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1071.

The Chairman: Mr Conceicao is not here.

Mr P. Govindaswamy: Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 1203 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1601*.

(* The same amendment also stood in the name of Mr Conceicao.)

The cleaning of the Republic is not done daily, and there are places where rubbish and garbage are accumulated. Therefore, it has resulted in the breeding of mosquitoes and flies. Will the Minister take action to see that the rubbish and garbage are cleared daily? We complained many times to the Public Health Division but they replied that they were short of men, short of lorries and all sorts of things. The Minister must take action to clear the rubbish and garbage daily.

Tuan Haji Rahmat Bin Kenap (Geylang Serai): (In Malay): Sir, I wish to draw attention to the recent outbreak of typhoid in Kampong Ubi and Geylang Serai. It appears that the Health Ministry shirked its responsibilities by putting the blame on a man who had failed to practise personal hygiene, and who had acted as a carrier of the disease, as was reported in the newspapers recently. I consider that such an accusation brings disrepute to the Health Ministry itself for trying to cover up its faults regarding public cleanliness in this area. The efforts of the Public Cleansing Department in the Kampong Ubi and Geylang Serai constituencies were very inefficient. Refuse was allowed to accumulate and became stinking, while drains were blocked. The residents of these two areas had played a useful role during the Keep Singapore Clean campaigns in 1969 and 1970, with the result that they are now imbued with the spirit of cleanliness and it has become a household chore to clean the environment of their homes. However, it is a matter for regret that the Health Ministry cannot share this responsibility in regard to cleanliness.

I wonder whether the Minister is aware that the construction of a new road from Sims Avenue, which is in the Geylang Serai and Kampong Ubi constituencies up to Jalan Eunos, has resulted in several drains being blocked. If the Minister is aware of the consequences after a flood, what steps and measures can be taken by the Public Cleansing Department to overcome this hardship? I am sure the typhoid carrier contracted the disease by accident of circumstances, but up to date no conclusive evidence has been obtained. What ought to be done by the Public Cleansing Department is to send the cleansing workers to take over the responsibility of maintaining a state of cleanliness in these two areas and, at the same time, clear the drains which have been choked in consequence of the road project now in progress. This should be done daily and not once or twice a year, which has hitherto been the practice of the Public Cleansing Department in respect of these constituencies.

Mr Chua Sian Chin: Mr Speaker, Sir, may I refer first to the rather blatant statement by the Member for Geylang Serai who attributed all the blame of the typhoid outbreak to the Health Ministry. I believe he must have followed the correspondence in the Berita Harian where my officer put the facts quite clearly. We are not trying to shirk any blame whatsoever, but we put the facts clearly, and wherever the blame falls, it falls rightly. From what the doctors told me - it was not told to me just for the sake of trying to exculpate themselves from blame, but as a result of bacteriological tests which had been carried out and from the evidence gathered - it was quite conclusive that the major factor in the outbreak was a break-down of personal hygiene, and not the unsanitary conditions of the drains and so on. This outbreak was the result of transmission of the disease through food. In other words, it was transmitted by carriers. In fact, this has been borne out by the fact that one carrier, who happened to be a hawker selling ice-drinks, was responsible for the people who had bought drinks from him going down with typhoid, and they, in turn, infected their families and friends. These victims had informed the Ministry officials that they had bought drinks from this man. It is quite clear that this outbreak of typhoid was the result of poor personal hygiene.

Perhaps I may explain what I mean by personal hygiene. It means that you must wash your hands when you handle prepared food and before you eat it. Not only that, you must cover any exposed food or drinks from flies around.

It is not true to say that the Health Ministry has been shirking its duties. It has been carrying out its duty of removing the refuse in that area. But may I say that if there is refuse in the drains it is also the fault of the residents of the area because, as the Member for Geylang Serai will know, in our Keep Singapore Clean campaigns, the message was that refuse should be thrown into dustbins and not into drains. If there is refuse in the drains, whose fault is it? Of course, it is the duty of the Ministry's workers to collect the refuse from the drains, but whose fault was it that, from the very beginning, refuse was thrown into the drains? Perhaps the Member for Geylang Serai may answer that simple question. Also, we have been informed that the residents did allow the children to defecate into the drains. Again, there was evidence that many of the lavatories - this is the bucket system of lavatory which we find is unsatisfactory - was not in a good state. Does the Member for Geylang Serai say that the Health Ministry must repair these lavatories for the residents there?

Then he mentioned the construction of the Sims Avenue Expressway which he blamed as the cause of flooding. I am afraid he has raised this matter under a different subhead. It should be under a different Ministry. There again, may I say that this is an area which is below the high-tide level. I think my Ministry officials have stated quite clearly that the only way to solve this problem of flooding is to raise the whole area, because, as we know, water flows from a high level to a low level. It cannot flow from a low level to a high level. So if the land is below high-tide level, how do you expect it to flow? Is it the responsibility of the Health Ministry to see that water flows upward?

The Member has said that the people in his constituency have co-operated with the Government in its Keep Singapore Clean campaign. I am very glad they have done so. And he says that because they have done so, they are now clean. We are not saying that the residents are dirty or have poor personal habits. It needs only one, two or three hawkers who practise poor personal hygiene to cause an outbreak of typhoid, even though the majority practise a high standard of personal hygiene. That is why the Ministry has never grown tired of reminding the people of Singapore that, for the sake of their own health, a high standard of personal hygiene should be maintained. My officials have told me that even though the surrounding areas are insanitary, if a high standard of personal hygiene is maintained by everybody, this sort of outbreak via carriers cannot occur. I believe that our Chairman, who is a medical man, will be able to understand it even better. But that does not mean that the Health Ministry is neglecting its duty to clear the rubbish. We do clear it. In fact, a correspondent in one of the newspapers says that the place is much cleaner now. Of course, an argument can be raised that we only cleaned it up after the outbreak. But if the Cleansing Department has not done its duty, did the Member complain to the Ministry of Health before? I did not receive any complaint from him.

I turn now to the Member for Anson. He says that the removal of refuse in the Republic is being done irregularly. May I say that, as far as removal of refuse is concerned, it is being regularly removed daily. May I also add that Singapore is about one of the very few countries in the world which remove garbage daily, including Sundays and public holidays. The position is quite different from that in more advanced countries like New York, London or even Tokyo where refuse is removed once or twice a week.

6.45 p.m.

The Chairman: One minute to go, Mr Chua.

Mr Chua Sian Chin: Yes, Sir. But I agree that there may he cases of non-removal on particular days, and the reasons are a shortage of labour and drivers, and a break-down of vehicles.

Actually at the moment we are suffering from a shortage of garbage truck drivers and labourers. In fact, there is a need for 963 cleansing labourers and 48 garbage truck drivers, and it is impossible for us to --

Mr P. Govindaswamy: You give more pay and more people will come forward.

Mr Chua Sian Chin: Well, my colleague, the Minister for Finance, is here, and the Member for Anson can raise that matter with him if he has the time.

Mr P. Govindaswamy: Sir, in view of the explanation given by the Minister, I beg leave to withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Mr P. Govindaswamy: Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 1203 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1721.

Sir, we are trying to keep the city clean and our campaign has met with some success. But unfortunately we still find that there are certain areas where mosquitoes are breeding. In spite of the cleaning of the city, these mosquitoes are still active. I wonder how the Anti-Mosquito Unit works. Can the Minister see to it that the Anti-Mosquito Unit checks the breeding spots of mosquitoes more thoroughly, so that these places will not be infested with mosquitoes? I understand there are some new spray machines available in Singapore, and perhaps these can be used to kill the mosquitoes wherever they are found breeding.

Mr Chua Sian Chin: Sir, first of all, may I thank the Member for saying that Singapore is much cleaner now. May I also say that the problem of mosquitoes will be there so long as there are people who breed mosquitoes in their own homes.

There are different types of mosquitoes. One of them is the Aedes mosquito which causes dengue and haemorrhagic fevers. This species breeds in water-bearing receptacles and other artificial containers in the homes, which are often carelessly thrown into the garden or into the open. Since launching our Keep Singapore Clean and Mosquito Free Campaign in 1969, we have had some good results in the sense that the number of haemorrhagic fever cases has gone down. In 1968 the number of these cases was 1,000 and in 1969 there were only 200 cases.

About the spraying of drains to prevent the breeding of mosquitoes, that is being done. But may I say this: Singapore is a tropical country, and the climate is such that you may spray the drains in the morning, but if it rains in the afternoon all the insecticide is really going down the drain into the canal. So as far as mosquito breeding in drains is concerned, it is an engineering problem, as there must be proper levels of drainage, in other words, water must flow from higher levels to lower levels.

Dr Augustine H. H. Tan: Sir, may I ask the Minister whether we are still using D.D.T. for mosquito control? If so, is he aware that in countries like the United States of America, they have noted that inordinate amounts of D.D.T. can cause all kinds of health complications?

Mr Chua Sian Chin: Sir, there is a Vector Control Unit in my Ministry headed by a specialist officer. They have experimented with a certain type of oil which is slightly different from D.D.T. We are using this new type of oil. I cannot give the Member for Whampoa more details about this, but if he likes he can file a question so that I can answer him. We are trying to go away from D.D.T. to another type of oil, not only because D.D.T. is not good for health, but because it also makes the larvae more resistant. They become more rugged and, therefore, more difficult to kill.

Mr P. Govindaswamy: Sir, I beg leave to withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The following amendment stood in the name of Mr Conceicao -

(4) That the sum to be allocated for Head 1203 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1741.

The Chairman: Amendment (4) , Mr Conceicao. He is not here. Amendment (5) , Mr Ramaswamy.

Mr S. Ramaswamy: Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 1203 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1831*.

(* The same amendment also stood in the names of Messrs. P. Govindaswamy and Yeo Choo Kok.)

Sir, under this subhead, Hawkers' Superintendent, I wish to bring to the notice of this House the nuisance and the difficulty caused by the hawkers in my constituency. There are about 100 hawkers doing business along Tai Thong Crescent, by the side of MacPherson Market. In the mornings these hawkers obstruct the flow of traffic, and it is impossible for vehicles to pass through Tai Thong Crescent. This problem has been brought to the notice of the Hawkers Department a few years ago, with the request that they resite the hawkers or allot them pitches near the market, in the backlanes and sidelanes and along one side of Tai Thong Crescent. In this way they need not lose their livelihood, and the traffic also need not be obstructed. From time to time the Potong Pasir Citizens' Consultative Committee and I myself have written to the Hawkers Department, and once to the Parliamentary Secretary about this problem, but without any result.

Can the Ministry take steps to allot proper spaces or pitches to these hawkers, and to settle this matter soon without causing any hardship to them? From time to time the reason given for not taking action to solve the problem is that the Hawkers Department has priorities and that this case does not deserve first consideration.

Mr P. Govindaswamy: Sir, I brought up the hawker problem in the last budget debate, and I have to bring it up again today. In the cleared areas when the hawkers slightly obstruct the road, the Hawkers Department takes legal action against them. But you find that no legal action is taken against hawkers in many areas which are still uncleared, and these hawkers make more profits and do not pay licence fees. I am not speaking against the officials concerned for not taking action against the hawkers. All I am asking is that, until such time as the whole of the republic is considered a cleared area, the hawkers in the cleared areas should be treated more leniently as they are legitimate hawkers, and they possess licences to do business.

Mr Yeo Choo Kok (Delta): Mr Speaker, Sir, I am not speaking.

Mr Chua Sian Chin: Sir, the hawker problem is quite a difficult one. We heard the Member for Potong Pasir saying that the hawkers are obstructing traffic, and therefore action must be taken. And then we heard from the Member for Anson that, although they may obstruct traffic slightly, we should not take action. So I am between the devil and --

Mr Ramaswamy: Point of clarification, Sir.

The Chairman: If the Minister gives way.

Mr Chua Sian Chin resumed his seat.

Mr Ramaswamy: Sir, I did not ask the Minister to take action to clear them. I asked him to allow the hawkers to do business without obstructing the traffic.

Mr Chua Sian Chin: Sir, I can understand the point of the Member for Potong Pasir. In order not to take action per se, but to resite them, you must have a piece of land or site. And he also complains of the delay. The delay is because it is not easy to get another site where you can resite the hawkers.

Mr Ramaswamy: I have suggested other sites.

Mr Chua Sian Chin: Are they suitable? May I say this then to put the mind of the Member for Potong Pasir at rest: something is being done about this problem. Although, as he has rightly said, we have priorities, he can be sure that the Hawkers Department will effect the resiting of the hawkers at Tai Thong Crescent in June 1971. It is the intention of the Department to resite them into a newly paved back-lane and sidelanes around the MacPherson Market.

Coming to the Member for Anson, he suggested something which quite astounded me. He said that no action or very little action should be taken against hawkers in a cleared constituency. My rational mind says that if you clear a constituency of hawkers and resite them properly, you must not allow other unlicensed hawkers to take the place of those who have been resited.

Mr P. Govindaswamy: Point of order, Sir.

Mr Chua Sian Chin: May I just say this?

Mr P. Govindaswamy: No, I did not mention unlicensed hawkers. I spoke about licensed hawkers.

Mr Chua Sian Chin: I agree. If licensed hawkers have been properly resited in a certain place, but you allow one of them to go back to the old place, the others will say, "If you allow him to go back to the old place, why cannot you allow the rest?"

Mr P. Govindaswamy: Sir, I only said that these licensed hawkers obstruct the road a little bit. My point is: these hawkers have limited space, and if they move their pitches a little bit, then action is taken against them.

Mr Chua Sian Chin: If you allow him a little bit, you can allow him a little bit more, say, two inches, three feet, or one mile.

Mr Ramaswamy: Mr Speaker, Sir, I am very glad that the Minister has promised to resite these hawkers in June - after two years. I beg leave to withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The sum of $34,052,490 for Head 1203 ordered to stand part of the Estimates.

7.00 p.m.

Head 1301 -

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

That the sum to be allocated for Head 1301 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1001*.

(* The same amendment also stood in the name of Mr N. Govindasamy)

Mr Speaker, Sir, in our budget for the next financial year there is no increase in taxation or the imposition of new taxation. This is a very judicious financial policy, because it will not impose any additional burden on our people. This shows that our Government is looking after the livelihood of our people.

However, we should not overlook the fact that there has been a general rise in the prices of various goods recently. This has greatly affected the livelihood of the people in the middle and lower income groups. In order to get the facts to substantiate my argument, I have personally made inquiries into the increase in prices of daily necessities. Let me quote the prices of the items obtaining in the past and compare them with those obtaining in January 1971. We all know there are several items of daily necessities. Although the price of rice has not gone up, the price of bread has recently been increased. Bread can be a substitute for rice.

First of all, let me mention the price of oil. Formerly, cooking oil cost $3.80 a tin. Now it is $4.20 a tin. Salt now costs 15 cents more. Bean sauce now costs 90 cents per bottle. Formerly it was 80 cents per bottle. One tin of condensed milk cost 40 cents before. Now it is 45 cents per tin. A five-katty tin of biscuits formerly cost $3.00. Now it costs $3.30 per tin. Lean meat cost $2.50 per katty before. Now it is $3.30 per katty. There are also other imported goods, for example, frozen beef, which formerly cost $2.60 per katty. Now it costs $4.40 per katty. This is quite a considerable rise.

I am just enumerating these few items to enable the Minister and his Parliamentary Secretary to understand the situation better. Perhaps the Ministry of Finance has not been very careful in compiling the data. It may well be that it has gathered the data from hearsay and, as a result, it is not well informed. The increases in prices have a great influence on our people, especially those in the lower income group. Take, for instance, an employee working in a small office earning a monthly salary of $200 and with many mouths to feed. His livelihood will be made very difficult as a result of these increases in prices. Out of the $200, he will have to spend $40 on house rent, and in addition he will have to spend money on education, food and other items of daily necessities. How is he going to make ends meet?

What is the reason for the increase in prices in recent months? We should find out the real reason so that we can deal with this problem. I hope the Minister will not take a cannot-careless attitude. On the contrary, he should take positive steps to remedy the situation by curbing the increase in prices. I agree with the Minister of State for Finance when he suggested that we should form a Consumers' Association. A Consumers' Association, comprising people of the middle and lower classes, can see to it that the merchants and traders will not overcharge the prices of goods. In this way, the consumers can bargain with the traders and maintain the prices of goods at a reasonable level. I appreciate the suggestion and I hope the Ministry of Finance will take steps to assist in the formation of a Consumers' Association. For instance, the Ministry of Finance can be of great assistance in the field of administration.

I also wish to suggest to the Minister that he should set up a Price Control Committee. Although he may say that he is not prepared to do so, I would like him to reconsider my suggestion, because I think a Price Control Committee is very essential. This committee can be charged with the duty of not only collecting data on prices, but also determining whether or not certain increases in prices are justified. The committee can also deal with merchants who increase their prices unreasonably. In fact, the price of daily necessities does not depend on supply and demand only. Sometimes it is due to personal manipulation and other extraneous circumstances. For instance, a few weeks ago when Parliament was about to sit to debate the present budget, certain irresponsible merchants spread rumours among the people that certain goods would be taxed and that certain tinned foodstuffs would also be taxed. Even Ovaltine and rice would be further taxed. All these rumours caused fluctuations in the market prices, especially the prices of daily necessities. Some irresponsible merchants made use of this opportunity to increase the prices of certain goods. If we can set up a Price Control Committee to control the prices of daily necessities and to supervise the market, the prices of daily necessities will be more stable. Our people will be able to live a more stable life and they will not be subject to the fluctuations in market prices. I hope the Minister will consider my suggestion.

Mr N. Govindasamy: Mr Speaker, Sir, after going through the Estimates of Revenue and Expenditure of Singapore for the current financial year, I find that I am more confused about the actual staffing position in the various Ministries and departments. Let me illustrate my point by referring to the Ministry of Labour, for example, where the incumbents of various positions, from that of Permanent Secretary to those of executive officers, are not substantive holders of the posts. They are merely acting in the posts. What is most puzzling to me is that some of them are acting in posts two grades above their substantive grades. If these acting appointments were made for a short period of time, it would have been more understandable. But the strange fact is that these acting appointments are often of several months' duration and, without exaggeration, they may be said to be made for life. Such a situation is obviously very unhealthy.

The same can be said of practically all the other departments in the Singapore civil service. Even in the Ministry of Finance, I believe there are more "actors" than substantive holders of the posts.

The civil service has many types of employees, namely, open-vote employees, temporary employees, acting employees, officiating employees, and supernumerary employees. Open-vote employees are also known to be temporary. However, some of these open-vote employees have been in service for more than 30 years and they are still known by the nomenclature. Temporary and officiating employees are either acting for some other incumbents, who themselves are acting or officiating for others or are officiating in their own right, but in both cases for long periods. In addition, we have supernumerary posts filled by people who have no business to be there at all.

When can we expect the Ministry of Finance to streamline the civil service so that all appointments are filled by permanent employees who are more likely to give better service, since one of the main grouses and frustrations of our civil servants is that, although they may be good enough "actors" for many years, they are not able to qualify for the substantive appointments in which they have acted. If they are not suitable for substantive appointments, it is not fair to ask them to act for long periods. Perhaps we should try to induce more suitably qualified persons to apply for civil service appointments. The salary scales for senior civil servants are not competitively attractive and their working conditions leave much to be desired.

I spoke about this aspect during the debate on the Government's financial policy statement, and I was not properly answered. A committee was set up on an ad hoc basis to revise the salary structure of the open-vote daily-rated employees. Another committee was set up to look into the salaries of the Police Force. And yet a third committee was set up to look into the salaries of senior civil servants. Yesterday we were told by the Minister for Social Affairs that the salaries of the Fire Brigade staff and their terms and conditions of service will also be looked into after they have settled with the Police Force. The Ministry of Education is again looking into the salary structure of the teachers. Are we going to continue to look into the salary structures and working conditions department by department? I believe it is high time that the Ministry of Finance gave sufficient thought to the whole structure of the civil service and drew up a comprehensive programme for streamlining the civil service in respect of the salary structure and working conditions if we are to have an efficient civil service. A solution that is framed in a haphazard manner and in isolation from other considerations is worse than no solution at all.

Sir, I have mentioned all this quickly because perhaps the Minister has only ten minutes to reply and I sincerely hope he will delve into this problem and not into the business of the high cost of living, because, however important it may be, it has been raised before.

7.15 p.m.

Mr Sia Khoon Seong (Moulmein): Mr Speaker, Sir, you will recall that on the 16th of this month I asked the Minister for Education about the progress of the current negotiations between the Teachers' Unions and his Ministry and the response of the Ministry to the teachers' proposal. The reply of the Minister for Education was that, as far as his Ministry was concerned, they had already submitted their proposals to the Ministry of Finance some time in December last year. This is late March. I would like to ask the Minister for Finance when we can expect an answer from his Ministry and whether he will personally look into the matter. He must excuse me if I have got not much confidence in the civil servants of his Ministry for two reasons. One reason is that, as the Member for Telok Blangah has pointed out, they are in acting capacities and are not confident or competent enough to make a very serious study and make sound judgments on some of the proposals that have been put forward by the Ministry of Education. The other reason is that I myself have personally lost confidence in the manner in which the Treasury handles civil servants' problems with regard to conditions of service.

Sir, to illustrate my point, I quote the example of one teacher's problem on the question of anomaly. On 1st May, 1958, a new salary scale was introduced for teachers who joined the service after this date. This scale is inferior to the old scale. The stipulation of the Treasury and the Education Ministry was that those who joined the service after that date would be placed on the new scale and those who were in the service before that date would get the old scale. And today we have teachers who joined the education service before 1st May, 1958, and who were put on the new scale. This problem was raised with the Education Ministry years ago by the Teachers' Unions and we received a reply saying that the matter had been referred to the Treasury, but up to now there has been no reply from the Trea sury. This is one example to illustrate my point about the very inefficient manner in which the Treasury is handling some of the civil servants' problems with regard to terms and conditions of service.

Just to round off my request, I would seek the Minister for Finance's personal attention to the teachers' proposals so that the matter can be expedited. He will appreciate that on the 1st of September, 1970, the then Minister for Education, Mr Ong Pang Boon, made an announcement inviting the Teachers' Unions to negotiate with the Ministry of Education. The first official meeting was on 10th October, 1970. All that the teachers are asking for is some response to the proposals that were put forward at the meeting. Surely this is not too much to expect from the Ministry of Finance when the Ministry of Education has already submitted its recommendations on the teachers' proposals.

Mr Ho Kah Leong: (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I have the same feeling as the Member for Moulmein has in regard to the officials of the Ministry of Finance. They are slow as snails in their working efficiency. I hope the Minister himself will supervise them and ask them to expedite the question of teachers' salaries.

I would like to take this opportunity to ask the Minister one question. When we were discussing the question of fisheries, the Minister for Law and National Development said that the question of pioneer status came under the Ministry of Finance and not under his Ministry. I want to know why the pioneer status for the deep-sea fishing industry was withdrawn. The Minister for Law and, National Development has asked me to refer this matter to the Minister for Finance. So I am taking this opportunity to do so. I notice that in the Finance Minister's budget speech, he mentioned that he would encourage deep-sea fishing. If he intends to encourage it, why was the pioneer status for the deep-sea fishing industry withdrawn?

The Chairman: Mr Hon, you have 10 minutes to reply to all the points.

The Minister for Finance (Mr Hon Sui Sen): Mr Speaker, Sir, because of the shortage of time, I am afraid I will not be able to answer all the questions. I will take the suggestion of the Member for Telok Blangah that I should not concentrate too much on the rise in the cost of living. This is not because I do not consider it important. In fact, this is one of the many problems that we shall have to consider during this year. Perhaps I should say to the Member for Sembawang that I do not live on fresh air and sunshine, and that I also consume some of the commodities that he has mentioned, like rice, bread, oil, salt and so on. My wife tells me that there has been some increase in prices of goods that she buys.

Mr J. F. Conceicao: Good show!

Mr Hon Sui Sen: As far as the increases in some other cases are concerned, they may not be justifiable. We have not agreed to these increases. For example, in the case of bread, the impression that has been given that we have accepted the increase in the price of bread is not correct. We have asked why there has been this increase, and we have found that even if there is an increase in raw materials, it does not justify an increase of five cents. There may be an increase in the price of flour which might justify a one-cent increase. We are looking into all these matters and we shall try to do what we can.

At the same time, I do not think we can accept the idea of price control, because the experience of people who lived with price control just after the war should make it clear that this is detrimental to the supply that is coming on to the market at reasonable prices. But we will give such help as we can in the collection of statistics, although there is some doubt about the figures that we produce. I think our inspectors in the market are just as able to find out about prices. The Trade Division and the Singapore Institute of Standards and Industrial Research will look into the quality and nature of the materials that go into the finished products.

I will now come to the matter of the civil service. I am in some sympathy with the Member for Telok Blangah when he says he is confused by the many appointments - acting, officiating, temporary, supernumerary, etc. These, of course, are not there because we like to confuse Members or ourselves. But they are just the result of a very rapid increase in the number of civil servants. In fact, 50 per cent of the administrative officers have less than three years' service. They are probationers. In the circumstances, it is not possible for the posts to be filled by officers who have the requisite experience and qualifications. In 1959, our civil service had 1,255 Division One posts. Today there are 3,907 Division One posts, an increase of more than three times, and we are not able to keep up with the expansion of the services. Therefore, we have had to resort to acting appointments. Where these appointments are more than two grades higher, then the persons who fill them are said to be officiating.

The supernumerary appointments are, of course, necessary. Under various circumstances, officers going on very long leave or going on leave prior to retirement, or officers who are understudying other officers before taking over the duties, and officers in excess of requirements naturally will have to be shown in the estimates, especially when they go off on national service. These various designations are there because there is a need to show them as such, rather than as permanent officers. Of course, we would like to have a civil service filled with officers of the right quality and calibre in substantive appointments, and we are trying our best to do what we can to train our civil servants so that they can be fully qualified for their duties.

In regard to the salary scales and conditions of service and their determination, this is one of the important matters we have to look into in order to get a full complement of substantive holders of the posts, and we will give consideration to the various salary scales. Consideration of these scales is being done. In fact, it has been mentioned that we are looking into the scales of daily-rated workers, the Police Force, the Fire Brigade and so on. So some action is being taken, perhaps not as fast as the Members would like us to take, but we are looking into these salary scales. In view of the shortage of staff which I have mentioned, and the fact that we do not always have people in the grades doing the work of looking into the salary scales, I think our civil service, instead of being criticised, ought to be given some praise for the work that they are doing and for the very large amount of overtime which they are doing.

In regard to the Ministry of Education and the teachers' proposals, this is not something which has been set aside. I hope that after consideration of the budget has been gone through, we shall get in touch with the Ministry of Education and come to some arrangement on the new salary scales which have been under examination.

7.30 p.m.

The Member for Jurong asked why fisheries are not pioneer industries. The reason for this is fairly simple. The fishing industry is really a very old industry, if not the oldest industry in the world. It certainly is not a modern industry, and therefore we did not think that it was appropriate that it should come under pioneer status. We wish to encourage fisheries. In fact, we make large amounts of finance available to anyone who wishes to engage in deep-sea fishing. The loans which have been approved by the Development Bank for some of the industries have been to the extent of 80 per cent of the cost of the assets.

The Chairman: Your time is up, Mr Hon.

Mr N. Govindasamy: Sir, I was not criticising the civil service but the Ministry of Finance. Officers have been asked to act for umpteen years and they are doing a good job. This is quite clear. I am not criticising the officers who are acting. If they are found to be suitable to act for a number of years, they should be found suitable to hold the job substantively. As far as I am concerned, officiating means somebody officiating a marriage. There must be a tremendous shortage of suitable persons in the civil service if officers are asked to officiate two steps above their substantive appointments. This shortage, as I mentioned earlier when we debated the Minister's financial policy statement, is due to the fact that we are not getting the appropriate persons into the civil service, as we are not offering competitive salaries and attractive terms and conditions of service. Therefore, my point is that there is justification for a salary revision, which the Government accepts, and as a result ad hoc salary revision committees have been set up for daily-rated and senior civil servants, the Police Force, the Fire Brigade and the teachers. I think the Minister accepts that the cause for revision is there. My point is, why not do it once and for all for the whole civil service instead of department by department and division by division?

Dr Augustine H. H. Tan: Mr Speaker, Sir, in virtually every country civil service salaries lag behind commercial and industrial salaries, even more so in a situation of very rapid development as we find ourselves in. The danger that we are confronted with here in Singapore today is that the top calibre personnel in the civil service may be drawn away towards the commercial and industrial sectors, leading to shortages of the kind which are very serious indeed, namely, top-level personnel. In such a situation, there are two things which can be done. One is a quick revision of salary, but this cannot be done to a considerable extent, especially in the present context of our general wage restraint policy for industry and the commercial sector as well. The other possibility, taken in conjunction with some revision of salary, is rapid promotion of people. We have to get away from the kind of mentality which says that, because I took 20 years to become a Permanent Secretary, therefore anybody who becomes a Permanent Secretary must take 20 years to get up there. Why cannot a person do it in five years or seven years if he has the ability and is prepared to work hard? Let us change this kind of mentality. Promote people rapidly. If they have the ability, put them up there. If you put them in an acting capacity for three months or six months and they have shown themselves to be capable, confirm them in their positions. I have argued on at least two occasions for the upgrading of the quality of the civil service, especially in respect of the upper level and the professional staff. Our economy is getting more sophisticated, and in order to understand it, to comprehend it and to service it adequately, we need to have technical and professional people to monitor and service industry and commerce. In order to do this, we have to be prepared to pay the price for people with these qualifications.

At present we pay Master's Degree holders two increments above the ordinary point of entry, and four increments in respect of Ph.D.s. It seems to me that it is just ridiculous to give two increments for a Master's degree and four for a Ph.D, degree, because, first of all, there are considerable earnings which a person has to give up when he pursues a Master's degree, which normally takes at least one year, if not two; and a Ph.D. degree takes at least two years, if not four, depending on which country he goes to. In addition, there is considerable effort behind the acquisition of a higher degree. It also presupposes a certain high enough level of qualifications in respect of the basic degree. All things taken together, Sir, the indication is that we need substantially more than two increments for the Master's degree and substantially more than four increments for the Ph. D. degree, and also rapid promotion for both.

Mr P. Govindaswamy: Sir, nobody cares very much for the civil servants because they cannot run away from a department after having served there for 20 to 25 years. The professional officers can all run away because they can get higher salaries outside, but the poor junior officers, with whatever salaries they receive, will have to remain there. Now legally qualified officers also come into Government service and therefore long-service people have difficulty in getting promotion. The Minister for Finance must consider revising the salaries of the civil servants because they are the backbone of the Government. If they work hard, the Government will also get a better name. Because the poor civil servants cannot vent their grouses, we tend to leave them out. Perhaps the Minister will consider the matter.

Mr Teong Eng Siong: (In Mandarin): I asked a question just now, but the Minister appears not to have clearly understood it. It is about the establishment of a consumers' association. I requested the Ministry of Finance to take steps to assist in the formation of a consumers' association, and the Minister of State for Finance himself mentioned this possibility. I think this is definitely a very good thing to do. We would like to set up a consumers' association to stabilise the prices of our goods. I did ask the Ministry of Finance to assist in its formation and administration.

Mr Hon Sui Sen: As the Minister of State for Finance has already said that he will be prepared to give assistance to the consumers' association, I think I need say nothing more on this. We will give assistance.

I would like to answer the comments of the Member for Telok Blangah in which he blamed the Ministry of Finance, but not the civil service, for the present condition of the civil service and their terms and conditions of service. As far as the acting appointments are concerned, and their being done away with, this is not within our dispensation. The substantive filling of posts, especially the superscale posts, is a matter for the Public Service Commission. Unless it considers that the civil servant can fill the post substantively, the only course of action we can take is to fill it on an acting basis or an officiating basis or a temporary basis.

With regard to quick solutions to the civil servants' salaries, of course, it is very easy to suggest that we should do this in a very rapid way. I suppose the most rapid way is to give everyone a 10 per cent increase. On this basis, we can then really get rid of the committees inquiring into the salary scales of daily-rated workers, the senior civil servants and the staff of the Fire Brigade! Perhaps we should take some of the blame for not dealing with these matters as rapidly as possible, but I suppose the test of any Minister for Finance, or any of his officials, is whether or not they are accused of giving in too easily to requests for salary increases!

The Member for Whampoa suggested that it would be necessary to give salary increases for a Master's degree and a Ph. D. degree beyond the two to four increments that have already been conceded. On this point, we must consider not whether the paper qualifications are a Master's, a Ph. D's or an Honours degree, but whether the applicant or the present holder can fill the job, and on this there is no other test than actual performance of the job. For quality in the civil service, it would be very desirable that we should be able to pay civil servants a remuneration commensurate with their value, but the difficulty in dealing with, say, 4,000 senior civil servants - that was the figure of Division One officers which I gave is that we cannot compete with the commercial firms which want only one or two officers and can therefore pay 10 per cent above whatever may be offered in the civil service. Even if we increase the senior civil servants' salaries by 20 per cent, the commercial firms can always up this by another 20 per cent.

An hon. Member: Give them rapid promotion!

Mr Hon Sui Sen: Well, that is being done. Perhaps there has been some complaint that we do not consider the seniority principle too sacrosanct, and we have sometimes promoted fairly young officers to Permanent Secretary grade, if not substantively, at least to act in the Permanent Secretary's post even though they have not had 20 years of service. If there are officers with five to seven years' service and with outstanding ability, and if they can perform the job of the Permanent Secretary, I, as Minister for Finance, will have absolutely no objection to their being rapidly promoted. I think I have answered most of the questions.

Dr Augustine Tan: Sir, I am afraid the Minister has missed the point regarding the two increments for the Master's degree and four for the Ph.D. degree. I was not at any time implying that holding a Master's degree or a Ph. D. degree alone is sufficient to indicate quality. All I was saying was that you must take into account the marketability of such degree holders. If you do not pay them a sufficient number of increments, you are not likely to be able to attract better quality degree holders into the civil service. You end up with a mediocre one, from Timbuctoo or some other unknown university.

7.45 p.m.

Sir, may I also vent my frustration, which I am sure my fellow Backbenchers also share, that Ministers seem to be in the habit of passing the ball from one to the other - from Health to Finance, now from Finance to the Public Service Commission. Sir, may we know the ultimate repository of power that we may have recourse to to get some of these things done?

Mr Hon Sui Sen: Perhaps I can answer the last one, i.e., passing the buck or the ball. As far as the Public Service Commission is concerned, it is the ultimate authority. I do not think there is any question of its passing the buck any further.

An hon. Member: The buck stops there!

Mr Hon Sui Sen: Yes, the buck stops there. I do not think there is any question about it. This was the decision of Members of Parliament here when the Public Service Commission Ordinance was passed. I still think that however much we like to be able to promote the officers, the neutrality of the Public Service Commission is something which we still accept and would like to see continue.

On Master's and Ph. D. degrees, it has been considered that two and four increments respectively would be sufficient, because it is a matter of opinion whether or not we are getting enough Ph.D.s. But we have quite a number. Those whom we send overseas on study courses, when they come back, are usually bound to the Government for three or five, or even eight years in some cases. Our problem really is not to recruit them into the service but rather, after they have been recruited into the service, to retain them in the face of the blandishments of commerce and industry. I say that is very difficult because the private sector can always pay a little bit more than whatever we may want to pay them. The final test really is whether the man likes the administrative work in the civil service or whether he wants to go outside and try his luck in commerce and industry. Perhaps there are very big rewards obtainable there, but at the same time there is the great risk that his paper qualifications may not, after all, make him a good industrialist.

Mr Sia Khoon Seong: Sir, on the question of passing the buck with regard to promotion exercises, I accept the explanation of the Minister for Finance that the buck has got to be passed to the Public Service Commission, because it is the ultimate authority in determining the promotion of officers. But there are other civil service matters which the Public Service Commission is not concerned with, and the buck actually ends at the Ministry of Finance. Therefore, the Ministry of Finance is responsible for, shall I say, messing things up.

To illustrate my point, I will just quote an example of what happened in the Education service. Not everybody knows that there is a shortage of teachers, but everybody knows that there is a shortage of graduate teachers. Sometime between advertisements for teachers, graduates applied for posts in the Education Ministry, and the reply was that there was no vacancy because certain civil service procedures had to be observed to determine the vacancies. I think it will take me a long time to explain how they work. In fact, I myself do not quite understand how they work. They have a one-track mind. This is just to illustrate the ridiculous situation that exists. You know very well that there is a shortage of graduate teachers, and yet you get a reply saying that there is no vacancy. And they quote so many rules and stipulations to prove that there is no shortage of teachers. This proves the point that when the responsibility is clearly with some department, they mess things up.

I now come back to the other point which I mentioned earlier but which was not answered, and that is the stipulation laid down by the Education Ministry (of course, with the approval of the Finance Ministry) that teachers who joined on or after 1st May, 1958 would receive a salary scale lower than that given to those who joined before that date. The old salary scale is much better. There are teachers who joined the service before 1st May, 1958, and so according to the stipulation, they should get the old scale, but instead they were given the new scale. And when representations were made to the Education Ministry, they said the Finance Ministry was responsible. The Finance Ministry in turn said the Education Ministry was responsible. This went on for years. What happens then to the teachers? This is only one example to show how helpless the civil servants are. When they want to seek redress for their grievances in matters relating to service conditions, I do not think the Ministry of Finance can pass the buck to anybody else, because the buck ends there. I think this manner of handling problems relating to service conditions and other matters has reach such a very unhealthy level that a log of dissatisfaction and unhappiness is caused, apart from the poor salary scales of the civil service. I think it is because of this situation that civil servants are just not satisfied with the answers they get for their grievances. They get lost. They are helpless. They do not know where to go to. This passing of the buck from one Ministry to the Finance Ministry conveniently ignores the civil servants' problems. So unless the Finance Ministry takes the buck and handles the problems more intelligently - rather than with a one-track mind - I think such problems will never be solved. But if there is a more efficient and more intelligent manner of handling civil service problems, many of the grievances will be removed, and there will be greater contentment in the civil service.

Mr Hon Sui Sen: Sir, first of all, I do not know why the Ministry of Finance should be blamed even for graduate teacher vacancies not being filled. Quite obviously there are vacancies, and the Minister for Education, I believe, has made it quite clear that he cannot get enough teachers. And if the Member for Moulmein has got any graduate teachers knocking at the door, I guarantee that they will be let in. There will be no passing of the buck in this case.

As to the stipulation laid down by the Ministry of Education, I am afraid I do not know much about the circumstances in which the old and the new salary scales were formulated. But if it will give him any satisfaction, I will look into this and see whether it is the Ministry of Finance that is responsible for this.

Mr N. Govindasamy: Sir, will Minister consider setting up a Personnel Department to look after the interests of the civil servants, as this will prevent the passing of the buck? This is important, because I have noticed from the civil service structure in the Ministry of Finance that there is only one Executive Officer (I think he is acting as Higher Executive Officer) looking after the interests of about 13,000 daily-rated employees. The civil servants do not know where to take their problems to. If they take them to the Ministry concerned, they are asked to refer to the Ministry of Finance, and they do not know whom they should approach there. I think it is about time the Government prevented further frustrations of the civil servants and set up a Personnel Department in the Ministry of Finance to look into the problems of the numerous civil servants that we have. Will the Minister consider the possibility of setting up such a department?

Mr Hon Sui Sen: I think the Member for Telok Blangah is not really aware of the organisation of the civil service. Surely we have a Personnel Department; in fact, it is the Establishment Branch of the Ministry of Finance, and the Permanent Secretary is in charge. He has a number of Deputy Secretaries in charge of service conditions. There is a Career and Development Officer whom we recently appointed to take charge of the training of civil servants. The question which has been asked about the Higher Executive Officer in charge of the Training Centre - I do not know whether this is the same matter - but anyway I can categorically assure the Member that the Personnel Department and personnel matters are not being handled at Executive Officer or Higher Executive Officer level.

Dr Augustine Tan: Mr Speaker, Sir, may I ask the Minister for Finance when was the last time that rules and regulations governing the terms and conditions of the entire civil service were revised or overhauled? It seems to me that some of these rules must be out-dated. Although they were meant to prevent abuses and so on, they do, in actual fact, considerably tie the hands of the brighter people, people with more entrepreneurial energies.

Mr Sia Khoon Seong: Sir, on the question of the Personnel Department, it is true that there are persons or bodies in this department handling personnel matters and so on. But I think it is not so much a question of bodies handling these problems, but the approach adopted by the -

The Chairman: Mr Sia, what do you mean by "bodies"? Do you mean human beings?

Mr Sia Khoon Seong: Persons, yes. The Minister replied to my colleague, the Member for Telok Blangah, that there is such a department with the Permanent Secretary in charge, and Deputy Secretaries and so on. It is accepted. But I think it is the manner of handling these personnel problems. And as has been pointed out by my colleague, the Member for Whampoa, some of the rules and regulations are obsolete. I think there should be some adoption of modern management techniques, personnel relationship. I suggest that we follow some of the private firms where they have much less employees, and they adopt very modern, close personnel relations, human relations, absolutely important, not bureaucratic, impersonal. I was told that in the civil service they are just digits -

Mr Conceicao: Bodies!

Mr Sia Khoon Seong: Bodies. I think it is a matter of revamping the whole set-up and adopting a new approach in keeping with the progress of Singapore.

Mr N. Govindasamy: Sir, this is an important issue. Fortunately for me, Sir, I have dealt with the Ministry of Finance on grievances of civil servants, daily-rated employees, the lot. The Minister is right - they have an Establishment Branch where a Deputy Secretary, who is in charge of so many other matters, is also in charge of personnel problems. When I said that there is only an Executive Officer, acting as Higher Executive Officer, who handles the problems of 13,000 daily-rated employees, I meant it, Sir. That is a fact. They do not have a Personnel Department in the Ministry of Finance as such. The Estimates do not provide for it. But there are persons in the Establishment Branch who, when grievances are taken up, deal with them. As the Member for Moulmein has pointed out, what we want is a department that looks after nothing else but this, and a department which has sufficient people to handle the day-to-day problems that arise in such a large civil service as ours, perhaps even to match the personnel departments in the private sector. In the long run, Sir, this will be a worthwhile investment on the part of the Government in that it will have a less frustrated civil service. Although it may not be possible to remove all the frustrations, perhaps we could have a less frustrated civil service.

Mr Sia Khoon Seong: The human touch!

Mr Hon Sui Sen: First of all. I think the question of when the rules and regulations of the civil service were revised -

8.00 p.m.

The Chairman: Order. Moment of interruption.

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

Mr Hon Sui Sen: Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to report that the Committee of Supply has made further progress on the Estimates of Expenditure for the financial year 1st April, 1971, to 31st March, 1972, and ask leave to sit again tomorrow.

Mr Speaker: So be it.