MAIN AND DEVELOPMENT ESTIMATES OF SINGAPORE FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR 1ST APRIL, 1973 TO 31ST MARCH, 1974

Debate in Committee of Supply resumed.

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

5.37 p.m.

Head 0701 (cont..) --

Mr Ivan Baptist: Mr Speaker, Sir, permit me to echo the sentiments of the Members for Sembawang, Toa Payoh and Kim Keat regarding the bus transport system in our Republic. I would, however, like to add that the state of the buses in Singapore is atrocious indeed. They are rarely kept clean and their smoky exhausts pollute the environment. I would urge the Minister for Communications to consider these matters and let us know if plans are ahead to ensure that the buses are kept clean and pollution-free. I hope the Minister, in considering the matter, will not peeve the Chairman of the Public Utilities Board by using too much potable water.

Dr Ong Leong Boon (Kim Seng): Mr Speaker, Sir, may I add to the comments that have been voiced by various Members of Parliament? I think we should be fair when we talk about the poor bus service. If we have a poor bus service today, it is not because the bus service itself, in isolation, is poor. If indeed we have a system that is somewhat short of ideal, it is only a reflection of what we have existing in Singapore, and that I take to mean more than just the bus service. We have at fault the ordinary bus driver, the ordinary vehicle driver, the ordinary lorry driver and the pedestrians. If we want to teach the bus drivers to drive better, we must also at the same time try to inculcate better driving habits in other drivers as well, and our pedestrians too. It is quite common to see pedestrians not using the, pedestrian paths or the overhead bridges but to run across or to jump across railings just to take the shortest way to the other side of the road, thus adding to the traffic congestion that we already have. Therefore, if we are to consider right now any measures to improve the bus service, let us take it in toto, and unless we do that we are not being fair in our comments on the bus drivers.

Sir, I would like to suggest to the Minister for Communications that, with haste, he might consider setting up a committee to study this problem.

Mr Hwang Soo Jin (Jalan Kayu): Mr Speaker, Sir, on the question of bus services, I would also like to take the opportunity of asking the Minister to look into the question of assigning new buses for the rural areas and not some broken-down bone-shakers. My constituents have time and again written to the newspapers to complain. It is all very well to extend the bus routes, but it takes two hours to get to town. I am quite sure this applies to areas like Jurong, Chua Chu Kang and the other outlying rural areas. I cannot see why the rural folks should be penalised just because they are staying in the rural areas.

Mr Lee Yiok Seng (Bukit Panjang): (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, the Member for Jurong just now mentioned something about overseas trunk call services. I feel that generally such a difficulty exists. Usually when people try to make trunk calls overseas, they find that they cannot get through in a short time in order to communicate with the persons abroad. Even when there is a booking for the trunk call, they cannot get their calls through at the scheduled time. I feel that this is a waste of time, particularly of businessmen, because if they have to wait one or two hours just to get through a short message, then this is really a waste of time and it is very uneconomical. I would like to suggest to the Minister to look into this matter in order to rectify the situation.

The Minister for Communications (Mr Yong Nyuk Lin): Mr Speaker, Sir, considering the number of Members who have commented on the bus services in Singapore, may I begin by saying that my Ministry is not complacent about the state of affairs of our bus services, although we feel that ever since the reorganisation which took place two years ago, we can say that there has been quite an improvement over previous years. There are many factors pertaining to the public bus services which have got to be looked into before we pass any comments or criticise without knowing the actual background and history.

5.45 p.m.

Only two years ago, before introducing the reorganisation of the bus services, we had to contend with getting about 8,000 to 10,000 pirate taxis off the roads and to get the bus companies to meet the vacuum once they were off the roads. Another difficulty, which perhaps we may lose sight of, is the fact that after having reorganised the bus services in April 1971, which is just less than two years ago, one great casualty occurred in that the Singapore Traction Company collapsed. It is all very well, now that everything is over, for you to forget how tragic this event actually was. It was, now that it is all over, a very large company with $14 million paid-up capital, employing nearly 3,000 workers. The reorganisation brought about the collapse of this company and 400 of its buses had to be taken over by the other three companies. A great number of these 400 buses are derelicts. Today, very often we see them in a state of breakdown on our roads. But what is most important was the fact that nearly 3,000 workers were not unemployed. They were given employment by the other three bus companies without any single cent from the Government. These were private companies which rose to the occasion. So, to be fair to these three companies, let us not keep saying that they have not played their part.

I am glad that the hon. Member for Kim Keat took the opportunity to quote what I said last year from a newspaper article. The reason I quoted that article was just that here was a newspaper which probed into the matter and came to a certain conclusion. It is true that the three bus companies managed to make a profit, whereas the STC which had a monopoly of the bus services for umpteen years showed losses of over $5 million. To be fair, therefore, I would say the three bus companies took over this bankrupt bus company of 400 buses and nearly 3,000 workers into their midst; and they are running it to the best of their ability. We must give them time to re-adjust to the new conditions. It is only just one year since they have been given this opportunity, before we begin to criticise. They must be given time to earn the revenue with which they can buy more new buses.

I think the suggestion by the hon. Member for Kim Keat that perhaps the profits from these three bus companies should be used for building more bus shelters is a good one. But I would prefer that their profits, if any, should be ploughed back for the purchase of more new buses because the question of erection of bus shelters rightfully falls on the Government. In fact, it is the Public Works Department that handles this. I agree that not enough bus shelters are being provided at the present moment. But here again let us give them some time to allow money to be properly spent, because there is still a period of adjustment. The present bus shelter sites are not necessarily the best. They may have to be moved. So we do not want to tear down $30,000 worth of bus shelters today and then move them elsewhere in a few months' time. I think it is a question of time really before we can bring about a state of affairs of which we can be proud. But I do ask for time to be fair to the companies.

Let me assure hon. Members that whilst they may appear to show some profits - I must confess that up to today, my Ministry has not received audited accounts of these three bus companies - I have asked for monthly figures, and on the face of those figures, I believe they are making a profit. I suppose only the Income Tax Department can tell us the truth. And I have no recourse to those documents.

However, Sir, criticisms have been levelled and 1 think it is only fair that I should endeavour to give an explanation as best I can. Let me say again that we are not smug or satisfied with what we have achieved. We think there is still a long way to go and much has to be done. But there are priorities and I do plead for some patience. Let me say that over the last year, two of the three bus companies were owing Government taxes, one as much as $1 million, and the other $1/2 million. And it is only after talking to them and pleading with them, that their accounts had been brought up to-date. So I must say that we are keeping a very close watch, and I think the hon. Member for Boon Teck knows the position best. He has been able to get all 10,000 bus workers to join his union, SILO, and it was only in December 1972 that all bus workers came under one union for the first time and they were able to get a fair deal from the three bus companies. Here again, first things must come first. The 10,000 bus workers should feel that they are getting a good deal as a result of the bus services reorganisation. They never had a chance in the past. You must have a group of happy, satisfied workers, before you can have a good public bus system. So I must allow for these things to move step by step. I think, this year, we should be able to see more new buses on the roads, and all the broken-down buses, known as low ya chia, will not be found on our streets.

Let me now come to the various criticisms levelled against them. The Members who spoke of their dissatisfaction with the bus services are the Members for Sembawang, Toa Payoh, Kim Keat, and Potong Pasir. I think the Member for Kim Seng very gallantly supported the need to be a bit fair, and I am very grateful to him for that. But we have got to take other things into consideration. The hon. Member for Jalan Kayu is very unhappy that old buses are made to serve the countryside.

As regards time schedules for buses and commuters having to wait a very long time before they can get on to a bus, there are many factors. Congestion of the roads can bring this about. I am sure everyone in Singapore knows that traffic today has increased considerably, and with congestion time schedules of buses are naturally upset. Sometimes we see three, four, five or even six buses all "bunching up". Of course, it would be simple to say that bus drivers somehow or other make it a habit to come together, as if coming for a meeting! It is not true. When there is congestion, all time schedules are upset and so at a certain point of time all the buses are there. So I do not think we should say that bus drivers are unco-operative, and that they do not seem to care for passengers. Sometimes people seem to pay too much attention to letters in the press. But we do know that some of those letters are not genuine. This can happen. We do not deny that such a state of affairs can exist.

Anyway, congestion is a problem. We hope we can tackle this in a number of ways. One way will be a long-term solution, which is the possibility of a mass rapid transit system. That is a subject under study, as mentioned by the hon. Member for Kim Keat. But it will take time for a decision to be taken. It is for the long-term. Even if we make a decision today, it will perhaps be five, eight or 10 years before we can see the mass rapid transit system operating in Singapore. However, we are asking the bus companies to introduce express bus services for commuters from large housing estates to their work areas. This is not something new. It has been done in the past by the STC in city areas. The bus companies have agreed to consider the matter, and I think they would themselves be quite happy to bring this about. But here again we should give them time to work things out before putting it really into effect.

On the question of accident rates, there are so many factors. If the roads are congested, then the chances of accidents occurring are greater.

As regards recklessness, it is not a question of bus drivers only but drivers of all types of motor vehicles. We do have an Enforcement Section which attends to complaints of this nature, and bus commuters themselves can help to stop the dangerous practice of buses pulling off before passengers have boarded or alighted by giving the particulars of the incident when reporting to the Registrar of Vehicles. It is not enough to say: `I saw this bus do this and that'. Please let us have more details, such as the number of the bus concerned, and the time and date, so that we will be able to follow up on those reports. Where a complaint is proved to be genuine, then the bus driver or conductor will be pulled up. But to make general statements will not be of much help. The ROV Inspection Centre also conducts field inspections, and they will follow up cases when we have more evidence.

As regards the question of over-aged buses, ever since we reorganised the bus services in April 1971, less than two years ago, the three bus companies have replaced about 290 buses of their own. As for the bus fleet itself, this has been increased from 1,339 in April 1970, three years ago, to 2,103 buses as at the end of last January 1973, i.e, an increase of 764 buses. Now if we add up these two figures, 290 plus 764, there has been an increase of 1,054 new buses on the roads within the last few years. And what is the total bus fleet in Singapore today? 2,000. One-half of the fleet is new, over the last two or three years. And if we work on the basis that each bus costs $40,000, we can arrive at what is the capital sum that has been invested on these 1,000 buses. It is $40 million. We do not just produce $40 million from thin air. It has got to come from somewhere. So we should not push it too hard. The companies themselves know that an old bus, or a bus that is broken down, means less revenue for them. They will of their own accord replace old buses as fast as they can, even without intervention on our part.

6.00 p.m.

Coming to the lack of so-called courtesy on the part of drivers and conductors. Here, I think the Member for Boon Teck can tell us how hard he has worked. The first courtesy campaign was organised between the bus companies and bus workers. I had the privilege of being present at the opening ceremony. This was done for the first time. There never was an occasion before where employers and workers combined their efforts together. Unfortunately, of course, the companies did say that it cost a bit too much, for the results. So they are a bit shy about repeating it. I mean, let us be fair. People are not going to spend money only to find that the results are not worth the money spent. So it does not mean that nothing is being done. We want to see more new buses rather than all the ramshackle buses serving the rural areas.

As regards cleanliness and smoky exhausts, as brought up by the Member for Potong Pasir, I must say that this has been done. On air pollution, may I just say that air pollution is a very big subject. There is such a thing as pollution which you do not see but which constitutes a greater danger. For example, pollution from petrol engines. The pollution that you see is a lesser evil. Smoky exhaust, which is visible pollution, is really the lesser evil. We have attempted to tackle only the lesser evil. I do not say that we have been completely successful, but I think there is less of smoky exhaust in Singapore today. As regards the greater evil of pollution by petrol driven cars - we do not manufacture those cars, but they are manufactured in the United States of America - I think President Nixon has asked that by 1975 cars with a minimum amount of pollution will only be allowed on the roads. That is something that will stretch not only our finances but also our imagination. I hope that if we have succeeded in reducing visible pollution, we would have already gone some way towards our fight for a cleaner atmosphere.

As regards clean buses, it is expected of them. But as one Member himself has already indicated, perhaps we should try to persuade the Chairman of the PUB to allow more water to be used for cleaning of buses. So you can see the difficulties we have to face.

I hope I have covered most of the grouses in respect of the bus services, and may I then move on to the Singapore Telephone Board and the Overseas Telecoms Service, which is being handled by a separate authority, at present known as the Telecommunications Authority of Singapore.

May I first deal with the Singapore Telephone Board. The Members for Sembawang, Jurong and Bukit Panjang have complained about the difficulty of getting through a telephone call. First of all, it is the rapid development of our own telephone services. Normal developments in other countries would be perhaps 5 per cent per annum. Ours is easily 15, 20 or even 30 per cent per annum. At this rate of development, it is very difficult to catch up with the provision of services of a high standard. There is generally a breakdown. Of course, we do not wish for this to happen, but we are doing our best. May I say that in this respect we were let down by a firm of manufacturers for telephone equipment. I will name it. It is the L.M. Ericsson of Sweden. As a result of a contract to provide equipment, we entered into a joint venture to manufacture telephone equipment in Singapore, to be known as the Telephone Industries of Singapore Pte. Ltd. At the end of 1971, just when it was supposed to start manufacturing, this company L.M. Ericsson, decided not to go on with the project. That upset our plans and also the delivery of equipment all the way from Sweden. This problem went on for quite some time, and you may have read in the newspapers very recently that we have signed a contract with a well-known firm of manufacturers in Japan, known as Fujitsu, for the supply of 100,000 telephones. So if we do have some unsatisfactory service in certain exchanges, it is partly due to this unfortunate decision on the part of L.M. Ericsson not to proceed with the joint venture, which resulted in withholding the delivery of equipment, etc, by them. So we were in a bit of a jam, but that has been put right now. Past contracts for delivery are now in the pipeline and we have also changed our contractors. In due course it should be possible to improve our telephone services.

The Member for Jurong mentioned the fact that our overseas telephone services are also very bad. Our overseas telephone services have been increasing at the average rate of 30 per cent per annum. Over the last six years, the development rate has been much too great for the personnel concerned, and there is a limit to human endeavour to meet with such a terrific rate of increase. As stated, the difficulty in meeting this growth was due to the equipment manufacturer not meeting the Singapore Telephone Board orders placed before 1971. A new order has since been placed with another supplier, and a new exchange equipment is now being installed and will be operational in August this year, in other words, five months from now. This will double the capacity of the existing exchange in Jurong, and congestion should then be eliminated.

I think the Member for Jurong also mentioned the case of a telephone operator having forgotten to put through a call. I would say, please let us have the name, the time and date when this happened, so that whichever operator was then in charge could be pulled up. I would appreciate it if the Member could supply me the particulars. We will deal with the case only if we have the full facts.

As regards Jurong proper, it is true, as he has said, that there are 400 factories in Jurong. The peak period is between 10 and 12 o'clock when everybody wants to talk to everybody; I do not know why. There was acute congestion in the Jurong Exchange during the third quarter of last year, but I understand that this has been eased. The Singapore Telephone Board has replaced the old 2,000-line equipment with new equipment to increase the traffic handling capacity of this exchange. In December 1972, 1,000 lines were added, and in February 1973 another 1,000 lines were added. Additional juncture circuits between Jurong and other exchange areas were also installed to ease the congestion. To cater for traffic growth, there will be another 3,000 lines to be installed and they should be operational by the third quarter of this year.

I hope I have given adequate answers to all the points raised by the 10 Members in the opposite Bench.

Mr Hwang Soo Jin: Mr Speaker, Sir, may I be permitted to ask whether the Minister can elaborate on the failure of the Telephone Industries of Singapore? Has it involved us in any financial loss? If so, what is the amount, and whether there are any legal means by which we can hold the other party responsible for our loss?

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: Sir, I can only say that the matter is under liquidation at the moment. Up to this moment of time, the Singapore Telephone Board is involved to the tune of $1 million. But how much of it is recoverable has yet to be ascertained. But whatever it is, may I say this: even if we suffer a million dollar-loss, by changing the contractor we have saved many millions of dollars on equipment.

Mr Teong Eng Siong: (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, the Minister has replied to the queries in great detail. I agree with him that the reorganisation of the public bus services is a very great task indeed. The Ministry of Communications has done its part, and the Minister has also admitted that the reorganisation is still going on. It is not yet completed. I hope that his Ministry will put in more effort to complete the reorganisation of the bus services in the shortest possible time. If he can undertake to do that, I will withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The following amendment stood in the names of Messrs J. F. Conceicao and Ng Kah Ting:

(2) That the sum to be allocated for Head 0701 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 11.

The Chairman: Mr Conceicao is not here. Mr Ng Kah Ting.

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

That the sum to be allocated for Head 0701 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 11.

Sir, this subhead covers the Mass Transit Planning Unit. According to the Memorandum on the Main and Development Estimates, this sum is "provided for the completion of the feasibility study on the proposed Mass Transit System". In the past I have raised in this House this matter of the feasibility of the proposed Mass Transit System. But up to this date, Sir, we have still "forgotten" to apportion another half a million dollars to finalise the completion of this feasibility study. Just now in his reply to an earlier amendment, the Minister mentioned hopefully that it would be another five to 10 years before such a system can be introduced in Singapore. Upon the completion of such a feasibility study being in hand, I am wondering whether it will take yet another five to 10 years before we can actually get the System off the ground. We know that a lot of money has been spent on this feasibility study, and also by getting the assistance of the United Nations Development Programme. I would like to seek further elucidation from the Minister for Communications as to when will the feasibility study be completed, and whether a decision would have to be taken to put the Mass Transit System into being. If so, when will we come to that stage?

6.15 p.m.

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: Mr Speaker, Sir, may I begin by answering the Member for Punggol that the total cost of this project, the Mass Transit Study, is approximately $3.5 million, of which Singapore's contribution in cash and in kind is approximately $1.1 million.

May I say that this Mass Transit Study is being carried on in two consecutive phases. Phase I is concerned essentially with the economic aspects, and includes the examination of existing transport demands and services, forecasts of requirements for transport facilities, and the systematic analyses and comparisons of alternative transport investments and policies. Phase II will deal mainly with the engineering aspects and will consist of a detailed feasibility study of those investment projects for which engineering design or construction is programmed to start before 1977 within the Mass Transit System recommended.

The studies are being undertaken with the assistance of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and the World Bank as executive agency. The Mass Transit Study Office was set up in mid-June 1972 with staff from the Ministry of Communications and officers seconded from the Public Works Department, the Planning Department and the Housing and Development Board. For Phase I of the study, the World Bank has appointed the firm of Wilbur Smith and Associates to provide professional services. The consultants were mobilised in Singapore in July last year. A Steering Committee has been established to review policy matters that might require decisions in the course of their study. The Committee is chaired by the Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Communications, and includes representatives from the Ministry of Finance, the Ministry of National Development, and the World Bank. The area of studies covers the whole island of Singapore. A minimum of four alternative public transport systems would be formulated and tested. The study will also estimate the comparative magnitude of investment, because it runs into hundreds of millions of dollars and the operating costs of the various alternatives. The relationship between travel demand and travel cost, and the effect of pricing policies, may also be examined. The alternative Mass Transit Systems are to be compared and evaluated on the basis of cost, service characterisation, the economic benefits and environmental and social implications leading to the recommendation of a system for detailed feasibility studies in Phase II. Phase I of the Study is scheduled for completion by the end of June this year. In April, that is to say, next month, the consultants will present their preliminary findings and recommendations on a preferred Mass Transit System and subsequently the final report. When this report is available, of course, it would go up to Cabinet for a decision. It is only when Cabinet decides that there should be a Mass Transit System that we will get the money to get on with the job. I am afraid I might perhaps be somewhat optimistic when I say that in five or eight years' time we shall be getting a Mass Transit System. That is my wish.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: Sir, I am just wondering whether it is wise to spend money to the tune of $1.1 million, as the Minister has pointed out, just on the study of a project, and then to consider whether the ultimate project, running into several hundreds of millions of dollars, will be worthwhile to implement. I believe, as the Minister has said, that when the preliminary findings of the Committee are put up, then only will they be decided upon by the Cabinet. However, I will cut short my remarks now and reserve my other observation until a later stage.

On that note, may I beg leave to withdraw my amendment?

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The sum of $1,054,830 for Head 0701 ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates.

The sum of $500,000 for Head 0701 ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.

Head 0703 --

Mr Teong Eng Siong: (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 0703 he reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1001*. (* The same amendment also stood in the name of Mr P. Govindaswamy.)

Sir, I would like to raise two questions under this amendment. First, it is the matter of taxi services at the Paya Lebar Airport. Secondly, it is the slowness of the terminal services at the Airport. Mr Speaker, Sir, Paya Lebar Airport is one of the busiest, if not the busiest, airports in Southeast Asia. Everyday many tourists come to Singapore through the Singapore International Airport.

6.22 p.m.

[Mr Deputy Speaker in the Chair]

Mr Teong Eng Siong: Therefore, more taxis should be made available at the Airport for the convenience of tourists. Sir, at present there are about 200 taxis operating between the City and the Airport for the convenience of tourists and others. So far the services rendered by these 200 taxis are quite satisfactory.

However, I would like to mention that I have received a complaint from the Taxi Drivers' Association. The Association applied to the Director of Civil Aviation for an office space at the Airport so that better services could be provided for the tourists. However, this application was turned down by the Airport management. There is, however, an office for operators of SZ vehicles which are for hire to tourists. Since both the SZ cars and taxis are meant for the convenience of tourists, how is it that operators of SZ cars for hire have been given an office space whilst operators of taxis have not been given any office space? In fact, I would say that the taxi drivers provide a more important service to the tourists. I wonder why the officer-in-charge of the Singapore International Airport did not approve the application of the Taxi Drivers' Association. If the operators of taxis are given some office space, then there is some fairness. In fact, there should be no discrimination between the two types of operators. I hope the Minister will look into this matter and ensure that there is no discrimination. There should be fair competition between the taxis and SZ cars for hire. We must allow both services to operate on an equal footing for a fair competition.

The next point concerns the handling of luggage at the Airport. Sir, recently I have received a number of complaints from tourists. Some of them are my friends. They have complained that the handling of luggage at the Airport is still inefficient and slow. Passengers arriving at the Airport have to wait for half an hour before they can collect their luggage. The Minister has said that that is not the case. Perhaps he should send special investigators there to look into the matter. If the handling of luggage is too slow, it will affect tourism in Singapore. The tourists will get a bad impression of Singapore.

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: Sir, I am sorry to hear from the Member for Sembawang that the representatives from the 200 taxis have applied to the Director of Civil Aviation for an office space and that the application has been turned down. I am not aware either of the application or its rejection. If the SZ car operators have an office there, I cannot see any good reason why taxi operators should not also be provided with an office. I shall therefore ask for this matter to be reviewed.

As for the second question about the delay in the handling of baggage, there seems to be all sorts of complaints. However, they have not been directed to my office. Whatever it is, I think it is fair comment. May I say that there will be a change in the management of the baggage handling services at the Airport. At the moment, the Department of Civil Aviation is handling the baggage for six airlines. But a subsidiary of the Singapore Airlines, known as the Singapore Airport Terminal Services (SATS), will take over the services from 1st April, next month. With this takeover, there will be one handling authority, and it should therefore provide a more efficient service. Perhaps next year we would not have to listen to this complaint again in this House.

The Chairman: Mr P. Govindaswamy is not here. Mr Teong Eng Siong.

Mr Teong Eng Siong: (In Mandarin): Sir, I am glad to get a very reasonable answer from the Minister. I beg leave to withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

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

(2) That the sum to be allocated for Head 0703 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1431.

In the absence of Mr P. Govindaswamy, the amendment was not proceeded with.

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

That the sum to be allocated for Head 0703 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 22*. (*The same amendment also stood in the name of Mr Ong Teng Cheong.)

Sir, this is an allocation for the extension to the Airport runway from 3,350 metres to 4,020 metres, and it amounts to $4.5 million. This is an indication of further improvement to our Airport. I would like to raise one question under this amendment. When will work on the extension be commenced, and when will it be completed?

6.30 p.m.

Mr Ong Teng Cheong: Sir, I am going to talk about invisible pollution. The chief medical adviser of the Industrial Health Unit in the Ministry of Labour has very recently stressed the importance of controlling noise in the Republic. He claimed that noise levels up to 90 decibels is considered dangerous, as exposure over a number of years to such levels will give rise to a number of undesirable effects and consequences. Sir, many of the residents in urban areas, especially in the Geylang and Katong districts, are already suffering from aircraft noise of 80 to 100 decibels. Whenever a plane flies over, one would have to give up his television viewing, telephone conversation, or suspend his class temporarily. I am sure we do not want to allow these conditions to deteriorate any further. In this connection, I wonder if the Minister for Communications would be prepared to categorically rule out the possibility of extending the existing airport runway further southwards in the future.

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: Sir, I do not know whether the Member is aware that if the existing runway is extended southwards, the noise pollution would be even greater for a larger number of people in the Katong area. But whatever it is, whether we extend it southwards or northwards, I am afraid that the people of Singapore will have to contend with noise pollution so long as Singapore remains an aviation centre. After all, we are a small island of just 224 square miles. I am afraid that this is part and parcel of our life.

The only remedy perhaps would be for the manufacturers to begin developing aeronautical engines with lower decibels. I think this is being done. For example, the Rolls Royce engine which powers the Lockheed Tri-Star is supposed to be a very quiet engine for its size. I believe all the manufacturers of aeronautical engines are working towards that end. For example, people thought that when the Boeing 747 Jumbo arrives in Singapore, the noise of the engines would be too difficult to bear with. In reality, it turned out to be no worse than the Boeing 707. So we hope that, in due course of time, engineers will be able to reduce the decibels of aircraft engines, so that people living close to airports will be less bothered by noise. That is as far as I can go. Today I do not think I am in a position to move the airport from Paya Lebar to some off-shore island. I do not think we have enough space to move around. At the most, we might have to move to Changi. Then, of course, the Member for Changi will stand up and say, "Why come to Changi? Why not go to Sembawang?", or something like that. This is a problem which can be resolved in course of time. We are trying to build a rugged Singapore. We all have strong eardrums to withstand all this noise, and hope for the best in the years to come!

Mr Teong Eng Siong: (In Mandarin): Sir, the Minister has not answered my query. Perhaps he was not paying attention when I spoke on the amendment. All I want to know is when will the extension work begin, and when will it be completed. It is a very simple question, and I have not got an answer yet.

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: (In Mandarin): Sir, work has already commenced, and it will be completed in 1974.

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

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

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

(4) That the sum to be allocated for Head 0703 he reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 23.

The Chairman: Amendment (4), Mr Ng Kah Ting.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: Sir, I am not moving amendment (4). I am moving amendment (5). Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 0703 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 31.

Sir, in moving this amendment. I merely wish to suggest to the Minister for Communications to look into the possibility of air-conditioning that part of the terminal building where passengers check in. One half of the building is at the moment air-conditioned, but the other half is not. There are many passengers checking in and they find the place a bit small. During the hot days, when one gets into the terminal building, he will notice that one part of it is air-conditioned while the other part is not. In this respect, I am wondering whether the Minister would look into my suggestion.

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: Sir, I think it is a very good suggestion, and I will do my best to get the Ministry of Finance to agree to extend the air-conditioning to the warmer half of the passenger terminal building.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: Sir, the position is that there is a sum of $380,000 to be voted for the redevelopment of the passenger terminal building. I wonder whether part of this sum could be set aside to air-condition the warmer part of the building. It is not a question of either asking more money from the Finance Ministry, or the Minister to say, "Right, this is what I will do, and I intend to take it up." If that is the case, then I will be too happy to withdraw my amendment.

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: Sir, I am afraid the Member for Punggol does not know how Government Ministries work. It is not that the Minister can just say, "Yes, you can have the air-conditioning." Good Lord! I wish I can do that. It would have been so much simpler. My officials will have to go into this with the Development Planning Control Committee. All that we can do is to make proposals, and the Finance officials will then sit down and generally prune every request.

This sum of money asked for has already been allotted for the extension to the departure hall and the ticketing wing, at an estimated cost of $8 1/2 million, and the procurement of three additional conveyor belts at an estimated cost of $270,000. Work on the extension to the departure hall has begun, and even approval for the cost of the conveyor belts amounting to $270,000 is awaited. So I am afraid that all I can do, as I said just now, is to make a very strong recommendation to the Finance officials to reconsider the matter of air-conditioning the warmer half of the terminal building.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: Sir, whilst I appreciate the difficulty of the Minister for Communications in trying to solicit funds to air-condition that part of the passenger terminal building, however, I would strongly urge him to put up this suggestion so that the entire building would be air-conditioned. It is ridiculous to have a situation where three-fourths, or even four-fifths of the entire ground floor of the terminal building air-conditioned, except for that small remaining part of the floor not air-conditioned.

If I may just stretch the argument, the Minister pointed out that approval for the provision of $270,000 for the additional conveyor belts for the terminal building is still awaited. If I may recall, this was a matter which several Backbenchers had in the past been suggesting that the baggage clearing facilities through the two existing conveyor belts were very, very unsatisfactory. It was because of this, I believe, that provision has been made for additional conveyor belts. So if the Minister would take up my suggestion - bearing in mind the difficulty of getting funds from the Ministry of Finance - he would put up a strong recommendation on my proposal.

In retrospect, there was mention in this House earlier in the day that fantastic increases in salaries have been given to two per cent of the civil servants in the senior grades. If we view it from that angle, I do not think the cost of the air-conditioning would be too great to bear.

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: Sir, I have already said that I will follow up on the Member's suggestion. I would like to thank him for it.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: Sir, in that case, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

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

That the sum to be allocated for Head 0703 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 32.

Sir, the provision for the New Air Freight Terminal is $1 million, which is a considerable sum of money. I would like to ask the Minister whether this project has commenced and, if so, when is the completion date? On completion, what sort of services will this Terminal provide?

6.45 p.m.

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: Sir, our Ministry has appointed a firm of consultants, the Northrop Airport Development Corporation, to advise the Government on the need for a new air freight terminal. It is the view of the consultants that such a terminal would be required by early 1975. In that year a total of 65,000 metric tons of cargo are expected to pass through our airport. Plans are now in hand to complete the air freight terminal by this target date.

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

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

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

That the sum to be allocated for Head 0703 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 34.

Sir, the provision here is $2 million for the construction of a new sub-terminal building. I would like to ask the Minister when will construction of this building commence. On completion, what sort of better services will be provided?

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: Sir, the number of passenger movements in Paya Lebar Airport for last year was 2.5 million. The airport consultants, which I mentioned earlier, have estimated that this number will increase to over 3 million by this year, 4.6 million by 1975, and so on. It is felt that a new passenger terminal building will be required by 1976 at the latest. To keep to this target date, a preliminary building plan of this terminal is presently being drawn up by the airport consultants. The capital cost of the project is estimated at $31 million, of which the foreign component cost of $24 million will be financed by the Asian Development Bank.

Mr Teong Eng Siong: (In Mandarin): Sir, the Minister has replied to my queries. I beg leave to withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The sum of $10,178,380 for Head 0703 ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates.

The sum of $37,607,500 for Head 0703 ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.

Head 0704 --

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

That the sum to be allocated for Head 0704 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1001.

Sir, sometime ago there was mention about the transfer of the meteorological facilities from Fullerton Building to the Airport. Why was this done? How much progress has been made so far? As a result of this transfer, will our weather forecast readings in the city area be affected to any extent?

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: Sir, the Meteorological Department always has certain offices at the Airport, because one of its functions is to provide weather information for the safe and efficient operation of aircraft within the Singapore flight information region, which is about one million square miles of space. What the Member for Anson meant perhaps was the administrative headquarters, which is being moved.

Mr P. Govindaswamy: What I meant is the forecast. Will the weather forecast be correct by a transfer from the City to the Airport? Fullerton Building is so high, and the building at the airport is so low.

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: Sir, I do not think the matter of height of a building counts. After all, Fullerton Building is not very high. There are towers at the Airport.

May I assure the Member for Anson that the Meteorological Department has offices in the Airport itself to provide weather information. Even if the administrative headquarters of the Meteorological Department at Fullerton Building is moved elsewhere, it will not in any way interfere with the accuracy of the readings. So everything should be all right.

What I think the Member for Anson is concerned about is the safety of aircraft and ships. May I assure him that even if the headquarters has to he moved out from Fullerton Building to another building, the functions of the Department should all be in order. In fact, at almost every quarterly meeting with my heads of departments, I hear the director say that he is about to he moved from A to B, or B to C, or C to D. Life goes on.

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

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The sum of $1,756,900 for Head 0704 ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates.

The sum of $228,000 for Head 0704 ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.

Head 0705 --

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

That the sum to be allocated for Head 0705 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1001*. (*The same amendment also stood in the names of Messrs P. Govindaswamy and Ng Kah Ting.)

Sir, may I first congratulate the Minister for in the past year the Postal Services Department has shown a tremendous improvement in efficiency. This is because I have raised many criticisms last year in the House. Only when there is criticism can there be progress and improvement. The number of letters handled by the Postal Services Department comes to millions. The Postal Services Department is efficient and letters for local delivery are received on the same day. Very seldom do we find letters misplaced. This is a sign that the efficiency is pretty high.

I would like to put forward a suggestion for the consideration of the Minister. Can he consider setting up a small post office in Kampung Tengah, 15 m.s., Sembawang? There are about 10,000 people living in the four kampungs in that area. The only place they can go to now is the post office at the third milestone, which is about two miles away from the kampungs. So if the residents can go to this suggested post office in Kampung Tengah, which will be nearer their homes, it will be so much more convenient for them. I am sure that the expenses involved in building the post office will not be very much. We need perhaps one clerk and one jaga.

Mr P. Govindaswamy: Sir, I read in the newspapers that the Postal Department has been reorganised to suit present day requirements, and it is heartening to see that much has been done for the better.

However, more spectacular progress can be realised if new blood is injected into this important department. I understand that top officers, who are in Division I, cannot be transferred to other departments of the Government service because this has been the practice since colonial days. If this is true, then if officers are allowed to be there too long they will become stale and cannot foresee any way to improve the service. The Postal Service is a great asset to the Communications Ministry, and I recommend that the Postal Service be given a change of life. If Division 1 officers are interchangeable from one Ministry to another, I am sure greater improvement in postal services will surely result and the needs of the public enhanced by this recommendation.

Singapore's population is growing. It is therefore true that if the postal service is to keep pace with the growth, more pillar boxes should be introduced. This is not going to be a very costly item, nor is it going to be very inconvenient to the postmen. Further, the metal plates showing the collection times of many pillar boxes have either faded or been tampered with. Yet no action has been taken about it. Could something be done to remedy this situation?

One more point I would like to raise, Sir, is the working environment of the Sorting section at Nelson Road. It needs further improvement. The ventilation is still not sufficient. The dust and heat there is a hazard to the workers.

7.00 p.m.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: Sir, I rise to make merely a small suggestion. I notice that in the Postal Services Department a small unit known as the Philatelic Bureau has been set up. This Bureau is mainly concerned with the sale of first-day covers. When the Minister of State for Communications opened one of the stamp exhibitions, I remember he made a point with regard to encouraging more people to acquire the habit of stamp collecting. I think, Sir, this is very good encouragement, and it is in this respect that I would like to see this small Bureau expand its activities.

I believe there are several stamp collecting groups or clubs in some schools. I would like to know whether this Bureau can give assistance and guidance to schools with regard to stamp collecting. Stamp collecting, Sir, is a very interesting hobby because through the collection of stamps school children will be able to know more about the countries from which they have collected stamps.

Sir, in this respect, may I ask the Minister for Communications whether he will consider expanding the Philatelic Bureau with a view to assisting schools to set up stamp collecting groups?

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: Sir, may I first reply to the hon. Member for Sembawang in respect of his request for a sub-post office for Kampung Tengah? If, as he says, there is a population of 10,000 in this kampung, I am sure the Postmaster-General can be asked to review this matter as to whether or not it would be economical to provide such a service. We try to improve our postal services as best we can with the funds that are made available to us.

In reply to the hon. Member for Anson on the question of the interchangeability of Division I staff in the Postal Services, I think this is a very good idea, except for the fact that this is a matter for the Treasury (Establishment) in the Ministry of Finance. I understand that Division I posts in the Postal Department are graded as departmental posts. This means that they are a closed Service. In other words those officers who are appointed to these posts stay within the Postal Department. But it may be desirable for these officers to be posted out and for new blood to come in, and I will therefore certainly put his suggestion to the Ministry of Finance for consideration.

As for the tampering of mail, I am afraid this is part and parcel of society.

Mr P. Govindaswamy: Sir, I did not refer to tampering of mail. I mentioned about the metal plate on pillar boxes showing the collection times of mail, not tampering of letters. There is a metal plate on the pillar box showing the collection times, and this has faded.

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: I hope I have now got the hon. Member right. Per, haps the metal plates on post boxes showing the times for the collection of mail have been defaced so much so that people do not actually know what the collection times are. Sir, what is really needed is only a new coat of paint.

Mr P. Govindaswamy: Yes.

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: It shall be done. Lastly, as regards working conditions at Nelson Road, the former PSA warehouse, I am glad that the hon. Member is in the position to say that conditions have improved, but could still be improved further.

Mr P. Govindaswamy: If possible, air-condition the place.

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: That is asking a lot. I am all in favour, Sir, if only the Minister for Finance will provide the money. Whatever it is, as a result of discussions with the AUPE in June last year, a study was made with the PSA and the Industrial Health Unit on ways and means to further improve working conditions at Nelson Road. As a result, 39 additional wall and stand fans were provided in August last year to supplement the 14 extractor fans and three blower fans. In addition, two improvement projects at a total cost of $59,000 were recently approved by the Ministry of Finance. The projects provide for the installation of special heat insulation material and fibre glass sound insulation material for the roof to reduce heat, and for the installation of additional blower fans and silencers to improve air circulation and to reduce noise. The roof insulation project is expected to commence in the next few weeks, and the other project will be carried out as soon as the equipment has been purchased. All in all, it is considered that working conditions at the Nelson Road centre are much better than those prevailing at the basement of the General Post Office in Fullerton Building.

In reply to the hon. Member for Punggol regarding the Philatelic Bureau which was established to encourage the sale of first-day covers, stamps and commemorative issues, I remember when I opened a stamp fair recently, it included a number of school stamp clubs. So we are already getting schools interested to form stamp groups. The suggestion of the hon. Member will be made known to the Philatelic Bureau so that they can spend more time with our school children to set up school stamp clubs, and hence result in more stamp enthusiasts.

Mr Teong Eng Siong: (In Mandarin): Sir, the Minister has given us a very good reply. I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

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

(2) That the sum to be allocated for Head 0705 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 2016.

The Chairman: Mr Ng, amendment (2)

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

The sum of $25,336,520 for Head 0705 ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates.

The sum of $880,000 for Head 0705 ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.

Head 0706 --

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

That the sum to be allocated for Head 0706 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1001*. (* The same amendment also stood in the names of Messrs J. F. Conceicao, Sim Boon Woo and P. Govindaswamy.)

Sir, the Registry of Vehicles undeniably is a very busy department because it takes charge of nearly 470,000 motor vehicles. Its function involves the registration of motor vehicles, the collection of road taxes and the registration or transfer of motor vehicles, inspection of taxis, and other related work, in the past, when this Department was under the Lim Yew Hock Government, it was one of the departments most criticised by the public because the supervision of work was in a mess at that time. However, ever since our Party came to power we have tried our best to improve the running of this department. It cannot be denied now that this department is run more efficiently and output has been raised to a greater extent. Also there is improvement all round. However, there is still room for further improvement.

Sir, there are two matters which I would like to raise with the Minister. I hope he will look into them. Firstly, there are many people who have complained that when they send their vehicles to the Registry of Vehicles for inspection, the inspection has been too strict. Certain new vehicles after testing have been found to emit too much smoke. Even new vehicles cannot pass the test, and have to go through various tests again. After several days they still cannot be passed. I do not deny that at the moment we are carrying out the anti-pollution campaign which involves paying close attention to the possibility of doing away with vehicles which emit too much smoke. But all cars will emit smoke to a certain extent. In view of this, I hope the officers in charge will adopt a more sympathetic attitude when testing new cars, and not just apply the regulations in a very strict manner, thus causing suffering on the part of the car owners.

The second matter relates to the inspection of taxis which is being carried out even more strictly. Taxi drivers have to send their taxis for inspection at the ROV when certain parts of the taxis are found to have corroded or when certain parts need replacement or repair. They cannot get through the test as the procedure is also very strict. Hence they do not get approval. Therefore, this brings about great difficulties to the taxi drivers because their income is reduced as they have to send their taxis for inspection again. I hope the Minister can consider their case sympathetically and apply a certain measure of flexibility to help them clear the inspection tests.

Mr Sim Boon Woo (Changi): Sir, I would like to draw the attention of the Minister to the number of second-hand motor dealers whose business is to import second-hand trucks or lorry bodies. They re-condition and re-assemble these second-hand vehicles and then re-export them to neighbouring countries or sell them locally. Sir, due to the rapid growth of our trade and industry a lot of these re-conditioned vehicles are sold locally. Those sold locally must have a weight certificate which is issued by only a few so-called qualified big motor firms. The dealers must obtain the weight certificates first, before they can send the vehicles to the Registry of Vehicles for registration.

7.15 p.m.

Sir, these weight certificates are charged at $50 each by the big motor firms. The dealers are therefore faced with a lot of difficulties. Apart from having to pay $50 for a weight certificate, what is worse, Sir, is that they have to pay a few hundred dollars "under the table" to the person in charge for an early issue of a weight certificate. Sir, if it is not paid, these big motor firms may ask them to wait for days.

I do not understand why the ROV has appointed only a few big motor firms to carry out the process of issuing weight certificates. The dealers told me that they are prepared to pay the ROV about $200 to $300 per vehicle if the issue of weight certificates for registration could be dealt with directly by the ROV. If this move is possible, then I think the Government will receive more revenue from the ROV.

Mr P. Govindaswamy: Sir, although some Members have already spoken about cars and buses, I have yet to say something about them. The Minister will probably only take note of my remarks.

Sir, the daily traffic on our roads seems to be increasing at an alarming rate. Is it possible for the schools, Government offices and commercial firms to co-operate with the Traffic Police to stagger their working hours effectively so that our roads do not become congested during peak periods? Or is it possible to close certain key roads in the city area to private vehicles during the peak period? This will ease the flow of buses which transport most of the office workers and school children. In the meantime private vehicles could be diverted to some other routes which are not too busy during that period. I suggest that a study be made on this proposal and to implement it if it is feasible. At the rate our office workers experience the daily traffic jams at the moment they will soon have bad lungs by inhaling the 5.00 p.m. dose of carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide. It is no wonder that our office workers do not seem to be in the least rugged!

The introduction of box junctions is commendable. But I wonder how many persons have since been booked for ignoring the box junction rules. Some drivers seem to think that the yellow box junction is a chess board and they block traffic coming from the other side.

Sir, our buses have earned such a notoriety that it will be recorded in the annals of Singapore. Not only do the buses cough out poisonous fumes and pollute the air but they are the cause of a good number of accidents in Singapore. Surely something can he done to remedy this increasingly deplorable situation. We see daily the familiar triangle sign on the road indicating that a bus has broken down. This has become so common that one has only to travel along any bus route to see broken down buses. Either these buses are not being properly maintained or the owners are straining the efficiency of the vehicles to their utmost.

Moreover, inside the bus, it is not an uncommon sight to see the Seats damaged, litter bins without a bottom, and used tickets thrown all over the place. And although a litter Bin is provided, cigarette butts can be seen here and there. I wonder whether we can introduce a complete ban on smoking in buses.

Some of our bus drivers and conductors are supposed to have gone through a refresher course, but of late instead of giving better service, the public are getting more and more experiences of rudeness by bus drivers and conductors. The numerous letters written to the press regarding the behaviour of bus drivers and conductors are testimony to this fact. Some bus drivers seem to think that bus bays or bus stops are only meant for show and not for use by them. It is not infrequent to see buses damaging road dividers and pedestrian walks. They will endanger the lives of road users if no remedial action is taken immediately. Moreover, bus drivers often ignore commuters by not stopping or stopping far away from the bus stops only to let down passengers and will not pick any passengers at all. The passengers wait hopefully at the bus stops for the buses, but quite often their wait has been in vain.

What positive action is being taken by the Ministry of Communications to bring about discipline in our public transport system? The public is fed up and disgusted with the behaviour of some of our bus drivers and conductors. I would call upon the Minister to set up an urgent inquiry into the matter to find out why the drivers and conductors are deliberately behaving in that manner. If necessary, it should recommend whatever benefits they deserve, such as more pay, in order that we may have a better transport service. It can also be further improved by the introduction of more new buses.

Sir, with the growing number of vehicles on our roads from year to year there is greater pollution of air and noise, and the fumes emitted by the buses, lorries, motor cars and motor cycles are offensive and poisonous to the people. Will the Minister seriously consider enacting laws to eliminate such pollution? One suggestion would be to enforce the compulsory installation of silencers to all motor vehicles and the compulsory half-yearly inspection and overhaul of old vehicles. If this suggestion is carried out, Singapore will be a better and healthier place to live in. Otherwise our vehicles seem to he literally getting away with blue murder.

Sir, the computerisation of vehicle records has created a mess at the Registry of Vehicles in Middle Road. Not only is there no one to guide members of the public as to where to queue, but there is also a racket going on by those in the queue. What measures have the Registrar of Vehicles taken to remedy the situation? It seems that the offices on the ground floor of the Registry are not well sited. All this will project an image of inefficiency.

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: Sir, I think I should answer the Member for Anson first. Most of the grouses about buses, as he himself has said, have been answered earlier on. I will therefore attempt to answer the few new points that he has raised.

As regards air pollution, early last year we did introduce restriction on new petrol driven cars, that is, they should have special crankcase devices, like after-burns, which will therefore reduce air pollution. This has been introduced for new cars. However, we have got hundreds of thousands of old cars, and it will therefore take time to replace them.

Then there is the suggestion to reduce congestion by the introduction of staggered hours for schools and offices. This was, in fact, proposed in the White Paper on the Reorganisation of the Motor Transport Service for Singapore three years ago. I think this can be quite upsetting as people would have to change their present ways of life. Nobody seems to be interested in changing routine, but we hope that ultimately the schools and offices may think it desirable to introduce staggered hours for the staff and the school children. This has been found to he reasonably effective in certain countries. For example, in Germany the staff could walk in and clock the time they enter the office, and leave at any time they wish provided they make up the hours in other days. In fact, they can walk in and out of the office as they like provided they do their lot. They have found that this system is very effective from the point of view of productivity. But I think this is only applicable to a small number of progressive firms. This is something idealistic, except, of course, in Communist states. When I was in Leningrad, I was told that the factories did have staggered working hours and workers could go to the factories at different times, at 7, 8, 9 or 10 o'clock. Of course, in Leningrad there are not many private cars on the road, so that even without staggered hours there is very little traffic on the streets.

Mr P. Govindaswamy: On a point of explanation, Sir,I was referring to heavy-duty lorries and motor vehicles.

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: Sir, heavy-duty lorries carrying heavy cargo should be restricted to certain hours? I think that is a good point which I will ask the Registrar of Vehicles to look into - the suggestion to restrict the movement of lorries. There will be a yell. And perhaps, as adviser to the Singapore Lorry Owners' Association, I will soon get a petition from them through you, Sir?

The other suggestion is the closing of certain roads during peak hours. This may help. There is a committee comprising officials from the Public Works Department, the Traffic Police and the Registry of Vehicles. Officials from these three departments have formed what is known as the Road Improvement Committee, and they are looking into this proposal. They have, in fact, introduced in August last year a special bus lane for buses along New Bridge Road. It is that stretch of road close to Outram Road to the Havelock Road junction. It is a very small stretch, perhaps 200 yards. But it has been considered a success, and it is likely that more such bus lanes will be introduced, Even in a one-way street, where other vehicles will have to obey the one-way street sign, the buses are allowed to go against the traffic stream, to cut short their journey time and to avoid the traffic jam. This has been proved successful in large cities, including London. It is, therefore, likely that from this year onwards, we shall see the introduction of more special bus lanes.

May I now move on to the question raised by the Member for Changi? If I heard him correctly, he said that it cost second-hand dealers $50 each to get what is known as a weight certificate from certain motor firms, which have been authorised by the Registry of Vehicles, before they can either re-export the vehicles or re-sell them in Singapore. He has questioned why the ROV has restricted the issue of such certificates to just a few large motor firms. It is, therefore, more like a monopoly. What I am interested in is the allegation that several hundreds of dollars have changed hands "under the table" to get things done. That, to me, is a very serious allegation, and I would like the Member for Changi to provide more evidence for the CPIB to look into. I do not think we can tolerate any "under the table" gratification of, I presume, officials in the ROV.

7.30 p.m.

Mr Sim Boon Woo: Officials in the motor firms.

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: Even in the motor firms, I see no reason why this should be done. I would be most happy indeed if the Member for Changi can provide information direct to the CPIB against the ROV officials or even those in the motor firms.

Mr Sim Boon Woo: Sir, I am not complaining about the ROV.

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: I am very glad indeed that it is not the officials in the ROV. Otherwise I will be a very despondent Minister to know that these things are happening under my nose. I am glad that that has been put right. But I was happy to hear that second-hand dealers would be very happy to pay $200 to $300 direct to the ROV for this service so that there would be additional revenue for the Ministry. I am pleased to tell the Member that I am very happy to accept his proposal, and I will see to it that our officials will provide this service, and it may not cost as much as $200 or $300 each.

Mr Sim Boon Woo: Instead of going through the other channel.

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: Certainly, I would like to make it quite clear that we will not tolerate any nonsense, even in motor firms; if they think they can get some illegal money just because we insist on certain things to be done.

Lastly, as regards the Member for Sembawang's request not to be too stringent over mechanical inspections, especially if there is a wee bit of smoke, it is very difficult to be lenient because the Member for Potong Pasir has asked, "What is the Minister doing about smoky exhausts?" I do not think I can please the Member for Sembawang. I am afraid the standard of mechanical inspections will have to be maintained. I would not say that it would be strict nor would I say that it should be too lenient, but we have certain standards.

May I say that the Member for Sembawang himself has admitted that in the past very little was being done about inspections. It is because very little was being done in the past that, when you begin to reorganise and decide to maintain certain standards of performance, people begin to grumble, "Oh, it is too strict." So I will say that, as he is well aware, taxis are subject to bi-annual inspections; there will be an inspection every six months. Even a new vehicle has got to be looked into. And if it so happens that a new taxi emits too much smoke, therefore, that engine is not properly tuned. It has got to be put right, and therefore it is necessary for certain standards of mechanical inspection to be maintained. I am afraid, therefore, that we cannot reduce the present standard of inspections. That would defeat the reorganisation programme which is to achieve higher standards in our public service vehicles. If the taxis have been reasonably maintained and serviced, they should have no difficulty in getting through the mechanical inspection.

There has been a general misconception that mechanical inspections are strict. They are not strict. They are just minimal, because certain minimal standards must be maintained. The misconception arises from the fact that nine years prior to June 1971 - that goes back to 1962 - the ROV Mechanical Inspection Section had been understaffed because of the inability to recruit qualified personnel. Inspections, therefore, had been cursory. But since 1971 more qualified staff have been recruited, and all of them are now in the Sin Ming Road centre where there are adequate pits for the examination of vehicles. Mechanical inspections, therefore, have been brought up to the standard as they ought to be. This has been misinterpreted as stricter inspections. So let me assure the Member for Sembawang that we are not being too strict. We are just maintaining certain minimal standards of maintenance of vehicles.

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

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The sum of $2,356,390 for Head 0706 ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates.

The sum of $1,343,000 for Head 0706 ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.

Pursuant to a resolution of the House, Mr Deputy Speaker thereupon left the Chair of the Committee and took the Chair of the House.

Mr Yong Nyuk Lin: Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I beg to report that the Committee of Supply has made progress on the Main and Development Estimates of Expenditure for the financial year 1st April, 1973 to 31st March, 1974, and ask leave to sit again tomorrow.

Mr Deputy Speaker: So be it.