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

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

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

2.32 p.m.

Head 1101 -

Mr Ong Teng Cheong (Kim Keat): 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 names of Messrs Tay Boon Too and Cheong Yuen Chee.)

Sir, during the debate two days ago on the Ministry of Communications, I managed to obtain, in principle, support from the Minister for Communications to my suggestion that private bus operators contribute financially towards the provision of bus shelters. I will talk about bus shelters again today.

While I fully agree in principle with the Minister for Communications that this is a question of priority, and that the profits of bus operators should at present be ploughed back for the purchase of new buses and other rolling stock, I still feel that there is a lot yet to be done for our bus commuters generally. I would therefore like to turn to the Minister for National Development and urge his Ministry to look into these questions again to see if his Ministry could expedite the provision of bus shelters to those bus stops which do not as yet have any form of shelters at all at the moment, especially in highly populated residential areas created by his Ministry. First, I would like to suggest, Sir, that the Ministry should try to secure additional funds for the construction of as many bus shelters as possible within the shortest possible time, especially in existing Housing and Development Board estates. Toa Payoh New Town is a case in point, where bus commuters have been put to unnecessary inconvenience for the last few years. Second, Sir, is the transfer of part of the executive functions of the PWD to the Housing and Development Board. I would like to suggest that the Housing and Development Board should, when constructing new housing estates or new towns in future, be responsible for the construction of bus shelters, instead of the present practice where the PWD constructs these shelters years after the estates were completed. This is to ensure that bus shelters are provided for bus commuters as part of essential facilities, just as car parks are provided for private car owners in Housing and Development Board estates.

Mr Tay Boon Too (Paya Lebar): (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, as a Member of Parliament representing a rural constituency, I would like to touch upon the pressing problems of the kampung people.

Sir, we are all very glad that over the recent years there have been political and economic stability, commercial and industrial prosperity, as well as an improvement in the standard of living. The Government has one unchanging policy, i.e, to try its best to narrow the gap between the rich and the poor, and to do away with all the slums. According to the results achieved by the Government in the past decade, we are confident that one day our people will be able to enjoy as good a life as possible. In fact, the people in the suburban areas are now enjoying the same standard of living as those in the urban areas.

However, there are still some people living in dilapidated attap huts; the whole family is crammed in a dilapidated attap hut. Of course, they also want to save up and move into Housing Board flats so as to enjoy better conditions of living, and where sanitary and other amenities are better. However, the policy of the Housing Board in the allocation of flats is "first come first served". There is no favouritism. Of course, I am not disputing this. However, I must say that in spite of the high building rate of the Housing Board in the past few years - one housing unit every 40 to 50 minutes - there is still a shortage of flats. This means that the supply is less than the demand, and so for the immediate future we cannot meet the housing needs of the people. Under these circumstances, the people in the lower income group have no alternative but to continue to live in dilapidated attap huts, which are like dungeons. This is a fact.

Sir, attap huts differ widely from brick and cement houses. An attap hut is built of plank and attap, and therefore gets damaged easily after a period of inclement weather. So from time to time, it needs to be repaired, for which the consent of the landlord will have to be sought. There are many dilapidated huts and houses, with the pillars and beams in a state of near-collapse. However, without getting the sympathetic approval of the landlord, the tenant simply cannot or would not dare repair such a house. Some tenants have approached the Planning Department, or the proper authority, for permission to repair the house, but without any success. In the meantime the holes in the roof are growing bigger, the pillars and beams less firm, and the walls begin to crack. Living in such a structure is not only unhygienic, but also dangerous. While there is prosperity in all fields of economic activity and our standard of living is improving every year, the existence of these dilapidated houses is a blemish to our environment. It is a smear in the rosy picture of our economic progress. So the authorities concerned should try to remedy this situation for the sake of our people, and thereby erase this blemish.

2.45 p.m.

Sir, despite the fact that the Housing Board is going all out to build as many flats as possible, many applicants still have to wait for at least three years or more before any flat is allocated to them. Sir, immediate needs cannot be solved by long-term plans or measures. Since landowners do not allow tenants to repair their dilapidated houses, the Government should exercise some flexibility in the control of repairs to houses. Of course, Sir, I do not mean that these tenants should be allowed to rebuild their houses with materials other than the original, so as to change the structure entirely. What I have in mind is that tenants should be allowed to repair their attap roof with attap material. This is a reasonable request, and the landlords should not be unreasonable. They should not deny the tenants the permission to carry out repairs to their houses because in the first instance the landlords had given their consent to the tenants to build houses on their property. The landlords should he more humane and reasonable. The Government should look after the affairs of the people. It should sympathise with their predicament and try to solve their problems.

I wonder whether the suggestion that I am going to make is practicable. I think this sort of application can be referred to the Citizens' Consultative Committee of the respective constituency. Perhaps they can be entrusted with the task of helping these people. The Citizens' Consultative Committee can consider any application for the repair of an attap house because they are in close contact with the people in the locality. They are in a position to know what kind of material is to be used in the building of the house in question. If such a procedure can be devised by the Government, I think it will go a long way towards solving the problem of the rural people. The Government will also get their full support.

I do not mean to say that we should supervise the work of the department concerned, for which the Minister is responsible. I have raised this question in this House because I have come across many such instances and have consulted with the department concerned but without any result. Therefore I have raised this matter in this House.

Mr Cheong Yuen Chee (Toa Payoh): Mr Speaker, Sir, in the Housing and Development Board Annual Report it was stated that (a) the Board has been directed mainly towards planning and building more and better houses in an improved environment; (b) that with effect from 1st January, 1972 the defects liability period assumed by the Board has been extended from six months to 12 months. Furthermore, the Board has also taken steps to ensure that contractors can carry out their contracts efficiently and satisfactorily. All these are indeed commendable moves on the part of the Housing and Development Board. We all agree, Sir, that over the years the Housing and Development Board has made tremendous progress in the field of public housing and urban renewal. Prices and rentals of flats built by the Board have remained static for many years. This has in no small measure contributed to a successful check on inflation. However, Sir, as stated in the report there is still room for improvement.

I would like to take this opportunity to touch on some problems which, I hope, will receive the consideration of the Minister. On the question of the quality of flats constructed by the Housing and Development Board, I would like to bring to the notice of the Minister the poor quality in the construction and finishing of the recently constructed six-storey blocks of flats in Toa Payoh Central. The windows in these flats are of the old-fashioned wooden louvred types that are very common in Chinatown. Many of these windows cannot be properly closed as the latches are not properly aligned. The floors are uneven and the doors cannot be properly closed. In one of the flats, two doors have had to be replaced. These defects show up only after some time has elapsed, usually 12 months after the occupiers have moved in. These defects may be caused by the weather or negligence on the part of the contractors. I hope the Housing and Development Board will conduct a survey of these flats and put right the defects mentioned and, if necessary, take appropriate action against the contractors responsible.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the system of tendering rentals for shop houses and hawker stalls in the Housing and Development Board estates has some disadvantages. This is especially evident in the tendered rentals for eating houses. The minimum rental for an eating house set by the Housing and Development Board is usually $770 per month, but it has been tendered for as much as $3,000 per month. In order to recover the costs and also make a profit, the tenants sub-let as many stalls as the shop houses can accommodate, at rentals of $100 or $300 each per month, depending on the type of food sold. As a result, the tenants and sub-tenants often encroach on public areas, like five-foot ways and even car parks. The Housing and Development Board is therefore compelled to take action against such offenders much to the chagrin of the stall-holders and the residents.

Sir, in the case of hawker centres, the rentals are fair and there is no distinction. It is $35 each per month for all categories of food-stalls, irrespective of whether the tenant sells ice-water, kachang puteh, or runs a mini-restaurant. Previously the rental was $55 for a stall, but this was reduced on account of a subsidy given by the Government. Sir, I would say that the subsidy is not utilised to best advantage. I would have thought that the money so allocated should be used to build more hawker centres to accommodate the many hawkers who are still plying in the streets. Some hawkers are very affluent. However, I am not against successful hawkers as such, In fact, this is a good sign of progress. They can send their children for higher studies and enjoy the good things in life. However, they should not be on a subsidy. Subsidies should only be given to cases of hardship, for example, those receiving welfare assistance, those affected by resettlement, widows and physically handicapped persons. To illustrate my point, I would inform the House that near Block 18 in Toa Payoh, which was formerly in my constituency but it is now in the Kim Keat constituency, there are two stalls selling Hokkien mee. They are barely ten feet apart. One pays a monthly rental of $150 to the eating-house tenant, and the other pays only $35 to the Housing and Development Board. Both stall-holders are doing very well. Therefore, I would suggest that the Housing and Development Board should in future consider building hawker centres of various sizes and fix the rentals according to the type of food sold. This will minimise the anomalies that are so evident now.

Sir, in the development of new satellite towns, the Housing and Development Board has endeavoured to provide adequate facilities for the recreational needs of the residents, such as playgrounds, sports complexes and other communal facilities. As an illustration, I would quote some projected population figures as stated in the HDB annual report: Queenstown 150,000; Toa Payoh 190,000; Telok Blangah 120,000; Bedok New Town 150,000; Kallang Basin New Town 100,000. With more and more people moving into these housing estates, there is also a need to provide facilities for our youths. Other than community centres, the youths have no other place to go to for guidance on recreational and social matters. There are many youth organisations and voluntary organisations in Singapore which are prepared to participate in community activities in housing estates. But due to the lack of proper premises they are not able to perform their community work effectively. The Government has rightly identified the various problems faced by our youths, e.g, drug addiction and juvenile delinquency, hence, the setting up of a special committee to look into these problems. I think the Housing and Development Board can play a useful role in this direction. The Board should allow the various youth organisations and other recognised voluntary organisations to set up branches in housing estates. This could be done by converting a portion of the void areas in the various blocks of flats in housing estates into premises and leasing them to these organisations at nominal rentals.

Dr Tan Eng Liang (River Valley): Mr Speaker, Sir, can I be permitted to raise a very small point in regard to the Housing and Development Board policy? I was thinking of raising it under Head 1401, Ministry of Finance, but I believe it may be more appropriate to mention it under this Head?

The Chairman: Yes.

Dr Tan Eng Liang: Sir, while the Housing and Development Board flats cater for the lower income group, there is a particular group in my constituency where this housing scheme does not apply. I refer, Sir, to the middle income group. At the moment the combined family income of all applicants for Housing Board flats must not exceed $1,500 per month. In the debate on the Budget statement last week, many Members in this House spoke of the rising cost of living and the speculative rise in prices of private houses and flats. Since it is now simply impossible for the middle income group to keep pace with the spiralling prices, I would like to suggest and plead that the Housing and Development Board should begin to cater for the middle income group. The ceiling of $1,500 per month total family income should therefore be raised. This will certainly add on to the waiting list of 60,000 applicants, and the period of waiting will probably be longer than two years for many applicants. But I am sure those applicants in the middle income group would not mind the long wait so long as they know that finally they will be able to own a flat.

Mr Lee Yiok Seng (Bukit Panjang): (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to raise one or two points on this subject. I sympathise with what the Member for Paya Lebar has said just now, namely, the plight of unauthorised house dwellers. There are many illegal structures in the rural areas. The reason is that the rural people were not able to get the approval of the Planning Department when they built their houses. Therefore, their houses are now regarded as unauthorised. It would seem that the authorities concerned have not been looking into their problems. The tenants of these unauthorised houses were able to build their houses because at first there was no interference from the Government. Then after a long lapse of time, these houses have fallen into a state of disrepair, and it is only natural that they should want to carry out repairs.

3.00 p.m.

Therefore, when they make applications for repairs to their unauthorised houses, the authorities concerned wanted to know whether or not building permission was granted in the first place. Otherwise their applications for repairs would not be approved. If it is possible, they would like to rebuild their houses, but they could not do so if they had no money. Therefore, after a lapse of one or two years, more and more parts of the house would dilapidate and perhaps a portion of the building might collapse. So when they do something about it, the authorities would turn round and say, "Your building is illegal and unauthorised. You must pull it down." Hence, many Members from the rural constituencies have raised this matter again and again. The occupiers have said that they have lived there for more than 10 years and that they only need to do minor repairs. It is not a newly constructed unauthorised house. We are put in a very difficult position when our constituents, who have lived there for so long, approach us. But there are some newly constructed unauthorised houses too. I think it is not right to allow such a situation to drag on. We should find ways and means to help them. I would like to suggest to the Minister concerned whether it is possible for him, in conjunction with the Citizens' Consultative Committee of the constituencies, to find out the number of unauthorised houses in the rural constituencies and their condition. I hope the Minister concerned would consider this matter sympathetically.

My second suggestion is with regard to flats. Nowadays, many people hope to purchase flats. Many of them apply to purchase three- or four-room flats. This shows the success of the Government's home ownership scheme. Sir, I have come across a case where a block of four-room flats had been allocated to the purchasers, but more than 90 per cent of them did not move into their flats within the first three months or more. They wanted to lay mosaic on the floor and carry out some interior decorations.

Sir, the question I would like to raise is this. In future, just before the completion of a block of flats, will the Government consider allotting the flats to the purchasers in advance? Inquiries could then be sent out to them to find out whether they want to have any interior decorations made. Or can permission be granted for the purchasers to carry out decorations during the final stages of the building construction? I think this is a reasonable request and a practical suggestion, particularly at a time when we are experiencing a shortage of building materials and labour. This will save a lot of unnecessary additional expenditure. Otherwise, in the cases I have referred to, the flat owners would have to get their own contractors to lay the mosaic flooring or other interior decorations. In some cases, cement floors have to be chipped in order that the new flooring material could be laid out. If everybody uses the lifts to carry heavy loads of cement and other building materials for reflooring, the lifts could be damaged. This is a waste of labour and material. Therefore, I hope, in future, the Housing Board will allow interior decoration and flooring to be done just before the completion of a block of flats, as in the case of private housing. Arrangements can be made for the Housing Board contractors to lay the new flooring material and carry out the interior decoration required, at the expense of the purchasers.

The Minister for Law and National Development (Mr E. W. Barker): Mr Speaker, Sir, may I first attend to the request of the Member for Kim Keat? Like him, I would be happy if we could get more money from the Minister for Finance for the construction of bus shelters. Certain sums of money have been allocated for bus shelters but there are priorities. And we have to make the best use of these monies according to the priorities for bus shelters.

The present policy is to provide bus shelters, firstly, near clinics and hospitals; secondly, near schools and, thirdly, in housing estates.

The Member also made the suggestion that the building of bus shelters should be transferred from the Public Works Department to the Housing and Development Board. This will lead to complication because as soon as a housing estate is built and the roads are completed and become public roads, they then come under the responsibility of the Public Works Department. Many Members have made requests for bus shelters in their constituencies and have not got them within the time they want them. I myself had to wait one or two years before getting bus shelters in Tanglin. But there are priorities - priorities between constituencies and also within a particular constituency.

The Members for Paya Lebar and Bukit Panjang have almost the same grouses. This is in connection with building permits and planning permission. They should be interested to know that the Building Surveyor's Department was reorganised and set up as the Building Control Division under the Public Works Department on the 1st of February last year. The procedures for obtaining approval for effecting urgent repairs and minor alterations to attap houses and similar structures have since been simplified and the application forms revised. If the Members are interested, I have copies of the application forms in my file for them. To provide on-the-spot service and advice to the public, sub-offices have been established at Bukit Panjang District Office (Rural West), Serangoon District Office (Rural Central) and at the former Midwives' Maternity Centre (Rural East) in Jalan Eunos. To further assist the public, the Building Control Division will shortly be issuing a booklet on the do's and dont's of building activity to inform the public of the procedures to be taken before any building works are carried out. If you put up an unauthorised house five years ago and then want to renew or repair it, naturally you would not get permission because your act five years ago was illegal in the first place. You have got to put that right before you ask for permission to carry out repairs. But there have been many cases where the original building was authorised and application is made for repairs or minor alterations and at the end of which the building becomes larger or even taller. Then, of course, the builder is in trouble and runs to his Member of Parliament.

Sir, to accept the suggestion that the Citizens' Consultative Committee be given authority to approve or disapprove building plans either for building repairs or renewals might lead to chaos, as far as planning and building is concerned. Either we have control, or we do not have control. My sympathies are with the Members of Parliament complaining. I have similar problems in my constituency.

If I can now deal with the other matters raised by the Member for Bukit Panjang. This is a question of additions and alterations to Housing Board flats before the purchasers move in. As I understand him, balloting should take place perhaps one, two or three months before the building is completed so that alterations can be effected with the least inconvenience. This appears to be an admirable suggestion. This has been done in the past. But this also leads to complaints from those who do not want to put in any additions or alterations or those who do not want mosaic floors. They grumble and say, "What is the use of selling me a flat if it is not completed?" So either way we hear grouses. The Member himself suggested that, whilst people are in occupation of the flats, the lifts are used to carry cement or mosaic, common corridors are thereby littered, the lifts themselves get dirty and even go out of order. This is the reason why the Housing and Development Board wants to control alterations to Housing Board flats. Without control, your neighbour upstairs may be hitting the ceiling down to you. This is why the Board must have some sort of limited control. Otherwise tenants of other floors and other units will complain.

3.15 p.m.

If I can go on to the suggestion by the Member for River Valley, he suggests that the income limit for buying a Housing Board flat be raised beyond the present $1,500 a month. Sir, the income limit for home owners was, in fact, increased from $1,200 a month to $1,500 a month with effect from 1st July, 1971. A few thousand people applied, but they could only apply for 5-room flats. They have waited more than 18 months. They have not got any flat. The first of these few thousand will only get their flats at the end of this year, when about 192 units at Farrer Road will be completed. To increase the income limit would appear to be desirable so as to look after the middle class, or the lower middle class if you like, but this will only lengthen the waiting period and waiting list. However, I agree with the Member that something should be done for this group of people. All I can say is that at the moment we cannot do anything. There are priorities. The Member for Paya Lebar complains that some of his constituents have had to wait nearly three years before getting housing accommodation. If we were to increase the income limit, I think more Members will grumble because their constituents in the lower income groups will have to wait a longer time.

Perhaps Members are interested in the numbers registered to purchase Housing Board flats. As at last month, there were 56,000. But I wish to point out that of the 56,000, approximately 20,000 or 36 per cent are already in occupation of Housing Board flats. In other words, they are tenants now. They want to better themselves. Their families have grown probably. They are at the moment in occupation of one or two-room flats. So with rising affluence they get more money, the family grows, and they want to buy a bigger flat. A further breakdown of these 20,000 or 36 per cent, who are already in flats, is as follows:

2 per cent are existing owners wanting to change their purchased flats.

24 per cent are existing tenants wanting to purchase, instead of renting Housing Board flats.

10 per cent are immediate relatives now staying with registered tenants or owners in Housing Board flats, but they want to purchase their own separate accommodation.

The remaining 64 per cent or 36,000 applicants are not living in Housing Board flats. If you add this figure to the 25,000 applicants who have registered to rent, the total would exceed 50,000. We hope to build 25,000 or 30,000 units this year. If we complete 30,000 units, we would have done well. But then there is still the balance of 20,000 and more will register throughout the year. Though my sympathies are with the suggestion made by the Member for River Valley, all I can tell him now is: be a little patient; their turn will come.

The Member for Toa Payoh has registered some valid complaints. He complains about certain six-storey blocks of flats in Toa Payoh which have been badly constructed. First, I am glad to note that the Member has pointed out that these defects were not immediately apparent but only arose after some time. The Member will be happy to note that remedial action is being taken on the six-storey blocks referred to, and the doors, windows and floors will be put right.

The Member for Toa Payoh also suggested that the system of tendering sometimes does not work out to be fair or perhaps practical. Sir, in order to give everybody a fair chance to obtain Housing Board shop premises, the lettings of the shops must be by competitive public tender, otherwise you will have complaints of bias and corruption. I would be happy to consider any alternative fair form of letting out that can be suggested by any Member of Parliament. Because of the keen competition for shops in certain locations, tendered rentals are higher than elsewhere. As for the rent of $35 of certain stalls, the subsidy was given at the persistent request of some Members of Parliament. I am glad to hear one Member saying now that he is not in favour of this subsidy because it does not work out to be fair in all cases. He pointed out the case of two hawkers, both doing well and one paying $170 a month for space in a shop and the other paying $35 for a stall space. To withdraw this subsidy, after having given it, would only lead to more complaints.

The Member's other suggestion was to let youth organisations - perhaps he is thinking of boy scouts and girl guides -- occupy some space within housing estates so that they can organise and carry out their activities. This is a good idea. But can I point out that we have been approached by many organisations - religious organisations, charitable organisations and other organisations like the boy scouts - for space within the Housing Board estates. Frankly, we have not got enough space. To allow one would be to let in all the others. That would mean less units of flats for the people. There is, of course, the suggestion to let them use the open space at the ground floor of every multi-storey block of flats. But the practice of the Housing Board is to leave this space open and free, and for a good reason: there is fresh air and children may move around. To block up the space would only be a step backward.

I hope I have dealt with all the queries, Sir.

Mr Cheong Yuen Chee: Mr Speaker, Sir, first I would like to offer a suggestion, as invited by the Minister just now, with regard to the tendering of shop houses in Housing Board estates. In my question, I was referring to eating houses only. As far as shops or other trades are concerned, the present system is working quite satisfactorily. But for eating houses, will the Minister consider restricting the number of sub-lettings? In other words, if the minimum rental for an eating house is $770 per month depending on the floor space available, the tenant should not be allowed to sublet, say, more than four or five hawker stalls. This will then discourage them from tendering high prices, because it will be at the expense of the consumer.

The second point is a matter of clarification with regard to the void area at the foot of each block of flats in Housing Board estates, which is now the common practice to leave it open. I am not suggesting that we block up the whole area. In fact, most of the blocks are very large, and there is ample space. What I was suggesting is to allow a small portion of space, sufficient for these organisations to use it as a base of operations. This will help to encourage them to organise activities which can be conducted in the remaining void areas.

Mr Tay Boon Too: (In Mandarin): Sir, the Minister said just now that the procedure for repairs to attap houses and so on has been simplified. I want to find out from the Minister whether the simplified procedure has removed the need for the consent of the owner for repair works to he carried out. Some landlords are very unreasonable and they simply refuse to sign the form for the repairs. They just simply refuse to sign. In some other cases, the landowner may be away from Singapore. So if the tenant were to wait for the landlord to return to sign the form, what will happen to the attap house which is in a state of disrepair? My question is, can the procedure be revised in such a way as to remove the need for the landlord's signature so that repair work can be carried out immediately?

Tuan Haji Mohd. Ariff Bin Suradi (Kampung Kembangan): (In Malay): Mr Speaker, Sir, I am interested in the reply given by the Minister in regard to the question raised by the Member for Kim Keat. The Minister has said that the money for bus shelters would have to be spent on a priority basis. He also said that priority was to he given to bus shelters near clinics, hospitals and schools. Sir, I had made a request three years ago for bus shelters near Still Road Clinic, near the Telok Kurau Secondary School, and the Jalan Daud and Jalan Eunos primary schools, but I wonder why they have not been erected. These are places which the Minister has considered to be priorities.

3.30 p.m.

Not only that, the roads in these places are also in a state of disrepair. When it rains, the water is splashed by passing vehicles on to bus passengers. So pedestrians or bus commuters have to avoid standing near these puddles of water, I want an assurance from the Minister as to whether or not he will give priority to erect bus shelters at the places I have mentioned just now.

Mr Ho Kah Leong (Jurong): (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I fully sympathise with the Member for Paya Lebar in connection with his complaints against the necessity for landlords to put their signatures on applications for repairs to be carried out. Sir, since you are not there to see for yourself, it is very difficult for you to understand the hardships suffered by the people. Some landlords simply refuse to sign the application, as indicated by the Member for Paya Lebar. Sometimes the landlords resort to extorting money from tenants who want to carry out repairs to their houses. They demand exorbitant sums of money before they put their signature on the document. So if the poor rural people have not got enough money, the landowners will not sign the papers.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the Minister also mentioned just now that buildings must be controlled. I agree with him that there must be some form of control. But, at the same time, we must not only look at the legal side of the matter, but also think of the human side of it. Some of these attap dwellers are living under difficult conditions. In fact, I have come across one such case. So I took a picture of this house which was in a state of great disrepair and dangerous for people to live in. I then wrote to the Minister about it and, in the end, some arrangements were made. There can be other similar cases, or cases where the house is badly damaged. There may also be cases of attap dwellers who, with better means would want to provide their families with better amenities. So they ask for permission to reconstruct the building and to partition more rooms within the same space. But usually permission is not granted. So they have no choice.

Sir, there are cases where about 30 people live in a house occupying only 1,000 square feet of land. The place is definitely overcrowded. They have no choice but to stay in it. So they extend the existing house illegally to get more rooms. 1 hope the Minister will consider such cases sympathetically. In the case where the size of a family has increased considerably, permission should be granted to them to partition more rooms. Their lot should be improved.

Sir, the Minister also said that if the CCC is given the power to deal with applications for repairs and so on, there may be chaos or confusion. However, I think the CCC should at least be permitted to do something, such as the responsibility of certifying the existence of the unauthorised houses, some of which were put up years ago. So the CCC would be able to certify this fact. I think that is quite proper and adequate.

As mentioned by the Member for Paya Lebar, CCC members are supposed to be the community leaders who have been living in the area for many years and they are quite acquainted with the conditions there. They know what is going on. So if an unauthorised house has been in existence for many years, and if it is certified by the relevant CCC, then I think their applications should be given sympathetic consideration.

Mr Ong Teng Cheong: Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to refer to my earlier remarks about the construction of bus shelters. I was only suggesting that the Housing and Development Board should, in future, be responsible for the provision of bus shelters in new satellite towns. This is because I cannot under- stand why millions of dollars had been spent by the Housing and Development Board on the provision of car parks in Housing Board estates, and not a single cent has been spent on the provision of bus shelters. In this respect, I wonder whether bus commuters are regarded as second-class Citizens. Why do we look after the haves, who own cars, and neglect the have-nots who have to depend on public transport and whose continued support and patronage of public transport services is much to be welcomed? I think they deserve the comfort and convenience I have suggested.

My plea is to ask the Ministry to make the lives of bus commuters less miserable than what it is today. I believe a senior member of the Housing and Development Board sits on the Board of the Bus Services Licensing Authority, and therefore there should be no difficulty in planning and establishing bus routes and allocating bus shelters in new public housing estates. I do feel that the Housing and Development Board should provide bus shelters as they have been providing car parks in Housing Board estates. I would like to ask if the Minister concerned is satisfied with the present state of affairs in respect of the provision of bus shelters in Housing Board estates created by his Ministry, and if he would take steps to improve the situation.

Mr Barker: Sir, I will deal with the last Member first. I think he has got the wrong end of the stick. I explained earlier why it was the PWD that built bus shelters. It is because bus shelters are on public roads, the responsibility for which falls on the PWD. Hence, car parks within housing estates are the responsibility of the Housing Board. The Housing Board also does not discriminate between the haves and the have-nots. Otherwise they would not be building so many flats. To suggest that tenants with cars in Housing Board estates are the haves is also perhaps not true. Otherwise they should also not be living in Housing Board estates.

As for permits to renew or repair premises the rule is that if you want to build a new house, or to reconstruct a house, or to effect substantial alterations to a building, you must get the owner's permission. If the repairs are merely repairs to the roof, you will not require the owner's permission. We realise that some owners will not give permission. There is a law which says that you cannot build on someone else's land. To get rid of this law will not be fair to the owners. If you build an unauthorised house on someone's land, he will not put his signature to a permit either to renew, repair, or rebuild. But we do enforce the law with humanity. As the Member for Jurong has pointed out, he has referred cases to me. We have been rather lenient. We have postponed demolitions. We have extended the periods. But it is part of the Member's job to get these extensions, and it is part of my job to run the department, and sometimes we agree to postponements of demolitions.

If I can now briefly deal with the Member for Toa Payoh. The proposal of his, if accepted, will mean going back again to the various voluntary organisations, charitable and otherwise, wanting to use portions of the empty ground floor. We could try it out, but I hope there will not be too many applications.

Coming to the Member for Kampung Kembangan, I am not aware of his applications for bus shelters, He said that three years have passed and no bus shelters have appeared. To cut this matter short, would the Member send his request in writing either to my Parliamentary Secretary or to me, and, if funds are available, bus shelters will appear at his clinics and schools.

Mr Ong Teng Cheong: Mr Speaker, Sir, in view of the explanation given by the Minister concerned, I beg leave to withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The sum of $573,990 for Head 1101 ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates.

The Chairman: From now on, we will strictly follow the guillotine times. This Head of Expenditure has exceeded the guillotine time by a few minutes.

Head 1104 -

Mr Sim Boon Woo (Changi): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 1104 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1001*. (* The same amendment also stood in the name of Mr P. Govindaswamy.)

Sir, in moving this amendment, I would like to express my appreciation of the Government for the firm answer to the suggestion I made last year when the House debated on the Motion of Thanks to the President for his Address to Parliament.

In my speech, I urged the Government to pay more attention to the development of the rural areas. Sir, Changi village is required by the State for development. The clearance exercise by the Land Office has been carried out recently. Hundreds of families and shops will be affected. Sir, no one in his right mind will go against the Government's policy of development of this village. Sir, the conditions set out in the Temporary Occupation Licence state that holders of TOLs are not eligible for any compensation or alternative accommodation on termination of the licence. Sir, my plea is that in the process of clearance, the Land Office should give the least inconvenience and hardship as possible to the affected families and shopkeepers, and try to arrange for alternative accommodation for them either in Housing and Development Board flats or shops.

Sir, I would like to appeal to the Minister to consider the cases of those people who have prepared themselves for this eventuality, by buying small plots of land in other parts of Changi long ago. These people should be given permission to erect their own dwelling houses or small cottage factories on their land so that they can continue their business of manufacturing bread, potato chips, and other products. Sir, I would also wish that the competent authority will accord all their applications with great speed.

3.45 p.m.

Mr P. Govindaswamy (Anson): Mr Speaker, Sir, I have received many complaints that structures which had been erected many years ago are now considered as unauthorised structures by the Land Office, and have to be pulled down. I wonder whether the Minister will consider allowing such structures to stand until such time as the whole locality is taken over by the Urban Renewal Authority. After all, the structures have been there for a long time, and it is only a matter of time before the area will be taken over by the Urban Renewal Authority. Can the Minister consider giving alternative accommodation to the occupants of those unauthorised structures, who have been living there for more than seven years now, should the Government decide to take over their place?

Mr Barker: It is guillotine time, Sir,I am wondering how much time you are going to give me.

The Chairman: I will give you seven minutes.

Mr Barker: Of the seven minutes, five minutes for the Member for Changi, and two minutes for the Member for Anson.

Sir, the clearance of any area regrettably involves the dislocation of persons, but it is unavoidable and is undertaken only if it is for the general good of the community. Officials in my Ministry are under directions to deal with the problem arising from re-development, including resettlement and rehousing, in a manner that is likely to cause the minimum of inconvenience.

As for Changi Creek, every assistance has been given to Singapore citizens, who are eligible, to be provided with alternative accommodation. Sir, in the first phase of re-development of Changi which has been completed, three acres containing clusters of houses were cleared on both sides of Nicoll Drive and the eastern side of Changi Creek. A total of 234 families have been cleared; 162 families have been offered and have accepted alternative accommodation by the Housing and Development Board; 72 families have found their own accommodation; 64 families have been accommodated in ex-War Department artisan quarters at Telok Paku. Of the remaining 98 families, approximately 70 per cent have been re-housed at Kampung Chai Chee, and the rest at Toa Payoh, MacPherson or Tanjong Rhu. The Member will be interested to know that ex-gratia payments totalling $331,463 have been paid out to the 234 families in this clearance exercise.

As for the Member for Anson's question, it has been the practice of the Land Office to summarily demolish any unauthorised structures erected on State land after 1st April, 1960. This was put into practice years ago. Unauthorised structures erected before that date have been regularised by the issue of Temporary Occupation Licences. As for his suggestion that unauthorised structures should not be disturbed until the Urban Renewal Authority moves in, this has, in fact, been the practice of the Authority, which saw no point in inconveniencing or causing hardship to people who occupy structures, whether authorised or unauthorised, if no redevelopment is to take place in the near future.

Mr Sim Boon Woo: In view of the not very unsatisfactory answer, I beg leave to withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The sum of $1,914,180 for Head 1104 ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates.

The sum of $25,500,000 for Head 1104 ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.

Head 1107 -

Mr Teong Eng Siong (Sembawang): (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 1101*. (* The same amendment also stood in the names of Messrs Sim Boon Woo and P. Govindaswamy.)

Sir, the Primary Production Department has done a lot to promote the poultry and pig-rearing industry. To a certain extent it has helped to lower the cost of living and to make poultry and pigs an export commodity. We have been self-sufficient in these two items of production. Recently orchid growing has been encouraged and promoted, and people in the rural areas are now growing orchids and exporting them. In this way, we have been able to earn considerable foreign exchange. However, the cultivation of orchids has given rise to the question of land. I have received complaints from the farmers that the Primary Production Department does not allow them to cultivate orchids around the Sembawang Research Station because the Department itself is carrying out a large scale experiment on orchid growing there. Therefore, the farmers are not allowed to grow orchids around that area. I feel that this is not right. Although the Primary Production Department has other plans too, I feel that before they are implemented, the farmers should be given temporary permits to carry on with their business of orchid growing so that their income will not be affected. When the Department decides to carry out its programme, it will then not be too late to stop the farmers from growing orchids around the station.

I also feel that the Primary Production Department should implement a scheme to grow vegetables on a big scale. Most of the vegetables we consume are imported from abroad. The cost of vegetables is rising. Formerly a kati of vegetables costs only 20 cents; now it costs 80 cents per kati. It seems that the price of vegetables will continue to rise. This will affect the livelihood of the people. Since the Primary Production Department has done quite well in the rearing of pigs and poultry, I think it should carry out research to find out the best way in which to grow vegetables. It should encourage our farmers to grow vegetables on a big scale, and should give them more land to grow vegetables. If more vegetables are grown locally, their prices will come down to normal.

Another point I would like to raise is that I have received many complaints from farmers about the drastic increase in the price of animal feed. It has gone up as much as 100 per cent. This has resulted in higher costs to the farmers, and they therefore suffer a loss of income. Has the Primary Production Department taken steps to help the poultry and pig-rearing farmers by finding out the reason for the increase in the price of animal feed, and whether such a price hike is justified?

Mr Sim Boon Woo: Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to draw the attention of the Minister to the unscrupulous inshore illegal trawlers along the east coast. These trawlers started their illegal operations a few years ago. It is regrettable to note that even now they are still operating; thus destroying the fishing nets, crab nets and the pupus, or fishing traps, of our inshore fishermen. Sir, even the spawns of fish were destroyed in the process.

Sir, my Citizens' Consultative Committee, through the Katong District Office, and I personally too, have written several letters of complaint to the Head of the Fisheries Department about this, but we have failed to get a satisfactory reply. Although the Fisheries Department, in conjunction with the Marine Police, have mounted more than ten raids but only a very few of them were arrested. Even among the very few who were arrested, one of them managed to escape under the very eyes of the Fisheries officers and the Marine Police. This happened on the night of 25th June, 1972, when two illegal trawlers were arrested and while they were being towed back to the depot, one of them escaped. Sir, this incident shows us how efficient the Department is.

Sir, my Citizens' Consultative Committee have been very helpful. Although it is an honorary job, they have helped the Fisheries Department to stamp out these illegal operations. As a result, they are now being threatened by the illegal operators. Sir, I wish to draw the attention of the House to the fact that whenever the Fisheries Department conducts a raid of this nature on a particular night, the illegal trawlers would stay away. I am very suspicious of this and perhaps there has been a leakage of information. This is a matter of great importance, and I hope the Minister will look into this matter with urgency. If such illegal operations are not stopped, I am afraid that the inshore fishermen might take the law into their own hands, as they have lost faith and confidence in the Fisheries Department. In that event I want to make it very clear that my Citizens' Consultative Committee and I myself will not be responsible for any eventual consequences that may happen, and at any moment now, Sir, I hope I will get a satisfactory reply from the Minister.

4.00 p.m.

Mr P. Govindaswamy: Mr Speaker, Sir, the recent outbreak of foot and mouth disease at Jurong Abattoir has resulted in the unnecessary slaughter of animals imported from overseas. As a result, the price of fresh mutton and beef has gone up enormously. Further, I understand that these animals are inspected en masse, and not singly. With this type of inspection sometimes a single animal suffering from this disease may escape detection. Can more stringent measures be introduced to ensure that our citizens are protected from consumption of unwholesome meat accidentally? The press has reported that before the detection of the foot and mouth disease of animals, meat from a few slaughtered heads were sold in the market. It is fortunate that there has been no outbreak of disease among those who had consumed the infected meat.

Sir, with increasing urban renewal projects taking place all over Singapore, what steps are being taken to introduce flatted farming for the rearing of pigs, poultry and fish? There was a lot of talk about the feasibility of rearing pigs in flatted buildings. But, up to-date, what progress has been made besides conducting a feasibility study?

Mr Ng Kah Ting (Punggol): Mr Speaker, Sir, may I have your permission to speak on this amendment now, so that I do not have to move my amendment (3) *, which is on Fisheries?

• The amendment reads as follows:

(3) That the sum to be allocated for Head 1107 be reduces by $10 in respect of subhead 1261.

The Chairman: Yes.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: Thank you, Sir. With regard to illegal trawling, I fully share the sentiments expressed by my good friend, the Member for Changi and I would also like to make a similar complaint to the Minister for Law and National Development. The Member for Changi just now mentioned that there has been illegal trawling operations along the east coast of the Republic, but I think it has extended to the north-east sector too, i.e, into the Straits of Johore.

Sir, illegal trawling has caused considerable harm and is threatening the livelihood of a good number of inshore fishermen in my constituency. I believe complaints have been made to the Department concerned. Action, in fact, has been taken, but somehow these illegal trawlers come back. Members of this House have just heard a vivid illustration of what may eventually take place if no stern or proper action is taken to deprive these illegal trawlers of trawling not only in the Straits of Johore but also in the east coast. I am told that these illegal trawlers prowl the Straits of Johore only in the early hours of the morning between 4 a.m. and 6 a.m. I must make it clear that I was told that the Fisheries Division of the Primary Production Department has been watchful over this matter and that the Marine Police has also come into the picture.

Sir, to give an idea of how the illegal trawlers operate, allow me to say this. These boats are pretty small, but quite highly powered. They are unlicensed boats and each is manned generally by three or four young men. When they are Out trawling, the boats are completely without lights. That is why in the process of this illegal trawling, they damage the surface nets and other fishing gear belonging to the inshore fishermen. Of course, when such things happen, tempers rise. And when tempers rise, you can bet that violence will result. Therefore I echo the plea of the Member for Changi that the Fisheries Department should take stronger measures to eradicate illegal trawling. I suggest that when the operators of illegal trawlers are caught, the Department concerned should press for stiffer sentences, not only to impose heavier fines but also to confiscate both the boat and fishing gear. This will, I hope, deter them. Thus, we would not only protect the livelihood of the inshore fishermen against threats but also prevent any serious consequences from arising, which the Member for Changi has rightly pointed out.

Sir, another point I wish to raise is in regard to the United Nations Development Programme-sponsored Fishing Training Centre and the Fishing Training School Vessel. Members will notice that, in fact, a lot of money has been spent on the running of this project. The Government together with the T.JNDP have jointly organised courses to encourage more of our youths to take to the sea. I am told that there is good response to the courses run by the training centre. But when those who have attended such courses go out to fish, a good number of them simply leave the boats on their return. The main reason may be attributed to their having to stay for a long period away from shore, and sea-sickness. In this respect, after having spent a lot of money on training them, the net result is that only a handful really stay behind. This is therefore far from satisfactory.

I am also told that a few companies are involved in offshore and deep-sea fishing activities. But a large proportion of their boats are actually otter trawlers. Most of these otter trawlers are based in Kangkar, which is part of my constituency. I am happy to say that the complaints about piracy in international waters, especially near the Horsburgh Lighthouse, have somewhat reduced. Thanks to the relevant Government department for their prompt action.

In view of all this, I wonder what the Minister has in mind to overcome all the problems.

Mr Ho Kah Leong: (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, the Members for Changi and Punggol have both raised the problem of illegal trawling operations in the east coast and the Straits of Johore. I would now like to tell the Minister that similar activities are going on in the west coast, namely, Jurong. The Members for Changi and Punggol have already given a detailed account of these operations and the harm they have caused to our inshore fishermen. When these illegal trawlers operate along the coast, they destroy or damage the nets and fishing gear of our inshore fishermen. And when this happens, certain consequences will result. That is why the inshore fishermen hate these illegal trawler operators. Hence, I urge the Minister to adopt stringent measures to stop such illegal trawling operations along our coast.

Another matter which I would like to bring up has already been mentioned by the Member for Sembawang. Although the Primary Production Department has done a lot for our farmers, the livelihood of the farmers has not improved. There are various reasons for this. For example, the pig-rearers in our country have been leading a very miserable life. Last year, there was a drastic drop in the price of pigs, and they lost a lot. At the beginning of this year, there was an improvement in the price of pigs. However, the prices of animal feed have gone up. Thus their gains have been set off. The prices of animal feed have gone up because of the increase in the prices of raw materials in the supplier countries. However, the price at source has come down but the prices of animal feed have not come down. I would like the Minister to investigate this matter and help our pig farmers.

4.15 p.m.

Just now the Member for Anson touched on the foot and mouth disease of animals. This disease has posed a grave threat to our livestock farmers. As a result the Malaysian Government has imposed a ban on imports of our poultry to Malaysia, thus causing hardship to our poultry farmers. I do not know whether our Government can help the farmers to petition the Malaysian Government to lift the ban. According to the experts, this kind of disease will not spread to poultry and I therefore hope that our Minister will help our poultry farmers in this respect.

Mr Barker: Sir, starting with the Member for Sembawang. He complains about the banning of orchids being grown around the experimental station. I find this hard to believe. One does not need permission from the Primary Production Department to grow orchids in Sembawang, or Tanglin, either in your house or even on a commercial scale. But if you want to grow orchids on a commercial scale, then it must be on land properly zoned "agricultural". So it is not true that the Primary Production Department does not allow people to grow orchids. In fact, the Department has been encouraging the commercial growth of orchids in the Republic because it is a valuable foreign exchange earner. Figures for the last three years show a steady increase in total value. 1970, $1.2 million; 1971, $1.8 million; and 1972, $2.6 million.

As for the price of feed-meal, about which two Members complained, unfortunately we cannot produce feed-meal for pigs in Singapore without importing the necessary raw materials. The rise and fall in prices of feed-meal is subject to world competitive prices. As we get our raw materials for animal feed-meal from abroad, we are subject to world prices, depending on demand and supply. At present, the prices have gone up and, unless we subsidize the price of raw materials for feed-meal, there is nothing we can do except to pay what foreign sellers demand.

The Member for Sembawang wants the Primary Production Department to grow vegetables on a large scale. Several Members want the Primary Production to chase illegal trawlers. But it is refreshing to hear the Member for Jurong say that the Primary Production Department has done a lot for the farmers.

As for trawlers, the Member for Punggol has pointed out, it is difficult to catch these illegal trawlers. The Department together with the Marine Police, have done their best. Some trawlers have been caught, and some have escaped. Early this year, the Member for Changi informed the Department that there was a resurgence of illegal trawling activities. The Department, together with the Marine Police and the District Office (Rural East), immediately carried out a number of raids. In the month of February alone, a total of 12 raids were conducted between the hours of 8 p.m. and 4 a.m. However, no trawlers were sighted. I do not know what the answer is. Perhaps there is a leakage of information, either in the Primary Production Department, or the District Office, or the Marine Police, I do not know. But if you have evidence of leakage, your proper course is to make a report to the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau. To press for heavier fines or penalties, this would really depend on what the Judge or Magistrate will impose. But perhaps we can consider revising existing legislation to provide for heavier penalties against offenders. But let me assure all three Members who complained, that whether it is Jurong, Changi or Punggol, the Primary Production Department would welcome any information and advice as to the effective means to catch and deal with offenders. I agree with them entirely that illegal trawling around our shores will lead to considerable damage not only to the fishermen's gear, net, or whatever it is, but also to a shortage of fish. There would not be fish around our waters unless we stop illegal trawling.

As for the Member for Anson, I find it difficult to follow him. He talks of "unnecessary mass slaughter" with respect to the foot and mouth disease. Let me assure him that the slaughter, however unfortunate, was very necessary in order to confine the disease within the precincts of the quarantine station. The disease was first discovered amongst cattle. As a result, 400 head of cattle had to be destroyed, some with no symptoms of foot and mouth disease. At the same time there were 4,000 head of sheep in the quarantine station, completely free of the disease. But soon after the cattle had been destroyed, the disease spread to some of the sheep. We had no alternative but to slaughter all 4,000 head of sheep. However regrettable and unpleasant the action might be, it was for the safety of the other animals in Singapore that can be infected by this disease. But to say that some of this diseased meat got out and was consumed, I hope not in Anson, is bordering on rumour-mongering. Let me assure the Member that no such meat left the station. No animal, in fact, was allowed to leave the quarantine station, whether it was dog, cat, horse, cattle or sheep.

Members will be perhaps interested to know the present position. So far we have managed to confine and eradicate this disease within the station. There is no evidence or sign of the disease having spread beyond the station. Continued vigilance is being exercised by the staff of the Primary Production Department. All dogs and cats which were quarantined, unfortunately longer than necessary as a result of the outbreak, were all released on the 26th February, last month. It is intended to leave the quarantine station as it now is, that is to say, no animal will be allowed into the station or out of the station, for about another month more before operations can go back to normal. But even when operations resume, it will begin with only a few animals. We do not want another 4,000 sheep going in and suffer another outbreak of the disease, causing all of them to be slaughtered. So a test period with few animals will have to be undergone.

The Member for Jurong rightly complains about the ban of poultry, as a result of the foot and mouth disease in Singapore. But foreign bans are not within our control. Poultry is not affected by foot and mouth disease, nor are eggs. But if a foreign country decides to ban the import of our poultry or eggs as a result of our foot and mouth disease, there is nothing we can do about it except to appeal to them.

The Member for Changi wanted particulars of the Fishing Training Centre. The Member has not got all his facts right. The UNDP-sponsored Fishing Training Centre runs two courses. One is the deck course, which is to train navigators and fishing technicians, and the other is the engine course, which is to train fishing vessel and shore engineers. So far two batches comprising a total number of 60 trainees have graduated from the centre. Our records show that out of the first batch of trainees, about 50 per cent are employed on fishing and other vessels, whilst the remaining 50 per cent are employed in shipyards and related establishments.

4.30 p.m.

In addition to these one-year courses, the Centre also conducts short-term courses from time to time. So far, a total of four courses of two to three months' duration have been conducted for inshore fishermen who wish to switch to off-shore and deep-sea fishing. A one-week course has been conducted for captains of fishing trawlers. In addition, the Centre also serves as the focal point for dissemination of technical knowledge to fishermen and fishing companies. The Member must realise that deep-sea fishing means a hard life, and not everyone is prepared to go out for weeks or months and then return to Singapore and to their family thereafter.

As for flatted factories, I have not forgotten the remarks I made in this House last year. But my Ministry has made a recommendation to the Ministry of Finance for the setting up of flatted factories. It has gone to and fro, between National Development and Finance, and we have not got their approval as yet. It is not my practice to come here and put the blame on another Ministry. But as I have to answer the Member, all I can say is that National Development has not slipped on this proposal. We have made recommendations to Finance who are considering the matter. It is again a question of priority, and how much money they can afford to put aside for this project.

Mr Teong Eng Siong: (In Mandarin): Sir, I would like the Minister to listen carefully to what I have to say. He said that it is not necessary for anyone to get a permit to plant orchids. I would like to tell him that the place in question is somewhere near the Sembawang experimental station. This land on which the farmers intend to grow orchids is leased to them on TOLs. When they want to grow orchids on this TOL land, which is also some sort of agricultural land, they were told to apply to the Primary Production Department for a licence to grow orchids. When they wanted to put up a fence, they were also told to apply for a licence. When they made the necessary applications, they were informed that the Primary Production Department might not be likely to give them a licence as the experimental station has a big scheme in mind. So the farmers complained to me, and I went to see the authorities concerned on their behalf. I informed them that since the Primary Production Department had no immediate use of the land then they could perhaps grant them the licence and later withdraw it after they had actually implemented the scheme. So perhaps the Minister was not informed of this, and that is why he does not know about the matter. Actually it is not necessary for the Primary Production Department to issue any licence at all. If it is the case that anybody who wants to grow orchids could go ahead with it, then it is very good.

The second point is about the growing of vegetables which I have just referred to. The Primary Production Department has done a lot in respect of vegetable farming and I praise the Department for its efforts. Perhaps the Minister did not listen carefully to what I have said. The Member for Jurong has also praised the Primary Production Department for what it has done in respect of vegetable farming. I mentioned this in the hope that the Ministry concerned can encourage more farmers to go into vegetable farming in order to reduce the price of vegetables, because I myself buy vegetables often. But the Minister does not buy vegetables himself, and therefore he may not know that the price of vegetables has gone up.

Mr Sim Boon Woo: Mr Speaker, Sir, I am really surprised the Minister said just now that he would consider amending the legislation to impose heavier penalties, jail sentences or confiscation of the vessel. However, I remember the hon. Prime Minister stated in a function at the Tanah Merah Besar Community Centre on the 26th of June, 1971, that illegal activities must be stopped by imposition of heavier penalties and even jailing the operators, if necessary. This speech was made two years ago, but since then nothing has been done. The Prime Minister's statement has not been taken heed of. This is very much regretted.

Sir, I wonder whether the Minister could assure the hon. Members for Punggol and Jurong that a special highly secret operation will be carried out against these illegal operators. As I have said just now, I am very suspicious over the fact that whenever a raid is to be carried out, the illegal trawler is never around. Sir, I hope the Minister will listen to the pleas of all the three Members here, myself included, of course.

Mr Barker: Sir, there is a little misunderstanding between the Member for Sembawang and me. He agrees with me that there is no need for a permit. But in this particular case, he speaks of a Temporary Occupation Licence, which means that the land belongs to the State. The land may have been let out on licence not for the growing of orchids, so that if he wants to grow orchids, he seeks the permission of the Land Office who refers him to the Primary Production Department. And in this case, the Department recommended that the licence to grow orchids on the land should not be granted because Sembawang Station wants to enlarge. That is the reason. It has got nothing to do with permits generally for orchids.

The Member also wants the Primary Production Department to grow vegetables. They are doing their best not to grow vegetables themselves, because if they do then they would be accused of competing unfairly with the poor farmers. What the Department has, in fact, done is to go into hydroponics and mushroom cultivation. This is a subject on which some amendments will be moved later. The Department has successfully grown fresh mushrooms, and if this can be cultivated on a commercial scale, it is good for Singapore. I would invite the Member for Sembawang to buy some of these mushrooms at about $3 or $4 a kati. This will be the best mushroom he has ever eaten!

Mr Ng Kah Ting: Sir, the Minister has not replied to the Member for Changi's observation on heavier penalties.

Mr Barker: The Member for Changi wanted an assurance from me. I am not prepared to give him that assurance. I did not make any speech in Changi. It was the Prime Minister who made the speech. I did not hear his speech nor have I been given any directions by him to increase these penalties. But Members should be satisfied with my assurance that I will instruct the Attorney-General to look into this matter with a view to enhancing penalties, whether it be fines or imprisonment and perhaps easier confiscation of vessels which have been caught for illegal trawling.

Mr Teong Eng Siong: (In Mandarin): Sir, I am glad to hear the Minister say that the Primary Production Department has gone into hydroponics and mushroom cultivation. I would like to know how soon can the results be made known. If it is made known one or two years later, by which time the vegetable prices would have gone up by $1 or $2, then it will be too late. Can the Minister tell this House something more about the hydroponics scheme?

Mr Ng Kah Ting: Sir, there is an amendment in the name of the Member for Jurong on the subject of hydroponics. I think it is out of order for the Member for Sembawang to raise it now.

The Chairman: Yes, I agree with you. Mr Teong, you will have to wait until the proper time.

Mr Teong Eng Siong: (In Mandarin): Sir, I only asked the Minister whether he could tell us more about hydroponics, and when will the results of the experiments be made known.

Mr Barker: Sir, I would rather wait for the relevant amendment to be moved. So he has got to wait until the Member for Jurong moves the amendment.

Mr Teong Eng Siong: (In Mandarin): Since I will be getting an answer later, I beg leave to withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

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 and shall take the Chair again at 5.15 p.m.

Sitting accordingly suspended at 4.42 p.m. until 5.15 p.m. Sitting resumed at 5.15 p.m.

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

Debate in Committee of Supply resumed.

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

Head 1107 (contd.) -

Mr Ho Kah Leong: (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 1201.

Sir, I would like to ask the Minister many questions on this subhead, Fishing Port and Fish Auction Markets.

First, will the Ministry of National Development expand the present fishing port? As I understand it, the present port facilities are not sufficient for us because there are several ships anchoring alongside the wharf, and it is not possible to cram them. This has caused some difficulty in the loading and unloading of fish. Since our population is increasing, more fish is needed for local consumption. I, therefore, feel that there is an urgent need to expand the facilities at the fishing port.

Secondly, there is also a need to set up a permanent office at the Central Fish Market. I had touched on this question during the Budget debate last year. When I brought up this matter at that time, the Minister replied that he would recommend to the Jurong Town Corporation to set up a permanent office there for the use of the fish merchants. He can refer to Hansard, Vol. 31, col. 1205, dated 22nd March, 1972. I would like the Minister to inform us of the progress, if any, which has been made in this respect.

Thirdly, the question of management of the Central Fish Market. Recently I have received several complaints that many petty thefts are taking place at the fish market. Sometimes whole crates of fish and prawns are stolen. I know that there are about 3,000 people going in and out of the fish market every night. There might be some bad hats among the crowd, and they impose certain difficulties in respect of management and security. Therefore, there can be no excuse at all for relaxation in management and control of the fish market. Perhaps when we issue entry passes, we should scrutinise the applicants carefully before issuing them with passes. At the same time the authorities concerned should also maintain close liaison with the Police. Perhaps it might be useful if the Police could send some officers there during auction time in order to reduce the incidence of thefts.

Mr Barker: Mr Speaker, Sir, judging from the Member's remarks, the fishing port and fish market in Jurong have been successful, and that is why more space is required. First, the Member will be glad to know that a sum of $195,000 will be spent on extension work. The work started on 8th February and the completion date is around August this year. The extension work involves the construction of three more bays, each 70 feet by 120 feet, at the auction area of the Fish Auction Market. Secondly, there is provision of proper accommodation for six ice-crusher stalls which will replace the present temporary stalls sited at the end of the existing market. There will also be the installation of a salt water pump to pump water from the sea to facilitate more efficient cleaning of the market.

As for the request of more space for the retailers, I am still pursuing that matter with the Ministry of Finance. I agree with the Member that more space should be provided, as some of the fishmongers are renting space from the authorised tenants and paying rather exorbitant rents.

As for stealing at the market, there are several officers on duty there. At the peak auctioning period there are about 3,000 people mingling in the market. This is bound to lead to some squabbles and arguments between wholesalers and retailers. After all it is a fish market. There have been a few cases of theft of fish in the market. The gates of the port are manned by two security guards. These guards are retired Police officers, and their duties are to check persons entering the fishing port. However, as I have said, there are about 3,000 people each night, in addition to about 500 vehicles. It is impossible to check each and every person entering the market without causing a long queue and much inconvenience to the fish retailers who go to the market to buy fish. However, spot checks are made from time to time. The Member for Jurong can rest assured that the Department concerned will look into his further suggestion and try to improve the running of the port and the market.

Mr Ho Kah Leong: (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, the Minister seems to have omitted the point I raised about the permanent office in the fish market. I raised this matter in the previous Budget debate last year, and he replied that he would negotiate with the authorities concerned. I would like to know the position now.

Mr Barker: Can I ask the Member this: whom is the permanent office for?

Mr Ho Kah Leong: (In Mandarin): Sir, I am referring to the permanent office in the fish market for the fish merchants. The position is as follows. At the moment there are temporary offices made of wooden planks for the fish merchants. They are not satisfied with such facilities. Each unit is very small, and it is very hot in the day. After four years certain planks of the wall have been attacked by white ants. They have therefore requested whether the Jurong Town Corporation or the Ministry of National Development can provide them with more permanent offices.

Mr Barker: There is some misunderstanding on this matter. When the fish market was built, the Department erected three blocks of timber offices for the use of the fish merchants. I pursued the Member's request with the Department concerned. Their reply was that, provided the companies put up the buildings themselves, they would help to find a suitable site for them. In fact, a number of commercial companies engaged in the catching, auctioning and processing of fish have constructed their own offices in the Jurong fish port.

Mr Ho Kah Leong: (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I heard the same answer last year. As I had pointed out to the Minister last year, not all fish merchants are as rich as he imagines. If some of them are rich, they would have invested their money in deep-sea fishing. I would suggest that he makes a recommendation to the Jurong Town Corporation, since the land belongs to the Corporation, to set up a permanent office for rental to the fish merchants. All these suggestions have been made before and recorded in the Official Report of Parliamentary Debates.

Mr Barker: Mr Speaker, Sir, we have sounded the Jurong Town Corporation, and they are not willing to do so. All that I can do for the Member now is to put up his request again.

Mr Ho Kah Leong: (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I will put up the same request with the authorities concerned. However, in view of the answer, though not quite satisfactory, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The Chairman: Amendment (3)+, Mr Ng Kah Ting has spoken. Amendment (4) , Mr Teong Eng Siong. (+ See footnote, col. 899)

Mr Teong Eng Siong: (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 32*. (* The same amendment also stood in the names of Messrs Ho Kah Leong and Ng Kah Ting.)

The provision under this subhead is for urban and rural services. There is no doubt that the Government has done much in looking after the welfare of the rural people. For many years now the Government has allocated large sums of money for the development of the rural areas by providing facilities such as street lighting, water and electricity supplies and so on. All these facilities have led to improving the lot of the people in the rural areas. However, this does not mean that all the problems pertaining to the rural areas have been solved. There is still plenty of room for improvement. In view of this, I feel that the provision of $3.2 million for this year is obviously not enough.

During the past years large sums of money have been allocated for the improvement of the rural areas. For instance, every year the provision of $100,000 to $120,000 was allotted to Sembawang for the extension of public facilities. But this year there is a reduction in the provision, the sum voted being only about $20,000. What can we do with this meagre sum of money? In order that the various construction works in the Sembawang constituency can be carried out successfully, we should increase this provision. I remember that during the Budget debate last year, I made a request that, for the financial year 1973-74, the provision for the rural areas should be increased. The Minister told me then that he would take note of my request. However, after one year it seems that he has forgotten about this matter. The provision for this subhead is actually the same as that for the last financial year. There is no increase. The sum is still $3.25 million. Therefore, I will continue to request the Minister for Law and National Development to appeal to the Minister for Finance to pay more attention to the interests of the rural people and allot more money next year for the various development projects in the rural areas so that the rural people can achieve the same rate of progress and enjoy the same standard of living as those in the urban areas.

5.30 p.m.

Sir, since the vote for the rural areas has not been increased, the provision should be utilised to get the maximum benefit. We should also encourage the rural people and national servicemen to do voluntary work or gotong royong the various Government projects so as to reduce expenditure. I will avail myself of this opportunity and mention a gotong royong project that took place on the 10th of March and which was carried out successfully. Two hundred national servicemen from the Seletar and Ayer Rajah Barracks toot part. Hundreds of villagers from Sembawang also responded to this voluntary road project. According to the PWD, the project was scheduled to be completed in four days. But it was completed two days ahead of schedule, thus saving a lot of expenditure for the Government. I would also avail myself of this opportunity to praise the good performance put up by the 200-odd national servicemen from the Ayer Rajah and Seletar Barracks. I must also thank the villagers and the people from the community centres for their help in this project. They have put up a good performance. They have saved Government some money and also contributed a great deal towards the good relationship between the ordinary folks and the soldiers. Therefore, we must encourage this kind of co-operation.

Finally, I wish to say that the distribution of the vote for the various projects is not appropriate. For instance, the provision for the construction of agricultural and kampung roads is only $750,000. This is insufficient. One of the problems facing the rural areas is the construction of roads and usually the amount provided is inadequate. The vote for the extension of water supply is $1.5 million. Though water supply is very important, I feel that in certain areas, more roads should be constructed. I would like the Minister to pay attention to this. If there is any surplus from the vote for the extension of water supply, I hope it will be used for the building of more roads in the rural areas.

The Chairman: May I remind hon. Members that the guillotine time for this Head is 5.50 p.m.?

Mr Ho Kah Leong: Mr Speaker, Sir, as a rural Member of Parliament, I share the sentiments expressed by my colleague, the Member for Sembawang. Members may recall that this subject was brought up for discussion in this House last year. If I remember correctly, the general feeling then was that the amount of money provided for the construction of roads was too little, and we hoped that in the next fiscal year more funds would be allocated to meet the pressing demands for the construction of roads. However, to the disappointment of Members from the rural constituencies, the amount provided for road construction for 1973-74 is the same as that for 1972-73, i.e, only $750,000. When this meagre sum is divided and allocated to the various rural constituencies, each rural constituency will get not more than $60,000. This sum is usually not enough to metal one agricultural road, let alone setting aside a certain amount for repairs of existing roads. Although the rural areas have been shrinking due to industrialisation and urbanisation, there are still many rural areas where roads, drainage systems and social amenities have to be provided. The rural folks want good roads. No road is considered good if it is not metalled. A laterite road or even a quarry-waste road will not resist wear and tear caused by the weather. Therefore, it is subjected to damage every other year. Sometimes the amount spent on repairs is quite sizable. If we add up the repair costs of a road over a period of 10 years, the sum might well be enough to metal a road. Since we have a surplus in our budget, I fail to understand why the Government cannot set aside a bigger sum of money to metal all the rural roads. When all the roads are metalled, the Government only need to spend a small sum for the maintenance of the roads, such as the patching up of pot-holes. So in the long run, it is more economical to metal a road than to repair it every now and then. I would therefore urge the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for National Development, who is also the Chairman of the Urban and Rural Services Committee, to seriously take note of my suggestion and recommend a bigger sum for the construction of roads for 1974-75.

Sir, I also wish to suggest to the Parliamentary Secretary that the various projects should be adequately supervised. Otherwise, through lack of supervision and the poor quality of work of the contractors, the project is ruined as soon as it is completed. I have invited the Parliamentary Secretary to make a site visit to Jurong to see for himself the poor quality of work of the contractors. I am thankful to him for accepting this invitation. He has seen for himself the standard of work done by the contractors. Sir, to repair the damages, additional expenditure has to be incurred. This is, therefore, tantamount to a waste of public funds. I would urge the Parliamentary Secretary concerned to look into this matter seriously.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: Mr Speaker, Sir, I should not take more than two minutes. In fact, most of what I intend to say have already been well covered by my two good hon. Friends, the Members for Sembawang and Jurong. I merely wish to suggest, for the consideration of the Minister concerned, that the sum of $3.25 million appropriated for the seven items be re-grouped as one block vote and allocate it to meet the more urgent requests, such as the making up of roads.

I notice that there are revotes for items 03, 04 and 06. According to my calculation, the revotes amount to $1.2 million. If these revotes are absorbed, it will amount to more than $3.25 million. Therefore, I urge that consideration be given to re-group the various allocations for the seven items into one block vote for this subhead 32.

Mr Hwang Soo Jin rose -

The Chairman: Yes, Mr Hwang. But remember that the Minister will have less time to answer.

Mr Hwang Soo Jin (Jalan Kayu): Mr Speaker, Sir, this debate is very important for a rural Member, and I would like to thank you for giving me an opportunity to speak.

(In Mandarin) Sir, I rise to support the rural Members of Parliament on the allocation of funds for the rural areas. Over the past few years, the Government has done something for the rural areas. Although the performance has been quite satisfactory in itself, on the whole, it is not adequate enough when compared to the high rate of progress and development in the urban areas. The feeling is that the rural areas are still backward. But if we compare the present rate of development of the rural areas with that of a few years ago, it could be excusable, because at that time our economy was such that we came to a stage when the spirit was willing but the body was weak.

The Member for Jurong has said that with the buoyant economy and with a surplus budget, there are favourable conditions for the Government to allocate more sums of money for the improvement and progress of the rural areas, particularly in regard to the metalling of roads, the construction of drains and the provision of other social amenities so as to make it possible for the rural people to enjoy the modern facilities in life. It is therefore regrettable to see that the allocation for 1973-74 is the same as that for 1972-73. As was pointed out by the other Members, it is also my hope that a bigger sum will be provided for 1974-75. Even if the amount is doubled it may not be enough.

Mr Lee Yiok Seng rose -

The Chairman: Yes, Mr Lee. May I remind Members again that this means less time for the Minister to answer.

5.45 p.m.

Mr Lee Yiok Seng: (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, the various rural MPs who have spoken on this amendment have requested for more funds for the rural areas. This is a matter of urgency. According to our past experience, the sums of money allotted for the construction of roads in the rural areas were not adequate. In fact, I feel that if we had really understood the actual conditions in rural areas, we would conclude that there had been a wastage of funds. First of all, because the vote was insufficient, metalling of the road had to be done in stages. And if the work was phased out over a matter of one or two months it would not be too bad; but the phasing was done over two to three years. So, if a road was metalled in three phases over a long period of time, then a lot of money would have been wasted. When the first part of the road was metalled, people were quite happy about it, but the second and other parts of the road were difficult to pass. When the second part of the road was metalled, the first part began to show signs of damage and in need of repair. When it came to metalling the third part of the road, the first part of the road would have gone into a state of disrepair. This is a very difficult situation. Unless the situation is remedied, a lot of money would be wasted. We should allocate more funds to metal the full stretch of the road all at the same time. We must think of the interests of the rural people. You can speak to the rural people, and they will tell you that although the Government has spent a lot of money to develop the roads in the rural areas, the actual situation is such that throughout the whole year or throughout their whole life, they will not be able to set foot on a completely metalled road, and at the very best, the road has been partly metalled.

I am pointing out all these matters with the main aim of supporting the appeals of the rural MPs, that is, for more funds next year for the rural areas. The Government must consider this appeal very seriously and in all earnestness. In that way, we will not let down the rural people. Instead we will be able to give them a better life.

Mr Barker: Sir, I thank Members for their support. Somehow I feel that their remarks should have been addressed to a different Ministry. The Ministry of National Development, like the Members themselves, feels that more money should be allocated for projects of the URSC. Even the Chairman of the URSC would be happier if he had much more money to divide between the various constituencies and the various projects. Whether it is for water, electrification or roads, we have to divide this sum of $3.25 million amongst the various projects. If they do not think that the amount of $750,000 is enough for rural roads, let me assure them that though these divisions are made for the different items, money allocated for, say, water, if unspent, can be used for roads. And if one constituency does not use its funds, as Tanglin last year, the funds are re-allocated to another constituency. This goes round. Sometimes we spend more in one constituency than what has been allocated to it, and in some constituencies we spend less. The division is a fair one between the constituencies. We divide into rural, sub-rural, urban or suburban. Their ratio of 1: 3 : 5 is multiplied by population and area. Hence the allocation. As far as is possible, the rural areas get the most money. They grouse that this money is not enough - I am with them on this, and I thank them for their support in our efforts to get more money from the Ministry of Finance.

Mr Teong Eng Siong: (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I thank the Minister for giving the undertaking to this House, particularly the rural MPs, that he will ask the Minister for Finance for more funds. I hope that with his co-operation, the rural constituencies will be able to get more funds next year for development. On this note, Sir, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

5.50 p.m.

The Chairman: Order. Time is up.

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

Mr Ng Kah Ting:

(5) That the sum to be allocated for Head 1107 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 43.

Mr Ho Kah Leong: Mr Ng Kah Ting:

(6) That the sum to be allocated for Head 1107 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 51.

Mr Ho Kah Leong:

(7) That the sum to be allocated for Head 1107 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 52.

Mr Teong Eng Siong:

(8) That the sum to be allocated for Head 1107 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 62.

(9) That the sum to be allocated for Head 1107 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 63.

The sum of $18,373,700 for Head 1107 ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates.

The sum of $38,335,400 for Head 1107 ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.

Head 1108 -

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

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

(2) That the sum to be allocated for Head 1108 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1911.

Mr P. Govindaswamy: I am not moving my amendments, Sir.

The following amendments stood in the name of Tuan Haji Mohd. Ariff Bin Suradi -

(3) That the sum to be allocated for Head 1108 be reduced by $10 in respect of sub' head 2028.

(4) That the sum to be allocated for Head 1108 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 21.

(5) That the sum to be allocated for Head 1108 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (04) of subhead 23.

The Chairman: Tuan Haji Mohd. Ariff is not here. Amendment (6) , Mr Teong.

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

That the sum to be allocated for Head 1108 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 24.

Sir, this is an allocation of $2.5 million for the construction of the Coastal Expressway from Bedok to the City. This is a very good measure for the development of our public road system. With the completion of this Coastal Expressway, I believe that the traffic problems and congestion in the city and rural areas will be relieved.

I would like to raise one point of clarification from the Minister concerned. When will work commence on the construction of the Coastal Expressway, and when will it be completed?

Mr Barker: Sir, the project is divided into three phases. Phase I, between Fort Road at the 7 1/2 m.s. of Upper East Coast Road, is in progress and is expected to be completed by the end of next year. Phase II, from Fort Road to Tanjong Rhu, will begin sometime this year, and is expected to be ready by 1975. Phase III, from the 7 1/2 m.s. Upper East Coast Road to Bedok, will begin next year. Completion date is around 1976.

Mr Teong Eng Siong: (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to ask two more questions. First, during the three phases of the construction, how much of the project will be on reclaimed land. Secondly, since the land has been reclaimed recently, will it be dangerous for the construction of the road?

Mr Barker: Sir, the answer to the second question is that it is not dangerous because the reclamation was completed some time ago and the earth is given time to settle. As to the first question, the road will run more or less parallel to the coastline, roughly about 150 feet to 200 feet from the seashore. It will not be exactly parallel to the coast because, as the Member knows, some parts, say, near Tanjong Rhu, are very narrow and some parts near Bedok are much wider. We intend to keep the stretch of land from Tanjong Rhu to Bedok, between the road and the sea coast, completely green and under shade for the pleasure of the Member.

Mr Teong Eng Siong: (In Mandarin): I thank the Minister for his answer, although it is not very clear. I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

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

That the sum to be allocated for Head 1108 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 26.

Sir, this is an allocation of $900,000 for the improvement of Sembawang Road (10 m.s. to 13 m.s.) and Upper Thomson Road. As a result of this Sembawang Road Improvement, which is in my constituency, some shops will be affected by clearance. So it is a matter of grate concern to me. I would like ot ask the Minster three questions: (1) When will the improvement work commence, and when is it expected to be completed? (2) For those shopkeepers whoare affected, what kind of arrangements in their interest will be made? I hope the Minister concerned will consider the hardship and difficulties of those affected. The best help is to resettle these people before work on imprvement commences, so as to alleviate their hardship and losses.

6.00 p.m.

Mr Barker: Sir, plans for the widening fo Sembawang Road, from Mandai Road junction to Admiralty Road junction, ar being finalised. Ther project is expected to commence in the later part of this year and will entail the clearance and resettlement fo many shop houses. The work willfirst commenceon the following stretches of unencumbered land - 10 1/4 m.s. Sembawang from Chye Kay Village 11 3/4 m.s. to Jalan Ulu Sembawang 12 1/2 m.s.; and from Admiralty Gate 13 m.s. to Admiralty Road 14 m.s. According to the census taken by the Resettlement Department on the 22nd Juanuary, 1971, the number of affected cases are as follows: Shopkeeper 156 Residential squatters 159 Industries 16 Offices 1 Hawkers stalls 63 Stores 11 Other establishments 8 Vacant houses 7 --- Total 421 ===

It will be some time before they are all moved. But let me assure the Member that as little inconvenience and hard ship as possible will be caused to these people. They will be given sufficient notice and, wherever possible, offered alterative suitable accommodation togeter with adequate compensation.

Mr Teong Eng Siong: (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I thank the Minsiter for the undertaking to give all forms to alleviate their hardship. On this note, I beg leave to withdraw, Sir.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

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

That the sum be allocated for Head 1108 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 34.

Sir, I remember that som hon. Memebers of the House have pointed out that in some places where pedestrain overhad bridges and underpasses. Sir, I would like to point out to Members of this House that whilst Government apportions public funds for the construction of overhaead pedestrain bridges. This could mean that pedestrians, instead of making use of such bridges, simply dash across the roads.

I think I can best illustrate my point by citing the example of the overhead pedestrian bridge built near the unction of Tampines Road and Upper Serangoon Road, where there is a traffic light. There are several schools in the area, and I notice that, in the evenings oand sometimes in the mornings, very few students only seem to want to make use of the overhead crossing. The others will simply dash across to the middle of the road, stop short at the divider, and continue with their hazardous way of crossing the road. Sir, in spite of the safety-first campaigns having been mounted on a number of occasions, and for which our Minister of State for Education had the privilege to open, it still does not drive home the importanat point that Government constructs these overhead bridges and underpasses for the pedestrains to corss roads safely. Perhaps primary and secondary schools should be told to encourage their students to make use of such pedestrain crossings, because during peak hours traffic is very heavy and it is a danger to their safety if they do not make use of such crossing.

Sir, I wonder whether the Minister will look into the possiblility fo condstructiong some shops along these underpasses so that it will attarct pedestrains to make use of them. I have been to countries overseas where they have shops along subways and underpasses. I see that a lot of pedestrains when they wlak along these subways and underpasses, do look around. It will not be a dull moment. In the case of Singaproe, whilst it may be ture that some PWD engineers may say: "look, in Singapore the ground is a it soft and water-logged", I think Members will agree that there is a problem to be looked into. If we are to build unerpasses, it is up to the engineers and planners to think of ways and means to overcome such problems and ot merely taking the easy way out by saying, "All right, we build an overhead bridge. Whether or not the public makes use of it is not our concern. If they still want to run across the road instead of using the overhead crossing ro underpass, that is their fault." No, Sir, far from it. Because a lot of money has been spent on it, this matter has been brought up several times in this House.

Moreover, Sir, there has been talk about introducing legislation against jaywalking. Id do nto think that that is a wise move, because I personally believe in relentless persuaion, especially in our schools, because our adult population may not pick up that habit easily, as can be seen at bus stops where instead of lining up they would clamber to get into the bus. This habit has got to be inculcated in the young. I hope the Minister concerned will give it every consideraton.

Mr Barker: Sir, let me first assure the hon. Member for Punggol that the Ministry of National Development is not looking for an easy way out. At the request of many MPs, overhead bridges have been built. Having built the bridges, if pedestrains refue to use them, my Ministry cannot do anything except to pass legislation, which the hon. Member considers undesirable.

As for the constructin of underpasses, this is very expensive and can be justified only in very special circumstances, e.g. under Anderson Bridge leading to Queen Elizabeth Walk. Even if funds are available, the feasibility of building and underpass will depend on the location and a number of technincal factors. Beyong that, Sir, I have nothing further to add, except that in my view it is desirable to build more overhead bridges. In fact, we intend to do so because some of out raods are becoming impasable to pedestrains. For example, if you want to cross Bukit Timah Road or Dunearn Roads, you only hope is the pedestrain bridge. And there are many schoools along both roads which require overhead bridges. If overhead bridges are used, then the number of accidents along roads over which these bridges are built will be cut down.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: sir, if overhead bridges are used, I see the justification in expendign public funds. But I would like to clarify the disagreement of the Minister when I say that maybe his PWD engineers looked for the easy way out. The easy way out simply means this. If there is a request for an overhead pedestrain crossing, then some period of time must be given to evaluate as to the need to put up the overhead crossing. That is to say, when such a crossing is put up, pedestrains will definitely make use of them. But if pedestrians do not make use of them, there is nothing more anyone can do about it. However, I quite agree with what else the hon. Minister has said just now, and I do not wish to prolong the argument. On that note, Sir, may I beg leave to withdraw my amendment?

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

In the absence of Tuan Haji Mohd. Ariff bin Suradi, the following amendments, standing in his name, were not proceeded with-

(9) That the sum to be allocated for Head 1108 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (02) of subhead 38.

(10) That the sum to be allocated for Head 1108 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (06) of subhead 38.

Mr Ong Teng Cheong: Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 1108 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 49*. (* The same amendment also stood in the name of Mr J. F. Conceicao.)

Sir, I only wish to seek information from the Minister concerned regarding the Feasibility and Engineering Study for Central Area Expressway under this subhead for which a sum of $3 million has been allocated. Would the Minister be kind enough to inform the House as to who will be conducting the study, and how long will it take?

Sir, although the object of the Central Area Expressway is to relieve traffic congestion and to make the Central Area more easily accessible, the consequence may quite possibly adversely affect the urban environment and the economic use of space. With the implementation of this Expressway and improvement of other existing roads, more cars would be attracted and expected to enter the Central Area. Unless, of course, supplementary policies and measures are introduced simultaneously to effectively control the vehicle population in the Central Area.

I wonder if the Minister would also be kind enough to inform the House whether steps have been or will be taken soon to formulate policies and to introduce measures to discourage and control the use of private cars in certain congested parts of our city.

Mr Barker: Sir, may I first thank the Member for his suggestions. He has expressed some fears over which my Ministry is genuinely concerned. As for the Feasibility and Engineering Study for Central Area Expressway, this study will be conducted by a consulting firm, or consortium firms, specialising in traffic engineering, planning or engineering economics. The study will be in two phases. Phase I involves the updating of traffic projections to 1982 and 1992, preparation of economic evaluation of the expressway system, recommendation of alignments and interchange layouts, and comparison of alternative schemes. This phase would take about seven months to complete. Phase II is concerned with detailed designs, specifications and estimates, and will take a further nine months. The P.W.D, will offer a counterpart personnel in this phase.

6.15 p.m.

Sir, with or without the proposed expressway, there will be more cars on the road with the growth of our national economy. The Ministry of Finance has taken steps to increase the taxes on cars, but I doubt whether this will prevent more cars being bought and driven on our roads unless the tax is further raised. But I am not encouraging him to do this.

It is obvious that we have to do something about our transport and parking problems. The parking policy will, in fact, be reviewed when the recommendations of the Mass Rapid Transit Study, now being conducted by the Ministry of Communications, are finalised. Some of the findings of this Study will be used as data for the proposed Central Area Expressway Project.

As for the other suggestion that cars or even vehicles should not be allowed into certain parts of the city, we had tried a pilot scheme to ask owners of cars to park in Kallang. All they do is to park there at night for different purposes! However, the day will come, and perhaps it is not too far off, when we may have to stop traffic from going right to the heart of the city. But our people are so used to driving up to the office and driving up to a restaurant that this will be bound to annoy them.

If I may close with a reference :o the National Stadium. If 50,000 or 70,000 people go to the National Stadium for the opening of the SEAP Games, it is obvious that everyone cannot drive up there. It is also pretty obvious that the motor cars or buses in which they travel will have to be parked not immediately next to the Stadium but perhaps a little further away, in Beach Road or in the old People's Association ground. It is physically impossible for everyone to drive up in grand fashion and alight at the entrance to the National Stadium at Kallang.

Mr Ong Teng Cheong: Sir, I would like to thank the Minister for his very fine explanation. I beg leave to withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The sum of $39,282,400 for Head 1108 ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates.

The sum of $27,391,000 for Head 1108 ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.

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

Mr Barker: Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to report that the Committee of Supply has made further 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 Speaker: So be it.