MAIN AND DEVELOPMENT ESTIMATES OF SINGAPORE FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR 1ST APRIL, 1976 TO 31ST MARCH, 1977

Order read for resumed consideration in Committee of Supply [3rd Allotted Day].

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

3.00 p.m.

Head O (cont.) --

Resumption of Debate on Question (17th March, 1976).

"That the sum to be allocated for Head 0 be reduced by $10 in respect of item lal of subhead AAA 3020."-(Mr N. Govindasamy).

Question again proposed.

Mr Ho See Beng: Sir, I would like to make reference to the Housing Board's policy in regard to restrictions imposed on visitors using their car parks when calling on friends living in Housing Board flats.

On the one hand, the Government proudly announces that public housing provides accommodation for more than 40% of Singapore's population and has urged the people to develop a greater sense of neighbourliness not only in their own estates but also with those in the estates around them. On the other hand, the Housing Board appears to be determined to stultify every attempt at neighbourliness by imposing petty restrictions, such as the closing of car parks at 10 p.m, and even at 7 p.m, in some estates. This makes it difficult for residents to receive friends for any length of time in the evenings.

Sir, it is difficult to comprehend the rationale behind this restriction if the Housing Board is really sincere in their attempt to encourage neighbourliness and cohesiveness among the residents in the housing estates. I believe that in some housing estates visitors are allowed to use the Housing Board car parks until 11 p.m. If this is so, why is it not allowed in other HDB housing estates? This extension will at least allow friends to meet for a few hours after work. In fact, the Housing Board should permit visitors to utilise their car parks until midnight. I am sure that there can be no administrative problem in keeping the Housing Board car parks open till midnight.

Sir, I have suggested extension of use of the car parks until midnight because as Singapore becomes urbanised so also must the life-styles of Singaporeans change. Thirty years ago when we were less urbanised and less industrialised, life went on at a slower pace and most people retire early to bed. Living in flats and apartments and the tempo of life today, including television, have all contributed to encouraging or even compelling Singaporeans to sleep late. Because of longer working hours and transport problems, social calls to friends are usually possible only after 8 p.m., and if visitors to residents in Housing Board estates have to clear their cars out by 10 p.m, it leaves very little time indeed for them to socialise. We have not got a wonderful public transport system to encourage them to travel in public transport. They therefore have to travel in their own motor cars.

In addition, Sir, young couples living in Housing Board flats have been encouraged to invite their parents to visit them frequently and to help look after their children when they are out. But the Housing Board's car park rules make this practically impossible if grandparents who make the visit by car have to clear out by 10p.m. This 10 p.m-deadline has a very unsettling and unnerving effect on visitors because if, by any chance, they are delayed by a few minutes they may find their cars locked in or parking posts chained at the whims of the Housing Board officials. Moreover, they will also be subject to a heavy penalty.

Sir, it would appear that the officials of the Housing Board are insensitive to the requirements and wishes of the residents of the flats, although they have been administering the flats for more than a decade. May I, therefore, request the Housing Board to take a closer look at its rules and regulations and consult the residents through the residents' association or other organisations and work out more pragmatic schemes not only in respect of car parking but also in other matters. This will be a more democratic approach instead of introducing arbitrary rules.

One such arbitrary rule which puzzles me is why residents who are allotted car park lots are not allowed to park their cars for a few hours in an adjoining car park when vacant, if they have a reason to do so. Apparently the Housing Board's rule, for reasons best known to themselves, is that "you shall park your car in your given lot and nowhere else", even if there are vacant lots in adjoining car parks.

It seems to me, Mr Speaker, Sir, that the Housing Board is determined to forge a regimented society, a society that will obediently abide by their many arbitrary rules and regulations, and may not seek redress. This attitude of the Housing Board appears to stem from their monopoly in public housing. As the biggest landlord, they appear to be succumbing to the thirst for power by dictating the rules instead of arriving at mutually acceptable rules and regulations that will equally provide discipline necessary for the efficient management of housing estates.

I would also like to seek clarification from the Minister as to the reason for abolishing the half-hour parking in Housing Board estates at a rate of 20 cents and substituting it with a minimum fee of 40 cents in the hour. This new rate means that anybody who parks his car there even for a short while has to pay the minimum rate of 40 cents for a full hour. This appears to be an arbitrary decision without any justification whatsoever. It excites suspicion that the Housing Board merely wishes to increase its revenue. In most cases people stop by at these car parks for a few minutes only to speak to their friends or to have a quick meal at the restaurant, or to make some purchases at the supermarket there. So although they may be there only for 15 to 20 minutes, they now have to pay the minimum fee of 40 cents. In the past it was 20 cents for half an hour, and it is difficult to understand the reason for the increase.

If the Housing Board is really honest in its declared intention to encourage greater intermingling and interaction among the residents of the different Housing Board estates, these arbitrary rules do pose a serious problem because in the not too distant future more than half of Singapore's population will be living in Housing Board flats. And if the Housing Board continues to build artificial barriers to prevent the free interflow of residents in those estates

The Chairman: Mr Ho, you have taken more than 10 minutes.

Mr Ho See Beng: I am closing it, Sir, I was saying that the residents will soon be cut off from their friends and neighbours and remain isolated, living in solitude within the four walls of their little flat. I can only express the hope that this increase in parking fee from 20 cents to 40 cents is the result of an honest mistake on the part of the Board's officials and not a perverse desire to isolate the residents.

Mr J. F. Conceicao (Katong): Mr Speaker, Sir, much has already been said about the Housing and Development Board and my first thought was, perhaps, sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof.

However, there is one point I would like especially to make and that relates to the Tanjong Rhu housing estate, and I hope this will not be considered as a particular or special pleading. The Tanjong Rhu housing estate was constructed in 1962, quite soon after the HDB replaced the old Singapore Improvement Trust. The flats raised at Tanjong Rhu were, in fact, sometimes described as "emergency flats" aimed at making up for the backlog of people that had to be housed urgently at that time and at resettling displaced families. Quite a lot of fire victims from Geylang and Crawford were moved there.

Since that time the quality of HDB accommodation has improved tremendously. When I compare the Tanjong Rhu estate with the new estates like Marine Parade in the next door constituency - in fact, with your constituency of Joo Chiat, Mr Speaker, or with Ulu Pandan, or Bedok and soon - I am struck by the comparative shortage of amenities that we have in Tanjong Rhu. Tanjong Rhu estate may well be unique in the spartan considerations that went into its construction. On this basis I think consideration of priority ought to be given to this estate for whatever improvement that may be planned, and I think Tanjong Rhu estate deserves a special look in this direction.

For example, it could have a community hall of which some other estates have several. Could we have this early? Could the lay-out and appearance of the market/hawker centre be improved, and its potential for service to the community extended? Could additional car parking facilities be made available? Many of the tenants are living in extremely crowded circu mstances; perhaps if the Minister makes an examination of Tanjong Rhu estate, he might find the highest number of people with very large families living there. Could consideration be given as early as possible to rehousing those people in such circumstances?

I am very reluctant to want to receive special consideration, but I think the history and circumstances of Tanjong Rhu estate may well warrant some special attention.

In regard to the other points that have been raised, especially relations between Housing Board officials and the people living in housing estates -

Mr Ho See Beng: You have a swimming pool there.

Mr Conceicao: I will come to the swimming pool a little later.

I think every effort should be made to emphasise a spirit of cooperation and understanding of the problems of one side with the other. With the kind of idea that many people have about the Housing Board, it would be a pity indeed if it is thought of as a cow that gives good milk and then kicks the bucket over.

With regard to this red herring that has been raised, the swimming pool is not only meant for the people in my constituency but for everybody around there within an adequate radius - Mountbatten and J00 Chiat - and if the Member for Bras Basah wants to have a swim he is entitled to come over for a swim too.

3.15 p.m.

The Minister of State for National Development (Dr Tan Eng Liang): Let me first answer the question raised by the Member for Telok Blangah. Together with a few other Members, he has raised some observations on the need to improve the standard of workmanship in public housing. As a result of their observations, the Ministry of National Development issued a press statement on 21st February, 1976, explaining in great detail the causes of the poor workmanship. I have a copy of the statement here which could be handed to the Member at a later stage.

Mr N. Govindasamy (Telok Blangah): I have read it.

Dr Tan Eng Liang: I am glad the Member has read it. The second point which he raised is whether the Board could refund the proportion of the unused fee for a season parking licence taken by one of his constituents. The Board cannot make such a refund to a resident who has already been allocated a parking lot. This means that he had been successful in balloting for a parking lot and had thus deprived another person of that particular parking lot. The same principle applies to a person who pays road tax to the Registry of Vehicles. If he decides to sell his car, he cannot ask the ROV for a refund of tax for the unexpired period. It is between him and the purchaser. The same principle applies to a TV licence. But, to satisfy the Member, should the car owner deregister his car immediately, that means, he really takes it off the road, then the Board would allow a refund of the unexpired season parking charges, to keep in line with Government's policy of discouraging car ownership. In respect of this particular car. I have checked with the ROV this morning and I found that it has not been deregistered.

Another point raised by the Member is about the Housing Board being a stickler of principles in regard to the processing of plans for community centres. Let me reply by simply saying that whenever the People's Association decides to build a community centre in a Housing Board estate it forwards its plan to the Ministry of Finance for endorsement. In the meantime the Housing Board goes ahead with the processing of the plan. At this point it is the normal practice for the Housing Board to request the People's Association to pay for the piece of land as soon as it can. In fact, a six-month extension period is normally given. It should be borne in mind that whatever the Housing Board charges the People's Association, the price of the land is kept extremely low.

The next question raised was in regard to helping the tenants and the contractors. As he has correctly pointed out, contractors are licensed by the Housing Board. But if complaints about them are substantiated, then the Housing Board can do something; perhaps their licence could be terminated and their deposit of $5,000 forfeited. They can also be black-listed and debarred from doing any renovation work in any Housing Board estate. I think I have covered all the queries raised by the Member for Telok Blangah.

The Member for Jalan Kayu has raised a number of points. The first was about the provision of better maintenance services for residents of Housing Board flats. I think it is well understood that the Housing Board is continuously striving to improve the standard of maintenance and services in its housing estates. A good example is the introduction of the Essential Maintenance Service Unit and the Lift Emergency Unit which provide a round-the-clock service to attend to urgent calls for correction of any defective electrical installation or to attend to complaints of normal choking of sanitary pipes and fittings. The present charges for these services are well below actual cost and, in fact they have to be subsidised. To give some figures, the expected income from the collection of service charges is estimated to be $52.8 million against an expenditure of $58.4 million. My Minister has indicated yesterday that for the next financial year the Government will subsidise the Housing Board to the tune of $46 million. Part of this money will be used to subsidise the maintenance and services section.

The other point raised by him is on the Survey. It is only fair that I should g ye the actual interpretation of the Survey by those who wrote this particular article. It has been indicated that in 1968 a large percentage of the residents were from resettlement cases cleared from the slums in the Central area. Therefore, 75.2% of the people interviewed have indicated that it is obviously cleaner to live in housing estates compared with their previous environment. However, in 1973 there were fewer clearance cases and some of the residents had moved from the older housing estates to the new housing estates as a result of the splitting of families, etc. Therefore, only 49.2% of the people consider that their new environment is an improvement over the old housing estate environment. However, in the 1973 survey only 9.6% of the people consider that cleanliness in the Housing Board estates is inferior to their previous environment. Therefore, it cannot be interpreted that the cleanliness in the Housing Board estaies has deteriorated in the last few years. think cleanliness depends both upon the residents and the maintenance and service team of the HDB. If the residents do not adopt clean habits, no amount of maintenance by the HDB can really keep the estates spick and span.

Another point raised is the suggestion that perhaps a top civil servant should be appointed Chairman of the Housing and Development Board. The present system of appointing a part-time Chairman to the Housing and Development Board has proved to be extremely satisfactory. The intention of appointing a Chairman or members to sit on a statutory board is to reap the richness of the expertise of top executives in the private sector. Obviously, the intention of establishing a statutory board is to ensure that it has more flexibility and that the administration could function smoothly and efficiently and not be bogged down by too much red tape and bureaucracy, as in the case of a department of the Government, like the Land Office or the P\ND.

Another point on which the Member has expressed concern is in regard to the coordination and planning of new estates. It is not fair to compare the older estates with the newer estates. I can assure the Member that the very fact that Ang Mo Kio will be vastly different from, say, the old Alexandra Estate, must clearly indicate that the HDB has been receptive of ideas and observation from the Backbenchers and the public in improving both the design and social amenities in the new housing estates. I can assure the Member that this is so.

On his particular complaint about Toa Payoh Police Station, according to the Housing Board's record, the piece of land was reserved for a police station for the last three to five years. But somehow the programme of the Ministry of Home Affairs did not meet with this requirement.

Lastly, the Member touched on the public tender system. I can only refer again to my Minister's statement made in this House yesterday afternoon, when he said that the existing public tender system has proved to be satisfactory and there is really no' reason to change what has already been proven to be a good system. Moreover, a fixed price system does not ensure that consumer products will be cheaper.

I would like to assure the Member that there is a constant review of the administration and policy of the Housing Board in conjunction with the Ministry of National Development, with the main object of improving both the concept of public housing in terms of design and the administration of public housing in terms of running these housing estates.

The Member for Bras Basah has raised a number of points. First of all, let me tell him why there is a need to charge for use of the Housing Board car parks. The object of paid parking is merely to control car parking either in public housing estates or on the main roads. It also ensures that there is proper use made of the car parks. If there is no control of car parks, inconsiderate car owners can easily cause obstruction and create problems for other car owners. Therefore, a paid parking system will eradicate this problem. It will also prevent any encroachment by lorries and trailers and also stop junk-yard operators from dumping their vehicles in the car parks meant for residents of the housing estates.

The Member may be aware that the HDB has very recently (I think it was last week) introduced a pilot scheme whereby parking lots are reserved for visitors to park their vehicles in the HDB car parks after 11.00p.m. To give some details, visitors are required to pay $1 for a permit to park their vehicles from 11.00 p.m, at night to 7.00 am, the next morning. This scheme has been implemented as a pilot project and it is being carried out at Toa Payoh West, Toa Payoh Central, Stirling Road, Henderson and Buona Vista housing estates. If this scheme proves to be successful, the Board may extend it to other areas.

The Member has complained about the unreasonableness on the part of the car park attendants in not permitting visitors to housing estates to stop just to pick up a passenger, a friend, or a baggage. The Housing Board now issues pink tickets for such vehicles to enable the driver to park for a duration of five minutes without any charge.

He has also asked why has the minimum parking fee been increased from 20 cents per hour to 40 cents per hour, and why is there the need to restrict parking up to 10.00 p.m, or 11 .00 p.m, for visitors. The answer is that it is mainly due to the administrative problem of shift work. For example, we cannot change shifts at midnight. Members should grant us that little administrative ability. Owing to administrative difficulties there are certain ways to go about exercising restraints. To illustrate that this is an administrative decision, the charge in the minimum fee of 20 cents for half an hour parking is slowly being withdrawn from the public car parks under URA. There are administrative difficulties. Let me assure him that it is not an honest mistake. It is a deliberate and well-thought out administrative procedure.

3.30 p.m.

Lastly, let me answer the Member for Katong. He has sadly lamented on the old estate at Tanjong Rhu. It is a fact that the Tanjong Rhu housing estate was built under the first five-year building programme when the standard of public housing was obviously among the lowest. Because of numerous complaints and so on, attempts have been made to improve. Again, due to the restricted site and the lack of additional space around to expand, there is very little the HDB could do. But despite that, we will try our best to make some improvement to the hawker centre that the Member mentioned, but it could only be a minor improvement.

For example, we have sacrificed green areas in this estate to make way for more car parks. To compensate for this lack of facilities or social amenities in the old housing estates, not necessarily in the Member's constituency alone, the Board is now systematically studying the various housing estates to provide additional facilities, wherever possible, within each estate if land is available. Based on this particular policy, a swimming complex, as the Member has mentioned, has been built off Mountbatten Road, but correctly pointed out by him, it is meant not only for the residents of Tanjong Rhu but also for the residents in the Old Kallang Airport Estate.

Mr Conceicao: And also for the Member for Bras Basah!

Dr Tan Eng Liang: The Board is now building another swimming pool, south of MacPherson Estate, for the residents in MacPherson. Another swimming pool and sports complex will be built off Alexandra Road to serve the residents in the old housing estates in Bukit Ho Swee and Redhill. Another sports complex will also be built at the junction of Jalan Bukit Merah and Henderson Road to serve the residents of Telok Blangah New Town as well as Tiong Bahru and Henderson Hill Estates.

Mr N. Govindasamy: Sir, I am aware of the reply given by the Housing Board on the 26th February, which the Minister of State has referred to. The fact is that the Housing Board was preparing a reply to, perhaps. "my last outburst" as they call it in respect of shoddy Housing Board flats. If they had studied the speech I made last time, they would realise that I had pointed out all the problems that they now have. And if the Minister of State had only listened to me yesterday, he would also know of my appreciation of the pressure the Housing Board is undergoing.

We know how many more flats it has to build. What I am asking for is that the Housing Board should be more vigilant in its supervision of the work of contractors. In its reply of the 26th February, the Board said, "More than 90% of the house owners did the floors." In other words, it is saying that since everybody is redoing the floors, why make the floors suitable? They are redoing the floors because they are bad. It is not because they want to do it.

Sir, on the other point about the refund of car park charges, I do nbt know what the Minister meant by ``immediate deregistration" because immediate deregistration could be effected within a month, a week or even the next day. I am not too sure whether this particular car has been deregistered or not, but I know that it has been taken away from Telok Blangah estate. This is a special case. In the history of Singapore, when has the Government imposed a tax and then withdrew it? In the case of the latest increase in road taxes, there was a withdrawal and, arising out of this, the man decided to deregister his car.

Sir, I was very happy to hear that the Housing and Development Board officers will look into the complaints of residents about contractors who do not honocr their obligations in respect of renovation work. I only hope that the Minister will pass the word down to his officers. What I know is that if any complaint is made to the Housing Board, they say, "Look, this is a private arrangement between you and the contractor." This has been so thus far. As from today, if the HDB officers look into it, I think the point has been made.

Sir, the other matter that I am quite happy about is that from now onwards perhaps the People's Association can make application to the Building Control Division for approval of the construction of community centres six months before getting the money from the Minister for Finance who is not here nnw. Sometimes the Minister for Finance takes more than six months to approve payment in respect of the land. I said that if the Housing and Development Board as landowner can sign the plans of the community centres even before receiving payment, then I think that community centres can be built at a faster pace than they are being built now.

The Chairman: Mr N. Govindasamy, since you are happy, would you like to withdraw your amendment?

Mr N. Govindasamy: No, Sir, I think other Members would like to speak.

Mr Hwang Soo Jin (Jalan Kayu): Mr Speaker, Sir, first of all, I would like to thank the Minister of State for his explanation. At the outset, I think it is necessary for me to place on record that when I suggested that the Government should have more direct control and to that extent we should consider appointing senior Government servants to take control, it was not my intention to discredit the contribution made by past chairmen. I think the present Hon. Minister for National Development and Communications was largely responsible for breaking the back of the very acute shortage of housing. I believe he was decorated for this and I would like to place that on record. It was not the intention to discredit past achievements.

Sir, coming to the other points. The Minister of State quoted some rather impressive figures to try and convince us that the housing costs are reasonable because they are being subsidised. First of all, why are they subsidised? Could it be that it is not being run efficiently? The very substantial figures quoted' by him show a turnover of $1 10 million per annum, that is, $52 million revenue and $58 million expenditure making a total turnover of $110 million, do support my point that much greater emphasis should be laid on the maintenance aspect and not just simply to development. That was my point.

Coming to another point, I did express some doubts about how reliable statistics are as they depend on the assumptions one makes. But the Minister of State has made some assumptions now, and I am beginning to question his assumptions here. He stated that by 1973 only 49.2% of the people felt that the change had not been for the better, and it was on account of the fact that they had moved from older estates to new estates. I would have thought .that there was the constant emphasis on qualitative improvements. Surely second generation flats are better than first generation flats. So by his own figures, he is suggesting that the second generation flats are not better than the first generation flats. It is worse, in fact!

On the question of coordination, there is a little bit of passing the buck as regards Toa Payoh Police Station. How about Jalan Kayu? It is a new estate. I talked about the traffic situation and the impact on the traffic situation, but that obviously was overlooked. Jalan Kayu housing estate is a new estate and not an old estate.

Dr Tan Eng Liang: Sir, I would like to assure the Hon. Member for Telok Blangah as far as his request for an assurance on those two points are concerned. But to be fair to the press release issued by the Ministry of National Development - I have it right in front of me - he mentioned that there was no substantive suggestions given to his observation. Let me simply quote something positive:

'In cooperation with the Public Utilities Board, the sanitary pipings are now tested before the flats are ballotted and any leakage is made good before handing over the flats to the residents.'

In fact, there is another paragraph right at the bottom which also answers his query. As I said, if he is satisfied generally, we will stop at that.

As regards the deregistration of that particular vehicle, the simple reason why I know about it is that the Member had written to me about this particular car, a Volkswagen, which came up during his meet-the-people session. All I am saying is that if he can produce the deregistration certificate from the ROV, I can assure him that the parking fee will be immediately refunded for whatever period that has not expired.

To come back to the Member for Jalan Kayu, all I can say is that our public housing is at the moment the cheapest form of housing accommodation available in Singapore. I think it is because of the subsidy that land is assessed at way below the normal market price, and I do not intend to query or quarrel over the figures because they were supplied to me.

As regards the qualitative aspect, I think that where the statistics and the survey are concerned, it merely points to cleanliness. That means the maintenance of the estate as a whole is comparatively cleaner. I do not think .- I may be wrong - that the qualitative aspect, improvements of social amenities and so on, is taken into consideration. But I stand to be corrected.

Mr N. Govindasamy: Sir, in view of the assurance given by the Minister of State, I beg leave to withdraw.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Mr Lai Tha Chai (Henderson): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 0 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead AAA 3020*. (* The same amendment also stood in the names of Dr Chiang Hai Ding and Mr Chin Harn Tong.)

Sir, I would just like to add some points to what many Members have already brought up.

Mr Speaker, Sir, in recent years, in its efforts to meet the increasing demand for housing for our citizens, the HDB has to a great extent eased the grave shortage of housing in our Republic. And in the course of doing so, it has helped to shape the new skyline of our island state. These glorious achievements of the HDB have won for our country international acclaim in many foreign countries.

However, although my humble comments here in this House will not in any way cause any weight to fall on the performance of the HDB, I would like to draw the attention of the authorities concerned to certain problems which are the end-result of the rapid resettlement of our citizens in HDB flats. This mass resettlement has created a series of new socio-economic problems in our society which, if allowed to go on unchecked, may produce adverse repercussions on our way of life.

The first problem is the oft-repeated complaint about quarrels between neighbours over trivialities such as noise nuisances or of wash-drippings from the upper floors, and insecurity of lifts. I believe all this is due to a lack of self-discipline and civic-mindedness of the residents.

Secondly, there is no suitable open area for large social gatherings such as a wedding function or a religious ceremony. At the moment such functions are being organised in HDB car parks, for which high charges have to be paid. Alternatively, temporary wooden structures are erected at the roadside, but these often obstruct the free flow of traffic and cause congestion. Still other alternatives are available, but they too cause great inconvenience, as mentioned by the Member for Bras Basah just now.

3.45 p.m.

Thirdly. HDB shop tenants are facing a lot of hardship, and so do the many hawker stallholders in HDB market centres.

All these problems which I have packed at random need to be thoroughly studied in relation to other problems, and effective solutions must be found.

Here, if I may venture to offer two humble suggestions to the authorities for serious consideration, I believe they could, in the least, contribute to an improved relationship between residents who live cheek by jowl of one another.

Firstly, to establish a Special Duties Unit, headed by a Public Relations Officer, to promote good neighbourliness and to handle any problems such as those I have mentioned. This Unit should also be entrusted with a certain amount of autonomous authority to dispel the hidden fear among officials of retaliation or victimisation, hence rectifying the cause of malpractice.

Secondly, we know that Citizens Consultative Committees and Management Committees of Community Centres have rendered invaluable service to the Housing and Development Board to deal with the problems of residents which occur every now and then. However, members of CCC and CCMC, who are not appointed by the HDB and therefore do not have direct relations with the HDB, have nothing to do with them. They feel that they can only render service to the HDB if they are so requested. In the circumstances, therefore, I support the view, just mentioned by the Member for Bras Basah, that now is the right time to consider the feasibility of setting up Residents' Representatives Committee under the supervision of the Special Duties Unit in the various constituencies which have got HDB flats so as to assist the HDB in tackling problems of residents. The HDB was chaired by our capable Minister in the early 1 96Os and we are fortunate that today it is still under the charge of the same Minister, who by this time would be more knowledgeable and more experienced. His contribution to the task of nation-building is immeasurable. And together with the Senior Minister of State who himself is a man of reputable talent and calibre, there is no doubt at all that these socio-economic problems in these housing estates will be solved with ease and that the HDB will continue to further develop and achieve greater success. But, Sir, I would like to know whether the Minister and his Minister of State share my views on the problems in Housing Board estates.

Mr Chin Harn Tong (Aljunied): Mr Speaker, Sir, in touring my constituency on several occasions I visited a few blocks of one-room HDB flats, and I must say that I was rather taken aback by what I have seen. To be fair to the HDB, the blocks of flats I visited are the old types. On each floor two rows of flats share a common corridor.

The first unpleasant impression I received on setting foot on each floor is that of entering into a dark tunnel. It may well be that each corridor would be well-lit at night. But as it was day-time and the lights were switched off, it took a bit of time for me and my friends, having stepped in from the sun, to adjust ourselves to the gloomy condition of the corridor.

Previously the corridor was not so dark because each flat had an opening near the top of the wall lining the corridor. Because of such openings the corridor was quite bright. Moreover, the opening allows air to circulate more freely in each flat and serves to ventilate the corridor.

I was given to understand that these apertures were bricked-up to contain any possible outbreak of fire in any of the one-room flats sharing the common corridor. If it is so, I would like to know how frequent does fire break out in such one-room flats as to justify the bricking-up of such openings. My concern is that the flats were originally designed with such openings to facilitate the ventilation of the flats and the corridor as well as to brighten up the corridor during daytime. As it is, the existing environmental conditions of the occupants of these one-room flats, which must have been the greatest density of occupants per room in Singapore, are miserable enough without being further worsened by the adoption of such measures as to the sealing up of ventilation apertures. I hope that the HDB can look into the matter and find an alternate means of containing any possible outbreak of fire without resorting to the drastic expedience of bricking-up ventilation openings.

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Education (Mr Ahmad Mattar): Sir, if I may be permitted to join the debate at this juncture. The subject raised by the Member for Aljunied is very close to my heart because there are 19 one-room blocks in Leng Kee constituency whose ventilation openings have just been closed up by the HDB. I was told by the HDB Area Office in my constituency that apart from fire hazards there are two other reasons which prompted HDB to implement this. The first is to prevent mischievous elements from throwing things into the flat. The second is to keep away peeping Toms.

I agree to all the reasons put forward, but one must also realise that the moment these ventilation openings are closed up, then whatever little cross-ventilation that might have existed before would automatically be lost. I did suggest to the Board towards the end of last year whether it was possible to consider replacing the glass sheet which was used to close the opening above the door to each flat by a set of glass louvres. Sir, all of us know that if the Iouvres are adjusted to a correct angle of slope they will certainly make it more difficult for those mischievous elements to throw things inside. As far as peeping Toms are concerned, if they still insist on peeping, then with a proper adjustment of the Iouvres, what they could see will be only the ceiling and not what is going on at the floor level. I hope the Minister of State will care to comment on the cost-effectiveness of the proposal I have suggested. If he says that the glass louvres are not to be fitted because of fire hazards, perhaps he would care to comment on why Iouvres are more fire-prone than glass sheets which they have now introduced.

Mr Ivan Baptist: Sir, I was elated to hear the Minister mention yesterday that priority will be given to a transfer from a one-room flat to a three-room flat, so that there will be better environment, more space, and so on and so forth. I do believe that the constituents of many of the Members in this House are also amply pleased. We have a Government policy that gives priority to a two-child family, i.e, father, mother and two children.

Mr Lim Kim San rose -

The Chairman: Will you give way to the Minister. Mr Baptist?

Mr Ivan Baptist resumed his seat.

Mr Lim Kim San: May I correct the Member? I did not say that priority will be given to application for a transfer. I said that consideration will be given.

Mr Ivan Baptist: Sir, I stand corrected. A very intelligent and Hon. Minister most certainly must be right. I must be suffering from, what is termed by the Ministry of Labour, noise-induced deafness.

The Chairman: Mr Baptist, flattery will not help. Will you please carry on with what you are going to say?

Mr Ivan Baptist: Yes. Sir. As I was saying earlier, the Government policy is that a two-child family will be considered more favourably than one that has more. I am just wondering, all things being equal, whether the Hon. Minister will give preference to "Dad, mum and two children" or "Dad, mum and eight children" when applications for transfer are made?

Mr Yeo Choo Kok (Delta): Sir, I have just one question to ask. I want to find out from the Minister whether the HDB will allow its tenants to make payment of PUB bills at the Board's Area offices. At present private commercial banks accept payment of PUB bills from the people, including HDB tenants. If this can be done, why can't the Board allow the HDB Area offices to accept payment of PUB bills by its tenants?

Mr Ng Yeow Chong (Mountbatten): Sir, I merely wish to make a small point. I understand, and I stand to be corrected, that junior employees of the Housing and Development Board such as maintenance inspectors and the hawker liaison officers, etc, are not given any training at all prior to their postings. These young employees of the Board are raw and inexperienced. They are simply recruited and posted straightaway to their jobs.

Sir, this state of affairs is rather undesirable because the nature of their work brings them into contact with the public frequently. My suggestion for the consideration of the Minister is that we should get these young officers to undergo an induction course so as to provide them with some understanding of human relationship. There are lots of complaints about the way these young officers go about their duties. They are inconsiderate, rude and at times aggressive. Something must be done, otherwise the good image of the Government may be ruined by these young officers. Sir, you may agree that it is almost a threat that the HDB is fast becoming a government within the government. Unless something is done then, as I say, the image may be ruined. So the best solution is to let them go through an induction course. If this is done, they will be more polite and we can still maintain the good image that we have created. I hope these matters will be given serious consideration.

4.00 p.m.

Dr Ong Leong Boon (Kim Seng): Mr Speaker, Sir, I would just like to make two points. One concerns the question of one-room HDB flats. I have asked in this Chamber before as to the possibility of the Housing Board considering, at some time in the future, pulling down these units completely and then rebuild new ones in their place. I was given the assurance that it would consider so. Till then, it would appear to me that the people living in these one-room flats will continue to live in these dark tunnels minus ventilation, and hopefully minus peeping Toms and other nuisances.

Sir, it is indeed appalling that in our visits to the one-room flats we do frequently come across something like eight, 10, 15 or more people live in them. I can certainly name one instance where there were about 23 people crowding in a one-room HDB flat. This is a fact. They were living on different layers of structure put up within that one room. This is certainly an exceptional case. I have quoted this case in order to draw the attention of the Housing Board that conditions in these one-room flats can be appalling and if these people have asked for a transfer, they should be given priority.

This brings me to the second point which has been raised by two of my colleagues, and that is, priority for a transfer - whether transfer to a bigger unit should be given to a family of four, i.e, father, mother and two children, or to one of 10, i.e. parents plus eight children. I understand that it is our Government's policy to encourage small family units but we must recognise the fact that the family planning policy was instituted only of late. Therefore, people whose established families are large cannot be blamed for actions for which in many instances they are not entirely to be blamed or are responsible for.

In spite of this argument, let me say this. From our own experience with our constituents through the meet-the-people sessions, we have come across numerous instances where small family units have applied for transfer. Although they were following Government's policy, yet they were told by officers of the Housing and Development Board that "because your family unit is too small, seven and less, you do not qualify for transfer." I am very confused and I should certainly appreciate the Minister giving us some logical explanation.

Dr Tan Eng Liang: Mr Speaker, Sir, on behalf of my Minister, I want to thank the Hon. Member for Henderson for his very kind compliments. But the answer to most of his queries will be "No".

The Member has correctly pointed out that the complaints of noise nuisance, the washdrippings and vandalism of lifts and so on are definitely an indication of a lack of civic responsibility on the part of residents. In that direction there is very little the administration of the HDB can do.

However, it is a valid observation that there is this lack of a big community hall for functions, like weddings and so on, to be carried out. But one must bear in mind that while we are improving the facilities in the newer estates, as I have indicated earlier, there must be priorities. Everybody is asking for facilities, such as sports fields and playing fields. It is now suggested that we should have a community hall for social activities. With a little bit of initiative, perhaps renting a hall at the community centre or some school hall could make-do for the sort of function that the Member has in mind.

I think there is need for a little clarification here. When my Minister mentioned that there was 90% success, he was referring to shops on the public tender system, and there was no implication of such success with hawker centres in housing estates.

To answer the Member's query on the setting up of a special unit to promote social activities. I have already stated earlier on that the answer is "no", The reason is this. Members may be aware that the Ministry of Home Affairs is already looking into a proposal for the setting up of a Block Committee comprising national servicemen and volunteers from amongst the members of the public, including members of the CCCs and MCs if they are available, to assist in the prevention of crime, vandalism and other anti-social activities in Housing Board estates. It is therefore premature for the Housing Board to consider the proposal for another special unit. I would suggest that we wait for the performance of this particular unit which is being set up by the Ministry of Home Affairs, and if the need should arise we can always reconsider his request.

The Member for Aljunied is a bit disappointed with the dark corridors in the housing estate in his constituency. As I have earlier pointed out, the Tanjong Rhu housing estate and the housing estate in his constituency belong to the older generation of one-room flats. I think the only way to convince Hon. Members is that, if one goes to the one-room improved type of flats at Telok Blangah, one can definitely see an improvement in the design, lighting, and so on. The main reason has been enunciated by both the Member for Aljunied and my colleague, the Member for Leng Kee.

I have no actual cost-effectiveness of glass louvres versus simple glass versus weld-mesh openings. But I think it can be said that Iouvres are more expensive If he is interested. I will give him a reading tomorrow on cost-effectiveness. I think the several incidents of fire that had occurred in these one-room flats have prompted the HDB to initiate this action. While the HDB is aware that substituting concrete blocks for these weld-meshed openings reduces ventilation, it is a necessary precaution against spread of fire in these congested one-room flats.

I do not think we should await a serious occurrence of fire for this to be tested. But to satisfy Members, we have done an informal inquiry into the situation after a few Members of Parliament have complained to the officers of the Area Offices. We have got a survey which shows that approximately 70% of the openings, that means the previous weld-meshed openings. completely closed. In addition, some 25% to 30% were partially closed prior to this decision to close them up.

Let me give some figures. In Toa Payoh East, it was found that 70% or these openings were closed. In Henderson, 70% were totally closed and 25% were partially closed. In Balestier. 70% were completely closed and 30% partially closed, which means a 100% coverage by the survey. I think the question of privacy and the nuisance of having things thrown into one's flat is uppermost in the minds of the residents as far as they are concerned. But from the HDB's point of view, what is most important is that these openings are definitely a fire hazard.

However, to double check the reliability of these statistics, the HDB will select a block of one-room flats due to be completed soon and provide larger openings along the walls fronting the access corridor to test the ventilation, and to observe its effectiveness during the next 12 to 18 months.

The Member for Mountbatten has correctly pointed out the need of a good public image for our public housing programme. I think we share his sentiments and, in fact, this is precisely what we are trying to do. I would like to inform him that the Board does conduct periodically training courses for all grades of officers when they first join the Board or some time after joining the Board. Such courses include HDB orientation programme, and for those involved in finance there are courses on financial administration, management report writing for executives, training within industry, and also courses on job relations, job methods, job instruction, courtesy to the public, handling of public requests and how to serve the public.

Like all other organisations. HDB officers are instructed to be courteous and polite to members of the public. But being such a large organisation with nearly 10,000 employees, it is therefore inevitable that complaints are made against some employees from time to time. But in all cases of complaints, investigations are thoroughly carried out. I would like to assure all Hon. Members that if they have any specific complaint about any particular officer in any particular area, please let me know and we will investigate into it.

Lastly, to answer the contradiction implied by the Member for Potong Pasir and the Member for Kim Seng on the two-child family concept versus a large family of seven to 10 children. Let me first merely say that if the observation of the Member for Kim Seng is that there are 23 occupants in one room, then I think probably most of them are illegal immigrants. As far as administrative implementation of transfer is concerned, where I am directly responsible as Chairman of the Allocations Committee, discretions are exercised between, say, a seven-member family versus a family of father, mother and two children. In all cases of transfer special consideration is given to the human aspect. For example, in a family of seven where one member of the family is unfortunately not in a good condition, then I think we will have no hesitation in giving preference to that particular family. On the other hand, for example, if a family of father, mother and two children wants to apply for a five-room flat, when we feel that they should be quite contented with a two-room flat, then unless there is urgent reason for somebody else to have it, we have no hesitation in giving preference to this family.

There is also a transfer registration involved. In other words, we have to take into consideration the length of time he has been on the waiting list. Let me assure Hon. Members that while there is contradiction, seemingly so, the administration of the implementation of transfer preferences is done after taking all factors into consideration.

4.15 p.m.

Finally, to answer the Member for Kim Seng. In the case of Tiong Bahru, if I am not mistaken, the one-room emergency flats have been knocked down and in their place one-room improved flats have been erected. But here again, the priority of providing more new HDB flats is uppermost in our minds, Therefore, priorities come into play. But let me assure him that wherever there is an urgent need, there will be no hesitation in knocking down the very old one-room emergency units with common corridors, and common facilities and building the new improved one-room units,

Mr Ivan Baptist: Mr Speaker, Sir, am Ito understand that the Minister of State is willing to go against Government's policy to consider preference.

The Chairman: Did he say that?

Mr Ivan Baptist: He did say that he would give consideration. It was all cloudy. He has made it very difficult for me to try and understand him. I am just wondering whether he could just come to the point and state whether or not he is willing to go against Government's policy in administrating it.

Mr Yeo Choo Kok: Sir, the Minister of State has not answered my question on the payment of PUB bills at the Area Offices.

Dr Tan Eng Liang: Let me first answer the Member for Delta. The answer is no. The reason is very obvious. In most housing estates we do provide facilities like the Post Office Savings Bank. In some of the estates, like Queenstown, there are also sub-branches of banks. Since they are providing all the facilities, theme is no justification in further loading the Area Office by granting that request.

I hope the Member for Potong Pasir could at least appreciate the difficulties of the administrators in implementing certain policies. The Member for Kim Seng has already indicated that the policy of the two-child family concept was enunciated sometime in 1972 or 1973. Frankly, in those cases where there are 10 children in a family, it is totally not applicable. I have indicated that a good administrator uses his discretion and decides on the merits of each case. There is no such thing as saying straightaway that there is a policy or it can be so streamlined that we can say effectively that this is the policy. If the Member can appreciate the administrative difficulties, then he will understand what I have been trying to say, rather than to imply that we are woolly and cloudy.

Mr Ivan Baptist: Mr Speaker, Sir, it has been excellently answered. Thank you.

The Chairman: May I indicate to Members that we have only about a couple of hours left for this particular Head of Expenditure.

Mr Sia Khoon Seong (Moulmein): Mr Speaker, Sir,I crave your indulgence because judging from the comments made by many Members seeking attention from the Housing Board for better amenities and the manner in which the Minister of State has answered on the priorities for the different claims. I thought I might as well take this opportunity, in seriousness, to stake the claims on behalf of my residents who are aspiring to become Housing Board flat tenants.

They have got the right simply because they are living in the slums. They were the victims of a fire some two years ago. I do not know whether it was their misfortune that the fire was quickly put out by the Fire Brigade, with the result that they were allowed to remain in their old houses. Only those people whose huts were gutted were rehoused in Housing Board flats. I was not joking when I said it was a misfortune for them. On the day when the fire occurred, the victims came to the community centre to get immediate relief. No life was lost. In fact, there was a little look of, shall I say, happiness among them because they were going to be housed in beautiful Housing Board flats nearby. However, a constituent in that area came to me showing more frustration than the others who were directly affected by the fire because his hut was not gutted. He asked me in a very frLstrated manner why he was not registered by the Social Welfare team for the allocation of a flat,

Mr Ho See Beng: Why did he not burn the house?

Mr Sia Khoon Seong: That happened two years ago. The land had already been acquired sometime earlier. I am waiting patiently for the Housing Board to resettle these people. The land is there for the HDB to put up a nice, small housing estate in Ah Hood Road which is in my constituency. I think my patience is running out. Apart from the tact that, as a Member of Parliament. I would like to see a better environment in my constituency. I think the residents there are also getting a little impatient. They have come to me very regularly in my meet-the-people sessions seeking my assistance to be rehoused because of the appalling conditions under which they live at present. Some of my fellow Members here have complained about the conditions of the one-room flats and so on. If they were to come to my constituency and take a look at the slum conditiors under which my constituents live, they would realise that their constituents are living in a paradise.

Let me say in seriousness that two years is already long enough. They should be given top priority because, as somebody has suggested, there might be a temptation for someone from among the constituents to make a bonfire and as a result everybody will be able to move out. But unfortunately this is against the law.

Dr Tan Eng Liang: Mr Speaker, Sir, the Housing and Development Board is sympathetic towards the situation at Moulmein. In fact, the houses may be put up faster if there was an "act of God". Anyway, a few houses in that particular area have been acquired by the Government. I can assure him that the people there would be given alternative accommodation.

The reason for the long delay is that many areas in Singapore are under clearance for development, for example, the Changi Airport project and other project and other projects in the Central Area. But to me it is a reasonable delay because there are other residents in other areas who have waited for more than two years. Unfortunately, that particular area mentioned is just outside the Central Area, and we have not reached the stage of requiring it for priority development. Let me assure the Member that the HDB will look into this matter, and if we can expedite matters we will do so.

Mr Lai Tha Chai: Mr Speaker, Sir, in view of the reply by the Minister of State. I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Mr N. Govindasamy: Mr Speaker, Sir,I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head O be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead AAA 4001*. (* The same amendment also stood in the name of Mr Hwang Soo Jin.)

Resettlement is very unpleasant, and the task of resettlement is also unpleasant. Nobody likes to be resettled from where they have been staying for many, many years, with the exception of perhaps the slum dwellers in Moulmein. Few officers like to be Resettlement Officers or even to work in the Resettlement Department. By and large, the people with whom these Resettlement Officers have to deal, are antagonistic and feel that they have been aggrieved. It is, therefore, very essential that the officers working in this department are properly orientated and have the right attitude to do this unpleasant work. In their dealings with people who are affected by resettlement, they must be tactful and polite.

When resettlement of a locality is decided, the officers of the Department will first go to the area to make a survey and take a census of the residents. The affected residents are concerned about their future and make enquiries from the officers conducting the survey. If, at this initial stage, the officers explain the reasons and the plans that the Department has for resettling the residents, then. not only will their job be made easier, but it will also reduce friction that invariably arises. In many instances, even the Member of Parliament for the constituency in which a census is being taken for resettlement purposes is not aware until a hue and cry is made by the residents. Officers from this Department have been known to tell the affected residents that they are going to be chased out in three months' time. When asked where they were going to be resettled, they were told. "Find out from the office" or "Go and see your MP" when the MP is completely in the dark.

Sir, to do this unpleasant task is not easy. It can be made easier if the officers are, as I said earlier, properly orientated towards their work and the Member of Parliament is taken into confidence and informed of the nature of resettlement and the need for such resettlement before conducting a survey.

It is also desirable that the period between taking a census and the resettlement is not dragged on and on.

Perhaps it is here that the Member for Moulmein has made his point. Two years after the census has been taken, they are still waiting to be moved out.

Mr Hwang Soo Jin: Mr Speaker, Sir, during the debate last year. I recall bringing to the attention of the House the fact that MPs were not kept informed of imminent resettlement affecting their particular constituencies. This is a point which has been made by the Member for Telok Blangah. Whilst the then Minister did promise that all MP5 affected would in future be informed in advance, I regret to report that the situation has not really improved. It is difficult for me to draw any conclusion beyond saying that words spoken by Hon. Ministers in this House are perhaps not taken that seriously by the civil servants! Thanks, however, to the present Senior Minister of State who has crossed over from this side of the House fairly recently and is perhaps, therefore, better able to appreciate the plights of Backbenchers, and I hope he will remain that way; some of my difficulties in the past year have been made a little easier as a result of assistance extended by him from time to time. However, Sir, from a procedural point of view I do not think it is such a good idea that Minister or Minister of State should be unduly burdened with work resulting from the day to day administrative inadequacy or inefficiency. These anomalies should more properly be resolved by introducing suitable procedures, Admittedly. Sir, the Resettlement Department has done well in moving people, otherwise we would not have half of Singapore staying in HDB flats today. But I do wonder, judging by the way they go about chasing out people, as mentioned by the Member for Telok Blangah, whether they have not become insensitive to human feelings or sufferings or perhaps they are taking for granted extremely good cooperation we have from the people in this particular regard.

4.30 p.m.

Sir, Jalan Kayu is one constituency which is fortunately or unfortunately catching up with progress, which means the presence of resettlement officers during the last 12 months. For several months now, at my regular meet-the-people sessions, an increasing number of cases of resettlement problems have been referred to me. In the majority of such cases it is quite clear to me that inadequate explanations or guidance have been given to these people, particularly on the question of their eligibility for alternative accommodation. The slightest ambiguity or inconsistency found on the identity cards of affected family members immediately disqualify them from alternative housing. In the majority of such cases if the Department concerned can be bothered to spend a little time it should not be too difficult for them to find out the correct answer as to whether the people are eligible or not eligible. The only advice the Department appears to be able to give in all such cases is that the families concerned must produce documentary proof, without indicating what type of documents will be considered as acceptable proof. In desperation many people spent time and money to take out statutory declarations, only to be rejected as soon as they are submitted.

In resettlement there is such thing as cutoff dates, which is the date decided by the Resettlement Department to determine a person's eligibility for alternative housing. If he moves into the affected area prior to the cut-off date, he will be eligible for alternative housing; on the other hand, if he moves into the area after the cut-off date, he will not be given alternative housing. How and when this date is fixed for a particular affected area often puzzles me. And not only the public, but even MPs are not kept informed of the cut-off date in advance. This has resulted in a number of instances of people unknowingly moving into an affected area and, after paying tea money and incurring expenses to move into their new homes, only to find that they have to start house-hunting again.

The apparent insensitivities of the Department are best illustrated by the fact that some of the affected families were asked to move out even during the Chinese New Year period. Until a complaint was lodged by me and very kindly taken up by the Senior Minister of State, the Department was in the habit of summoning affected families to appear in court presumably to psychologically intimidate them into moving. Sir, this sort of strong-arm tactic is, to my mind, quite unnecessary as by now our citizens have come to accept the fact that if Singapore is to go on progressing they must cooperate. For Jalan Kayu. I can assure you, Sir, out of several hundreds of affected families there was only one isolated instance of an old lady who came to tell me that she did not wish to move but subsequently, I gather. better sense prevailed and she moved out like everybody else. Sir, as pointed out by the Member for Telok Blangah earlier, it is a traumatic experience for people who have lived in a particular place all their lives to wake up one morning to find that they have to move out. When they are suffering the mental anguish and making all the necessary preparations to move to a new and strange environment, the very least the Department can do is to be sympathetic and not to further aggravate their difficulties. From what I have seen and heard of the work of the Resettlement Department, I am not satisfied that they have taken this into consideration.

Turning now. Sir, to the question of exgratia compensation for licensees of State lands, there are also many inexplicable and what appear to me to be unfair practices. Indeed many examples were quoted by Hon. Members yesterday. For instance, people are often asked to vacate without being told the exact quantum of compensation. For those involved in farming, according to the announced policy of Government, they will receive compensation at a higher rate. However, the assessment appears to be done somewhat arbitrarily. Once the Department has decided that a person is not a so-called bona fide farmer, there are no means by which the person may appeal. I did take up a few cases on behalf of my constituents, but sad to say, the answer in all cases was in the negative. Until yesterday when the Hon. Minister and Senior Minister of State enlightened the House, everybody was in the dark as to the definition of a "bona fide farmer". Consequently. Sir, there have been no guidelines to work on for those dissatisfied parties intending to appeal. Now we are told a bona fide farmer is one who keeps not less than 3.000 head of poultry or 100 pigs. Sir, from the point of considering the eligibility for alternative farm land, the criteria adopted may be acceptable but I do not think the same set of criteria should be applied to compensation. There are many small timers who keep less than 3,000 head of poultry or 100 pigs but they are nevertheless genuine farmers fully dependent on farming as a livelihood. There are many more who may be partially dependent but without the income from farming to supplement their family earnings, their livelihood can become precarious.

I feel strongly, Sir, from the point of compensation that a separate set of criteria should be worked out. The extent of dependence rather than the size of operation should be a more equitable basis for awarding compensation. Is it not possible to have a sliding scale of compensation so that persons partially dependent will nevertheless receive compensation at the enhanced rate proportionate to the percentage of their dependence on farming?

The Chairman: Mr Hwang, your time is up.

Mr Hwang Soo Jin: Sir, I am about to finish. From the number of examples cited by me, Sir, I am sure you will agree that these are not problems that cannot be resolved by establishing proper procedures and guidelines and, above all, a rather more sympathetic and human approach on the part of those involved in resettlement work.

Mr Teong Eng Siong (Sembawang): (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, on this amendment. I have two matters to raise for the consideration of the Senior Minister of State. I have received written complaints from those who are affected by resettlement that they are not given alternative shop premises, and therefore they are not able to make a living because they depend on their business for a living. Now that they are asked to quit, without given alternative shop premises, how are they going to make a living?

There are also complaints that when they were asked to leave, the officials from the Resettlement Department told them that they would get alternative shop premises very soon. However, today, after a lapse of one or two years, they are still without a shop and so they are suffering unnecessary hardship. If there is some truth in their allegation. I feel that the resettlement officers have been less than honest in their dealings with the people affected by resettlement.

The other matter is about the widening of a road in Sembawang area. I would like the Minister to tell us how many people are affected by this scheme, and what will the Government do to help those affected by the road widening project? As an MP for that area, I am naturally concerned with their problems. I would like the Minister to direct his officers to solve any such problem in a proper way so that the people affected by this project can be given assistance so that their hardship can be alleviated.

Dr Tan Eng Liang: Sir, let me give a brief picture of the Resettlement Department so that Hon. Members can understand why resettlement officers who go round resettling people or taking census really do not know themselves what the actual programme of resettlement is. The Resettlement Department carries out resettlement of families in affected areas at the request of the various Government Ministries or statutory bodies. The Jurong Town Corporation can request the Resettlement Department to clear certain areas. Similarly, the URA, the HDB itself, the Ministry of Communications, etc, No reason is given except that that particular area has been gazetted for acquisition as the land is required for a public purpose. This means that the resettlement officers themselves do not know what kind of development is going to take place in that particular area. So do not blame them if they honestly say that they really do not know. If any Hon. Member should feel strongly that they have to know what the area will be used for, then the best thing is for him to find out which particular Ministry or statutory body is acquiring that area and inquire directly from them.

The staff of the Resettlement Department, as indicated by the Hon. Member, faces tremendous problems. Nevertheless, they are told to be patient and courteous towards the public at all times. We have heard in the House that it takes both sides to exercise good relationship. Some people who receive resettlement notices adopt a resentful and even hostile attitude towards resettlement officers, and that is admitted. But I believe, by and large, working in such a stressing situation resettlement officers generally have performed their duties reasonably well. But nevertheless I can assure all Hon. Members here that if they have complaints of rudeness or are unhappy over certain activities of these officers, then do let us know so that an investigation can be carried out.

The Member for Telok Blangah queried about the need to conduct a census survey, His suggestion that a census survey on resettlement cases be conducted only when alternative accommodation is available is not practical. Census survey of resettlement squatters has to commence in advance because the magnitude of the problem has first to be ascertained and provision made for alternative accommodation. Furthermore, sufficient time is required to examine the squatters' eligibility, to process the improvement on their land, to compute the quantum of compensation payable and to comply with all the legal formalities such as serving notices to quit, etc,

4.45 p.m.

The Member for Jalan Kayu has I think brought up a number of points. First, let me deal directly with his query on the cut-off date. The main object of a cut-off date is obviously to prevent unscrupulous owrers of buildings or structures on State land or HDB land due for clearance from selling them to unsuspecting persons at perhaps exorbitant prices. This also prevents some members of the public from cashing in for priority of HDB flats by paying out tea money to owners of structures os~ these acquired sites. The Board has actually issued several press statements informing the general public of what these rulings are. The date of Gazette notification is taken as the cut-off date for eligibility in respect of private land compulsorily acquired by Government. In respect of State or HDB land, the cut-off date is the first day of taking of census by the Resettlement Department.

I have explained just now why it is not always possible for the Resettlement Department to inform Members of Parliament in advance. As I said, sometimes resettlement officers themselves do not know the nature of development. Sometimes it is necessary to keep it confidential where the position of the land is uncertain. I hope Members can appreciate the point. However, the Department has made it a rule to inform the Member of Parliament of the respective constituency in which the relevant site is located of any impending resettlement action before the field staff are sent out to conduct a census survey. I think those rural Members of Parliament can vouch that they are informed and that we do send officers to help during the period of difficulty.

The last change of residential address on the identity card before the cut-off date will be taken as conclusive evidence of the displaced person's eligibility for resettlement benefits. However, in borderline cases the Resettlement Department has accepted other official documents such as TOL, income tax returns, birth or death certificate, vaccination or inoculation certificate, radio or TV licence, driving licence, or any other evidence to suggest physical occupation of the site before the cut-off date. However, arising from such complaints of Members, the Resettlement Department is now drawing up a list of what we call "official documents" which can be accepted by the Resettlement Department as evidence of residence. In future this list will be attached to the clearance notices served on all displaced persons.

The next query the Member mentioned is about the ex-gratia compensation payable to people affected by the various land acquisition or development projects. The rates were last reviewed in 1975 and the revised rates were made known to the general public through the mass media. At this juncture it is worthwhile to clear the misunderstanding over the definition of bona fide farmers yesterday. This arose from a query by the Member for Punggol when he talked about land allocation and the criterion of 100 pigs or 3.000 head of poultry. To clear, once and for all, this implication that there are no criteria and that the Primary Production Department arbitrarily decides who is a bona fide farmer and who is not. I shall give Members all the criteria used so that there will not be any future queries as to what is this and what is that, if they can put up with me.

Before I go into that, let me say that the bona fide status of a displaced farmer is determined by the staff of the Resettlement Department on certain guidelines provided by the PPD. As the current resettlement policy provides enhanced resettlement benefits for displaced farmers, including higher rates of ex-gratia payment of compensation, payment of a cash grant or a free three-room flat in lieu of land allocation, all cases have to be referred to the Department of Primary Production for examination and verification. There is a panel chaired by the Director of Primary Production to review all these cases. In fact, if any particular squatter or settler is unhappy over any decision taken, he can appeal to this Panel, which comes directly under the charge of the Director of PPD. If the Panel should rule against the appeal of this squatter or settler, he can take it one step further by appealing to the Ministry of National Development, which has the final authority over the PPD. The Panel has in the past reexamined many cases of appeal and I shall later give Members very brief statistics to show that many cases were settled in favour of the appellant.

First of all, I think the term "bona fide farmer" is a misnomer. After today's debate, it is our intention to tell the PPD to stop using the term "bona fide farmer". This term "bona fide farmer" has been used to describe a situation for enhanced compensation as resettlement benefits. The present definition of a bona fide farmer means anybody or any farmer who is engaged in any farming activity to the extent of any of the following "criteria" (since there was implication that there were no criteria):

Livestock farming:

Pigs 25 heads, poultry 1,000 tieads.

Vegetable farming:

In the case of leafy vegetables, if you have an area of 1,800 sq. ft.

A cultivated area of 1,800 sq. ft. of water cress and 3,600 sq. ft. of other leafy vegetables.

Fruit farming:

20 durian trees or 40 rambutan trees, or an equivalent number of similar type of fruit trees.

Orchid growing:

Orchids and flowers cultivated over an area of 10,000 sq. ft.

Fish farming:

1� acres of pond fish-breeding. Aquarium fish 7,200 sq. ft. tank area. This means the surface area of the fish tank not the area of the farmer's particular estate. Aquarium plants 5,000 sq. ft. of cultivated area.

There are a number of queries on borderline cases. For instance, if a farmer has only 20 pigs, we do not straightaway eliminate his eligibility. We will try and re-define his case based on a combination of factors. If he has only 20 pigs and 800 head of poultry, we might define him as a poultry farmer. Or if he has a combination of any of these factors, say. 10 durian trees, 10 pigs and 500 head of poultry, the flexibility of this Resettlement Panel may rule in his favour. All the factors are spelt out in this list here. In other words, the assessment of criteria for a bona fide farmer is actually fairly generous. These criteria have been effectively implemented from 1971/72 and it has not been made public because this has all along been an internal administrative procedure.

To come back to what was discussed yesterday on the recommendation of alternative land allocation for resettlement cases. This is the point when we began to talk about the bona fide of farmers, and we said that a farmer must have 100 pigs or 3,000 head of poultry. In fact, he might be given half an acre of land if he farms to this extent. So it goes down the line: if he has 1,051 pigs and 15,001 head of poultry, he will be given two acres of land. There is a table of figures here that gives the whole range, Therefore, the consideration of all these cases of whether an ordinary bcna fide farmer belongs to this category which is eligible for enhanced compensation or to another category which is eligible for land allocation, is processed by the Resettlement Panel chaired by the Director of Primary Production. I have indicated to Members that they can appeal to this Panel and if they are still not happy they can go straight to the Ministry of National Development.

Let me give Members some idea of how this compensation is paid. This had been discussed yesterday. The ex-gratia compensation awarded to these farming cases ("farming case" means farmers as defined by the Department). Those who find their own accommodation will be paid exgratia compensation for their house and other improvements at the enhanced rate. "Enhanced rate" means the new rate revised on 1st April, 1975. In addition to this compensation, he is given a cash grant of $11,800 in lieu of alternative accommodation or, if he so prefers, a three-room improved flat in a New Town is given for free. For those recommended for land allocation, that means those who qualify for land allocation, ex-gratia compensation will be paid for his house and other improvements but at the lesser rate. "Lesser rate" means the rate before the revision.

Let me give an example of what I mean by "lesser rate" and "enhanced rate". There is a difference of approximately 30% to 50%, Compensation for a house and a kitchen with concrete floor and drain, at the enhanced rate will be $7.50 per sq, ft. At the ordinary rate, that means he is entitled to land allocation but is still paid a compensation, the compensation will be at the lower rate of $4.50 per sq, ft. On top of this, those squatters who were on the land when the census was taken will be entitled to some compensation based on the ordinary rate, and they will be given priority as far as rental and purchase of HDB flats are concerned. In fact, families affected by clearance are given priority for rehousing in HDB flats with a rental rebate of $15 per month for a period of three years. If they purchase a HDB flat the downpayment is reduced to $100.

The other form of alternative accommodation given for those affected will be shophouses. In this respect my Minister has indicated the rising rental formula which means that during the first year the tenant pays 50% of what the commercial value is and it goes up in subsequent years to the end of the fifth year, that is, on the sixth year, the tenant pays the full rate.

I hope all this has helped to clarify the doubt as to whether or not one is or is not a bona fide farmer. The best is to find out whether one is a farmer or not. If one qualifies under all the definitions that I have given Members, then one is a farmer. If one is a farmer then one is entitled to choose the type of compensation: land allocation or monetary compensation. But whichever one chooses, in addition to land allocation, one gets a monetary compensation based on either the revised higher rate or the ordinary lower rate. To give some figures, this Resettlement Panel has since 1971 made the following decisions.

5.00 p.m.

In 1974, 18% or 49 cases of farmers were allocated land. 142 cases or 52% of farmers were not allocated land, and only 29.7% did not qualify as farming cases. The total number of cases for 1974 is 272 to make it 100%. In 1975, 21% of the farmers were allocated land. 49.5% of the farmers were not allocated land, and there were 29.6% of non-farmers. If you add up, the total number of farmers in 1974 and 1975 comes within the region of almost 80%. So it is not true to say that the Primary Production Department uses its whims and fancies to decide on cases. There are proper procedures and these are being followed and, in fact, there are proper channels of assessment. I would like to assure Members from the rural areas that if they want more information on this I could supply them.

Mr Hwang Soo Jin: Sir, may I be permitted to press the point about those who are partially dependent. As I mentioned, the scale of operation is perhaps not as important as the degree of dependence. A farmer may be rearing 10 pigs and 50 chickens or 500 chickens, the fact is that 60% to 70% of the family's income is still dependent on farming. But under the Ministry's set of criteria, he would not get the enhanced rate, and these are the people who are going to suffer more when they are resettled.

Mr Ho Kah Leong (Jurong): (In Mandarin): Sir, the Minister of State has not answered the question why the farmers who are affected by clearance should be summoned to court. Just now the Member for Jalan Kayu also queried this point. This seems to be a kind of threat or a psychological intimidation. Can we abolish such procedures?

Mr Ng Kah Ting (Punggol): Sir, if some of this information had been given to the rural MPs whose constituencies have been affected, then it would have saved them a lot of trouble coming to this House to discuss at great length the definition of "bona fide farmer".

The Minister of State mentioned that the enhanced rate of ex gratia compensation is very generous. I would like to ask him whether a farming family, moving into a HDB flat, would be able to maintain and continue to subsist with the enhanced rate of compensation. In other words, I believe that the question of the endangerment to their livelihood has not been taken into account.

Mr Lee Yiok Seng (Bukit Panjang): (In Mandarin): Sir, there has been a lot of controversy over this question of whether a tarmer is bona fide or not bona fide. My view is that the mistake lies with the Primary Production Department. The PPD issues a farming certificate to every farmer. Later, when resettlement is carried out, the PPD will say to those affected farmers, "You are a bona fide farmer" or "You are not a bona fide farmer".

I would like the Minister to consider whether there could be some restriction on the issue of such a farming certificate. If they are not bona fide farmers, then the Department should not issue them with farming certificates. Then when they produce these certificates on resettlement we should follow the procedure laid down by the PPD and pay them compensation accordingly. Only in this way can we solve the problem. Otherwise, one department under the Ministry of National Development will issue a licence to a person to carry on his farming activities only to be denied, on resettlement, by another department under the same Ministry when a demand for compensation is lodged, that he is not a bona fide farmer. To the farmers, this appears to be a deliberate attempt by the Government to extract money from them by manipulating the situation. Therefore, this problem should merit serious attention.

Dr Tan Eng hang: Sir, let me first answer the Member for Bukit Panjang. A little history of the licensing of farmers will help him to understand the situation. In the earlier days, or even today, when a person applies for a farming licence there is no insistence that he must have a minimum number of pigs or poultry. That means, we take it at face value. When he comes to tell me that he wants to be a farmer, I am in no position to say whether he is a small-time farmer or a big-time farmer. One only assumes that he is engaged in farming activities. He may have a farming licence but he does no farming activity at all. That is his privilege. We issue him with a farming licence on the presumption that he is going into farming. Many of them have probably folded up, but they still call themselves farmers. So there is no correlation between possession of a farming licence and a bona fide farmer that I have defined just now.

But I would like to take his suggestion that perhaps what we should do is before issuing a licence to any person we say. "To get this farming licence. you must have a minimum number of so many pigs and so many head of poultry". I will get the Primary Production Department to look into this.

To answer the query from the Member for Jurong on notices to quit, I hope it is appreciated that this is definitely not done to threaten the farmers. I have explained very quickly just now to the Member for Jalan Kayu that it is a legal requirement.

Mr Hwang Soo Jin: Sir, I think the Member for Jurong was referring to the summons to appear in court.

Dr Tan Eng Liang: Sir, let me first explain why there is a need to issue this notice. We have initiated an arrangement whereby if a person does not want to go to court, he signs a warranty to say that he is giving up the piece of land. This is being implemented, and I think the Member for Jalan Kayu can vouch that this is being done. If there is any difficulty in that direction, I will be very happy to help out.

To come back to the Members for Jalan Kayu and Punggol. I have indicated that there is a set of criteria -. 25 pigs and 1.000 head of poultry, and so on. I have also indicated that in borderline cases a combination of factors is used to help define the position of a particular farmer. But again, like anything else, when discretions are exercised, the computation must be within reason. For example, a person may depend on two pigs and 10 layers to supplement his income by selling the eggs to his neighbours, but the Primary Production Department cannot take that into consideration. So I am trying to impress upon Members that there are limits to exercising discretion.

I have already given Members the other two extremes. If a person keeps 23 pigs and some chickens, we may say that he is a farmer. But a person who keeps four pigs and 20 chickens, we say that that is incidental; it is not a farming activity. But we do not penalise him. We still give him compensation and priority for a three-room flat. My Minister has also indicated yesterday that two rural centres will be set up in the midst of intensive pig farming activi:ies. If a person is deprived of a livelihood, he can always get a job because it is a fact that labour for farming is extremely hard to get.

I think it is only fair that I answer the Member for Sembawang who has queried some activities of resettlement in Sembawang. The shopkeepers affected by the widening of Sembawang Road will be offered shop premises in Ang Mo Kio New Town, which are expected to be completed by about the middle of this year. The Housing Board will also build a shopping centre at Sembawang Road. 19th Km., for the relocation of some of these affected shopkeepers. This shopping centre is expected to be ready in the second quarter of 1977 and will comprise 40 shops and five eating houses.

His third question is: how many shops are affected? The answer is: 41 shops are currently affected by the widening of Sembawang Road, stretching from Sembawang Hill Circus to Jalan Sembawang Kechil. In the Sembawang Road widening scheme, of the 333 cases affected, 37 families have been offered flats at Ang Mo Kio and Toa Payoh New Towns and another 23 families will be balloting for flats at Ang Mo Kio at the end of this month.

Lastly, the Member for Sembawang asked whether the Resettlement Department will give priority for allocation of HDB accommodation to squatters affected by clearance. If at the time of census the squatters were there. I have indicated just now that they will be offered alternative accommodation.

Mr N. Govindasamy: Sir, one short query in respect of resettlement. We have gone from resettlement to farming, to road widening and so on. Sir, I appreciate that there should be a cut-off date in respect of census of resettlement cases. Keeping it a secret before the cut-off date is understandable so as to prevent the movement of people and so on. But what is the objection of publicising the cut-off date after it has passed?

Dr Tan Eng Liang: Sir, I have indicated that Members of Parliament are being informed of the cut-off date. I have also indicated just now the cut-off dates in respect of two situations. There is no reason why M Ps could not be informed of the cut-off date. After all, it is not confidential.

Mr N. Govindasamy: Sir, I have a heavy resettlement problem in Telok Blangah and I was never informed of the cut-off date. However, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The Chairman: I think it is a good time to take the Suspension now.

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

Mr Speaker: Order. I suspend the Sitting and shall take the Chair again at 5.45 p.m.

Sitting accordingly suspended at 5.14 p.m. until 5.45 p.m. Sitting resumed at 5.45 p.m.

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

Debate in Committee of Supply resumed.

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

Head O - (cont.) --

Mr Conceicao: Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head 0 be reduced by $10 in respect of item lal of subhead BBA 2190.

Sir, I originally wanted to touch on the work of the committee set up to coordinate the laying down of utilities along the roads. But that matter has already been raised in the discussion on the Minister's Head of Expenditure. All the same, we might remember that last year during the Budget sitting the Minister for National Development did mention that he was shocked to learn of the fact that about 80% of our roads would be dug up during the financial year, that is, the financial year that is just coming to an end. Under such circumstances, obviously the question of coordination just does not seem feasible. However, we might express the hope now that when this large-scale development is over, that is, the laying of utilities on such a large scale is completed, the committee will once more be in a position to coordinate road digging to lay down public utilities.

On another point, there is no doubt that looking over the Estimates for the past five or six years, we find that an enormous amount of money and effort are being spent on the maintenance and extension of our road network in Singapore. In fact, when we look at the detailed statement of the estimated and actual expenditures, we might rightfully conclude that the Roads Section is getting on with the job of using funds allocated for this general purpose. At the same time, it is possible that, looking at the Establishment position, one may ask whether there is such a shortage of staff, especially at the technical level, as to affect the smooth accomplishment of road maintenance and development plans.

There are a few possible indicators that may suggest one or two problems. First, having to travel for some reason along Mandai Road quite frequently, I notice that the roadwork there has taken a very long time to proceed. In fact, for a spell the metal laid down at the road side was overgrown with grass and shrubbery. There may be similar instances of delay in respect of other road repair or development projects.

Secondly, with regard to road surfaces, one notices the different shades of mixture, texture and consistency of the mix laid on for the surfacing or resurfacing. This gives the impression that the standards in respect of the quality of road surfacing are not consistent. It is possible that supervision is not as effective as it should be, resulting in the contractors getting away with shoddy work and other irregularities of this kind.

Thirdly, if I may just refer to a development project to illustrate my point. When examining the Pan-Island Express Way scheme between Thomson Road and Jalan Anak Bukit, one might gather the impression that work could have been concentrated on certain segments and if these segments are completed, then they could be used and the effects of such development felt and enjoyed immediately. For example, the alternative routes thus provided could result in improved traffic conditions and greater convenience to the public. But instead one gathers the impression of scattered work being carried out at different points of the Thomson Road/Jalan Anak Bukit project resulting in effort being diffused and the effects not concentrated. This may point to problems of organisation in respect of roadwork and road maintenance. I would appreciate the Minister's response to these comments.

Dr Tan Eng Liang: Mr Speaker, SIr, the Public Works Department does suffer from a shortage of technical staff. The Minister for Finance has indicated in his Budget Statement that there is an excessive usage of technical staff in certain Government departments. If the Member could persuade the Minister for Finance, we may perhaps be able to get the required staff.

With regard to the Member's question about the Pan-Island Express Way, let me assure him that, as far as the organisation of roadworks is concerned, a project is first thoroughly examined before it is implemented, and there is a purpose in tackling each segment of the roadworks separately. I can give him that assurance. The completed stretch of the roadwork from Adam Road to Jalan Anak Bukit is the only segment of the Pan-Island Express Way which is not open to traffic. This particular stretch is being constructed in three phases. The stretch completed in Phase I is, to use the technical term, Chainage 335 metres from Adam Road to Chainage 3,350 metres. adjacent to the Singapore Turf Club. The construction works under Phases II and III are now in progress. These two slip roads connecting Adam Road to the Pan-Island Express Way are under construction and they are expected to be completed by the end of April 1976. In order to open to traffic the segment of the road constructed under Phase I, the only connection to Dunearn Road would be through Hillcrest Road which would not be appropriate as this would give rise to a great deal of traffic through a very quiet residential area. Phase II covers a stretch of road from the Singapore Turf Club to Jalan Anak Bukit and the road work is due for completion in August 1976. The whole stretch of the Pan-Island Express Way would, therefore, be open to traffic in August 1976.

He has also asked why there is so much delay in the completion of some projects, for example, the one in Mandai Road. There are numerous factors affecting the early completion of road projects. They could generally be summarised as follows. Land acquisition is one of the problems. Then there is the problem of clearing the squatters, the laying of new utility services and the resiting of existing services. Finally, as has been correctly observed, there are certain contractors who do give poor performance and, therefore, progress has been slow. In the case of Mandai Road, the slow progress is due mainly to the difficulty in its construction work. To alleviate flooding, the new road has to be constructed at a higher level than the existing one. The new road also overlaps part of the old road. The other factor is the heavy traffic especially during the morning and evening peak hours. The contracted date for completion is supposed to be 15th April, 1976. But owing to the above reasons it would be delayed by a month. Completion is expected in May 1976.

Let me briefly reply to his query with regard to the road surfaces and the implication that work is perhaps not up to standard. Resurfacing of roads is normally done every five or six years. Whenever there is an additional surface laid, there are different degrees of settlement. I do not wish to get involved in too much technical detail. I would merely say that once a road is dug up for laying certain services, the surface is affected by subsequent settlement of the soil back-fill. That means, as the road is filled, there are different degrees of settlement and this gives rise to the different colours. The settlement may be fresh or fresh bitumen may have been mixed with the older soil, and so on. These factors are fairly technical in nature. Sometimes, owing to settlement problems there will be unevenness in road surfaces. But normally, given time they will be rectified. Once the earth below the surface is allowed to settle, the PWD will resurface the road. That means it will keep on filling until the surface comes up to the original level again. What I am trying to say is that this is not due to poor supervision or poor workmanship, but rather the nature of the technical requirement in constructing roads.

Mr Conceicao: Sir, I am very satisfied with the answer. I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

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

That the sum to be allocated for Head 0 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead AAA 8201*. (* The same amendment also stood in the names of Messrs L. P. Rodrigo, Teong Eng Siong, Lee Yiok Seng, Ho Kah Leong and Ch'ng Jit Koon.)

Sir, the loan given by the Government to the Housing and Development Board for FY 76 is $74 million more than the previous financial year. I believe that with this increased allocation the HDB will be able to build more flats and more speedily this year. The residents in Kampong Ubi are affected by resettlement and they are experiencing endless problems of living in an environment with broken pipes, flooding, mosquitoes, etc. Various difficulties are being confronted by them as a result of the development now in progress in Kampong Ubi I hope the Ministry of National Development would give serious attention to this constituency so that flats could be made available to them as early as possible. When I say that the flats should be made available immediately. I do not mean that the flats should be accepted as completed if they are still unsatisfactorily done, as has been pointed out by many Members in this House earlier. I hope priority can be given to this matter so that the construction project in Kampong Kembangan can be expedited.

6.00 p.m.

Mr L. P. Rodrigo (Serangoon Gardens): Mr Speaker, Sir, as has been pointed out by the Member for Kampong Kembangan, there is provision under this subhead to spend a huge sum of money in the year ahead to build flats for the people. I think there is a wide recognition and appreciation of the efforts of the HDB, despite the grumblings of the Member for Telok Blangah, and if this appreciation is not voiced, I can assure the Minister that it is there in the people.

I would like to take this opportunity to express some fears that I have as to the future of our people in the HDB flats in addition to the pertinent points that have been raised by the Member for Ulu Pandan. Our people. Sir, in future will have no alternative but to get slotted into HDB flats. They will have to convert these houses into homes, and the thought of the future with hundreds of thousands of our people living in such flats can be nightmarish if what happens eventually is a potential tumultuous restlessness in the people living in these flats. This will happen if these flats are not homes.

So apart from the defects in construction, I think the paramount consideration is how the Board can assist the people in turning these flats into real homes where there can be a way of life and contentment. Pressures apply to families living in these homes, very centrifugal in nature, disintegrating the family, pressures upon children which require them to leave their homes pressures upon parents which require them to be absent from the home and, in fact, unwittingly the Board has developed a situation which assists in the disintegration of the family, Sir. The Board sets up good housing estates and, at the same time, good hawker centres. What is developing in these homes by way of disintegrating the family is a habit of parents not coming together in meals. What is happening is that parents are settling their lunch or dinner problem by distributing 50 cents. 80 cents or a dollar each to the children in the family, who immediately disperse to their favourite hawker in the hawker centre. There results immediately a disintegration of the family whence there could have been an opportunity for the whole family unit to cohere in a function of the day. This is happening extensively.

If one ponders the extent to which this can go and the extent of the disintegration of the family unit in the years to come unless something is done, I think it is disturbing. One cannot require the Board directly to be involved in trying to turn flats into homes because this is basically the problem of the occupants. If there is, in the thinking of the Board, an effort that can assist this development - frankly speaking. Sir, I have not studied as to how to make a constructive suggestion along these lines - I think it is going to do us a lot of good.

The second point that I wish to raise actually concerns community centres in the housing estates. I raise this point because I feel it is necessary for the concept or the idea to get accepted by the Board. I quite understand that in regard to building community centres in housing estates, the Board liaise very closely with the People's Association in this regard. I am thinking, Sir, of what may not be a perceptible loss in our populace as our families move into the Housing Board flats from the terrace, semi detached or kampong house. Something is lost and it is this. In the terrace, semidetached or kampong house, the youngsters in the family have got the opportunity to experiment, to tinker, to do carpentry, to engage in mechanical pursuits, either as a hobby or otherwise, in the garden, in the backyard or in the space around the house. It is this tinkering, this experimentation, this doing things which develop a creative and innovative potential in the youngsters who become innovative and creative adults and workers of the future. When there is this loss of opportunity to our populace by moving into HDB flats where these things cannot be done or undertaken, there is loss of this potential.

Therefore, I think if, as a result of liaison between the Board and the People's Association, there can be accepted the concept of incorporating in the community centres in the housing estates work-rooms with work-benches for youngsters in the estate to pursue hobbies or to do things. I think this would retrieve to some extent the kind of loss that we are undergoing. It is the fashion of the People's Association to advise the Board what facilities to incorporate in the community centres, usually it is basketball court or facilities for table tennis and meetings. But I do not think that this concept has been accepted yet or has been discussed by the Board in setting up community centres. I intend to raise this again when the People's Association comes up for discussion under the Head. Ministry of Culture. But I am bringing it up at this point so that the idea or the concept can be recognised by the Board.

The Chairman: Dr Tan, I think it would be a good idea for you to make some reply now, otherwise I will have to guillotine you off.

Dr Tan Eng Liang: Thank you, Sir. Let me first take the suggestions made by the Member for Serangoon Gardens. As regards his suggestion whether the HDB has any objection to incorporate some form of workshop or work space in the community centres, the H DB has no objection to this provision for whatever mec hanical activities he has in mind, provided they do not generate noise or cause any other environmental problems in the housing estates. But, as he has correctly pointed out, I do not know whether the People's Association will agree to incorporate these activities in their community centres and it will be up to the People's Association board to decide.

As to his other general observation on the HDB making homes more homely, administratively, on our own, we are trying to provide that by giving better houses, better finishes and perhaps better designed housing estates incorporating better social and recreational amenities. In fact, my Minister has reminded me that we have produced this magazine called Home which gives an indication of the sort of activities which the HDB is attempting to provide.

Sir, let me quickly switch over to the Hon. Member for Kampong Kembangan. The budget provided for the HDB for FY 76 is mainly to be used for the construction of three-room and four-room new generation flats and five-room improved flats. These flats will have better finishing compared to the old ones and they will have glazed wall tiles, mosaic floor tiles, pedestal squat pans and so on.

As regards his query on Kampong Kembangan, I am sorry I do not know what is the progress as far as this particular project is concerned. But his observation on some maintenance problems in regard to mosquito breeding, unsatisfactory environment, and so on and so forth, will be brought to the attention of the particular Area Office concerned, and perhaps I would be able to let him know of the situation at a later date.

Haji Mohd. Ariff: (In Malay): Mr Speaker, Sir, could the Minister of State give an assurance that the development of flats in Kampong Kembangan near Kampong Ubi could be expedited in view of the difficulties faced by my constituents?

Dr Tan Eng Liang: Sir, I am really in no position to give the Member an answer now, because I really do not know the details. But I will be happy to supply him with the information tomorrow morning if he wants to. when I can hand him a note.

Haji Mohd. Ariff: (In Malay): Sir, in view of the Minister of State's explanation, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The following amendments stood on the Order Paper Supplement: Mr Teong Eng Siong: (12) That the sum to be allocated for Head O be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead AAA 8301. Mr P Govindaswamy: (13) That the sum to be allocated for Head O be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead BAA 8105.

The Chairman: There is half a minute left. Mr Teong, amendment (12).

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

Mr P. Govindaswamy: I am not moving. Sir.

The time allotted for Head 0 having expired, the following amendments were not proceeded with - Mr N. Govindasamy: (14) That the sum to be allocated for Head O be reduced by $10 in respect of item (a) (iii) of subhead BBA 8102. Mr Yeo Toon Chia: (15) That the sum to be allocated for Head O be reduced by $10 in respect of item (f) of subhead BBA 8115. Mr Ho Kah Leong: (16) That the sum to be allocated for Head O be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead DAA 8101. (17) That the sum to he allocated for Head O be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead DEA 8101. Mr N. Govindasamy: (18) That the total sum to be allocated for Head O in respect of the Development Estimates be reduced by $100. The sum of $139,400,160 for Head O ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. The sum of $1,100,446,000 for Head O ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.

Head P --

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

That the sum to be allocated for Head P be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead AAA 1003*. (* The same amendment also stood in the names of Mr Ch'ng Jit Koon and Dr Ong Leong Boon.)

Sir, sometime ago I was told that I had torn the SBS to pieces! This year I do not intend to tear the SBS to pieces. In fact, I wish to commend it for having done something about its transport system, and I am sure that members of the public will agree with me in saying that improvements have been made,

However, there is still room for further improvement. Some services are still irregular, buses seem to reach the bus stops in threes or fours at the same time. Time-keepers should regulate the services more efficiently. No doubt conductors and drivers are generally polite and disciplined. That is commendable. But I am afraid to say there are still some black sheep existing and because of these black sheep, whatever the SBS tries to implement is sometimes negated. Cleanliness of buses has also to be looked into.

Next, I wish to mention the unnecessary delays caused by buses which go to their terminus or bus depots for refuelling. Very often, at these refuelling depots there is a long queue of buses waiting. Sometimes it takes as long as 1 5 to 20 minutes before a particular bus at one end of the queue is refuelled. Is it possible for the SBS to organise the refuelling of buses in such a way that not too much inconvenience is caused to the bus commuters, who may be fighting against time to arrive at their destinations?

6.15 p.m.

Sir, there was speculation in the local press that bus fares are expected to be increased from a minimum of 20 cents to a flat rate of 30 cents and 50 cents One of the primary purposes of amalgamation of bus companies in 1970 was to reduce cost In the past we had numerous bus companies The first amalgamation resulted in reducing the number of bus companies to four, and a further amalgamation resulted in only one single bus company, the SBS It is rather strange that with amalgamation we saw the disappearance of the 5-cent fare and then the 10-cent fare, and it looks as if we would very soon see the disappearance of the 20 cent fare. This is rather surprising. I hope the Minister will see that this does not take place, because the people are already grumbling about the recent ro,3d tax increases, and now even the fare for the cheapest form of transport is also to be raised, on the excuse of increased over-head cost.

Now, don't tell me that SBS is not making a profit. But perhaps profit is not the motive for the SBS either expanding or putting in additional capital for which it has to charge higher fares. Is it fair to charge higher fares if additional capital is required for the renewal of buses? Naturally, a certain amount of loss is inevitable but this loss can be recovered very quickly by careful and proper planning If the SBS is perfect, we do not have to supplement its service with Scheme El buses In fact, the Scheme B buses which were supposed to be a temporary affair seems to become a permanent picture on Singapore roads. I wonder how much longer we have to depend on these Scheme B buses for an efficient bus service.

A shuttle service was also introduced to run between the fringe car parks to the CBD zone. But this is a failure. In fact, we see the shuttle service taking away part of the burden of SBS. It looks as if we are going back to square one again where different bus companies were operating. So when is the SBS going to become a really efficient. reliable and a prompt public transport company?

The next point is that recently the bus company issued bus guides costing 50 cents each. I am afraid to say that this bus guide is not in the least handy. It cannot be put easily into the pocket. It is full of advertisements and the information in it confuses rather than helps the commuters. If any commuter finds it difficult to use, then what is the purpose of printing that bus guide? In fact, a very eminent geographer in Singapore pointed out the difficulty in looking for bus routes from the bus guide. How then is the common man going to find the bus routes in this complicated bus guide? Is it possible to issue a simpler bus guide that can be handy and useful to the commuter?

Sir, "our telecommunications services are one of the best in the world." That is what the Telecommunication Authority claims. But to the people in Singapore, I am afraid the opposite may be true. Very often when one makes an application for a telephone, one has to wait at times for as long as one year or even longer to get a telephone. Surely during the pre-planning stages of a housing estate a certain number of telephone lines could be planned and provided for the residents. Why is this not done? I hope the Minister will see that more lines are made available at all housing estates.

Mr Speaker, Sir, in our transport system there is much room for improvement. We have been harping on the Mass Rapid Transit System and money has been voted for that particular project. Even an expert from a foreign country had been here to make a study and to make recommendations. Our Prime Minister too has recently been to Hong Kong to see how the system works over there. Now what I want to know is this: Are we going to implement it? How soon can it be implemented? What type of transportation system will be used?

The Chairman: Mr Ch'ng is not here. Dr Ong?

Dr Ong Leong Boon: Sir, after the glorious speech by the Member for Anson, may I add my own comments to this subhead? First of all, I would like to extend my congratulations to the Ministry of Communications for the steps they have taken to ensure that Singapore has an improved system of public transport. It has taken time, but the fact that there is progress means that there is hope for tomorrow. The problems that faced the Ministry have in fact taken a great cost and toil to officers of the various departments and to the public. But I am encouraged by the fact that the bus system today is an improved version of what it was two years ago.

In addition to the comments that the Member for Anson made earlier on with regard to bus guides, may I humbly suggest to the Minister that instead of issuing bus guides, bus routes could very well be placed at all bus stops under the heading of the particular service number so that it is readily available for easy reference. That is, some form of laminated card boards with the bus numbers and the bus routes which. I think, is not difficult to make. It only requires some organisation and some effort by the Ministry of Communications, the SBS in particular.

Sir, with regard to the topic on Mass Rapid Transit which the Member for Anson has mentioned earlier, may I say that there has been tremendous public attention and interest on this subject. We realise that Phase I is over and Phase II of the feasibility study has just been completed. In addition to that, the Prime Minister himself had made a personal and important trip to Hong Kong to study the MRT system. I would be most grateful if the Minister could inform us as to the present state of the feasibility study of the MRT in Singapore, its cost and the time that will be taken, if accepted, to implement the system.

The other point which I would like to emphasise is the question of road discipline. Road discipline is something which is two-way. One is on the level of public sophistication, its discipline, its educational status, and its social consciousness. The other is the question to which officialdom and Government is willing to impose and to instruct. May I suggest that where the public has been failing or unable to live up to expectation of good road discipline that there is place for the ROV to impose stricter penalties upon bad use of roads. I know that there are many problems involved but at least in one respect may I suggest that the Ministry look into this: when ambulance cars, fire engines and police patrol cars are answering emergency calls, all other traffic should be cautioned and told to pull aside to facilitate these urgent vehicles answering emergency calls to get to the scene of the accident, fire, or crime or the scene of any other urgent matter.

One other matter which I would like the Minister to look into is the Area Licensing Scheme and the entry of vehicles in and out of the CBD during the hours of 7.30 a.m. and 10.15 a.m. We all know that the Area Licensing Scheme has produced somewhat remarkable results in terms of cutting down traffic within the CBD, but taxis are a notable exception. It is common knowledge that the introduction of the Scheme has turned out to be of great benefit to a considerable number of taxi drivers. They pay the $4 fee to enter the CBD and during those 2- hours they embark on a great profit-making exercise. After paying the fee for entry, they will plough in and out of the CBD charging each and every passenger the full fee for which they have paid for just one trip. To that extent they are making a tremendous profit and, in fact, fleecing the public. This is a matter that can be looked into, and I would suggest that urgent attention be paid to it.

With these remarks I would like to thank the Ministry of Communications for its constant attention in continuing to improve our public transport in the last year or two.

6.30 p.m.

Encik Abdul Aziz Karim (Kallang): Sir, I would like to discuss a little about the Government's road transport policy.

A matter which concerned me most was the sorry state of affairs of the Singapore bus service. However, over the past year, it has shown some improvements. The most perceptible area of improvement I have been told, and which I myself observe, is in the conduct of the drivers and conductors. Improvements have also been made in terms of service, routine, scheduling, road-worthiness and cleanliness of the buses.

Mr Speaker, Sir, if you would recall, in 1974 I proposed in essence in the first of a dozen principal Questions for Oral Answer, for the Government's involvement in this field of public transport. It was my belief that there were amongst the ranks of cur civil servants, officers who could take care of our bus service. The 40-odd officers who have been sent to look after the affairs of the Singapore Bus Service Ltd proved the point I made that-where there is a will there is a way of putting our bus service on its feet again. I also did propose, and I would still press on, that the Government should have a financial stake in the Singapore Bus Se'rvice Ltd. even if it has to be reorganized, so that further improvement can be made in this public service. The participation of the SBS employees should be considered, so that it would not be in their vested interest to see the SBS go down the drain. The management and the workers should weed out from their ranks all those who cannot make an honest living or who do not do an honest day's work.

I wish to say that the bus is the main form of transportation for the great majority of the people now and by the next decade or two the Mass Rapid Transit system concurrently serving the public. It is my calculation that it will cost millions of dollars to improve on the bus service and to construct the MRT. It is my guess that the millions of dollars which would be raised by the increased Area Licence Fees, road taxes and additional registration fees, would come in handy for these two purposes, namely:

(1) For the Government's intention to purchase SBS shares, should the company go public.

(2) For the development of the MRT system.

After the new taxes and fees were introduced, it was explained, if I am correct, that the taxes and fees were not revenueorientated. In passing, may I observe that the revenue estimate for Road Tax for 1975 is $87 million and for 1976 it is $108 million, an increase of $20.4 million. The revenue estimate for Additional Registration Fees for 1975 is $41 million and for 1976 it is $50 million. The revenue estimate for Area Licence Fees for 1975 is $5.4 million and for 1976 it is $6.5 million.

The purpose of the revenue is a question mark. If the money raised is used to provide a better bus service and to construct the MRT system, I make a guess that Singaporeans, being calculative people, wduld know the economy of being a bus commuter.

The service we provide to the bus commuters must reach a standard comparable to western countries. With the will, it will be possible to attain this objective in a couple of years' time. At this moment, the SBS is still not in a position to cope satisfactorily with the demand for its service. In view of this, it does appear that the imposition of severe measures against the use of private transport was a little too premature.

I am of the opinion that the Area Licensing Scheme's restricted hours commencing at 7.30 am., as at present, are causing a lot of hardship to private car owners who have to send their children to school. Mr Speaker, Sir, you could imagine how early these children would have to be awakened from their sleep in order that their parents could beat the restricted hours. I wish to repeat what I said during last year's debate: that the restricted hours should begin at 8.00 am, and not 7.30 am. It is my experience that our roads are never congested at this hour, but only much later, most unfortunately when the big wigs in Government profession and business go driving into the Central Business District.

I am of the view that the introduction of the Area Licensing Scheme is not to thin out road traffic so much as to give the appearance that the roads have to be cleared for Government bureaucrats, business executives and successful professionals to drive smartly into the City like emperors, maharajahs and sultans of days long gone by. If this is so, I envisage that the development costs of roads, whilst borne by the taxpayers, would benefit relatively fewer car owners.

I wish to state, however, that most of the measures taken to discourage private car ownership and the entry of traffic into the CBD are necessary. The nation's administrative and business life should not be smothered by traffic congestion. In the same connection, our industrial and transport activities must not be slowed down. There are growing signs that roads leading to Jurong Town are becoming congested with traffic. Therefore, it might be feasible to curtail the flow of private transport into Jurong Town in the not too distant future. It might incidentally cut down the volume of traffic along cross-town roads, like Scotts Road.

Last but not least, I wish to state that I would agree that our road and transport policy must be in the direction of further development and utilisation of the public transport system.

The Minister for National Development and Communications (Mr Lim Kim San): Mr Speaker, Sir, it is very nice to receive congratulations from Hon. Members. My only regret is that my predecessor is not here. Otherwise, he would be most pleased at the progress that has been made, a greater part of which was achieved during his time.

I wholeheartedly agree that there has been tremendous improvement in the public transport system and this, in a great measure, is due to the cooperation of the workers and also to the secondment of a Government Team of Officials to the SBS. It would be appropriate here to mention some of the measures which the Management Team has taken to improve the bus service and also to improve the standard of discipline among the workers.

One of the things they did was to keep personal files of employees, and they drew up a code of conduct and disciplinary procedures. Disciplinary action is also being centrally dealt with by headquarters. In this way, they were able to spot the black sheep among the employees and remove them for the good of the company.

Drivers, conductors and other persons who have been recruited are given training prior to putting them on the job. They were told of their duties and responsibilities and they were also told to provide service with courtesy and with a smile. Of course, some do not perform satisfactorily and, when spotted, are sent back for refresher courses.

There has also been a strengthening of the Enforcement Section. The duties of the Enforcement Section are, first, to ensure that bus fares are properly collected, buses run on time, and to catch drivers who speed. Based on their reports. disciplinary action is taken.

One of the indicators to show that there has been great improvement in the bus service and the way the employees discharge their duty is the decrease in the number of complaints received. In fact, complaints have dropped by as much as 75%.

I now come to the observation made by the Member for Anson. He mentioned about the long wait for refuelling of buses. I know it is very irritating for commuters to have to wait in the bus while it is being refuelled. Action is being taken to ensure that every bus, before leaving the depot in the morning, is fuelled the night before. But it is essential for every bus to be refuelled at least once a day because it travels on an average of 250 miles, and it does not carry a tank large enough to hold sufficient diesel oil for a journey of 250 miles. Anyway, buses are refuelled as far as possible during the off-peak hours. More refuelling terminals are being set up, and in certain places two oil pumps are in use. This problem is being looked into, and I think there will be a great improvement soon.

Like the Member for Anson, I deplore the end of the era of the 5-cent and 10-cent char kway teow and mee goreng with eggs, in the same way that he deplores the end of the 5-cent and 10-cent bus fares. One must remember that there are factors which make it impossible to retain the old rates of fares and prices. Hon. Members certainly are aware of inflation and may recollect that the price of diesel oil has gone up. The SBS has to pay higher wages and also the NWC wage recommendations. These are the factors which increase costs.

The Member has mentioned about the delay in schedules. SBS has more buses on the road because of better maintenance of the buses. Here again, the improvement has been due in some measure to the secondment of an SAF team to help maintain the buses. To maintain buses, we must have spare parts. The costs of spare parts have also gone up. So it is not true to say that the 5-cent and 10-cent bus fares have disappeared because the bus companies are amalgamated and there is a monopoly. There are other irresistible factors at work.

One of the problems of running an efficient bus service is to provide sufficient buses during peak hours. But what do you do with these buses during the off-peak hours? The buses will lie idle and the crew also will be idle and they have to be paid nevertheless. So one way of solving this problem is to allow the Scheme B buses and also the City Shuttle Service to continue. In this way, I think we are maximising the use of all available buses, because during part of the peak hours in the mornings and evenings the Scheme B buses are usually quite free. During the hours when they are not engaged in transporting children to school, they help in transporting other commuters. In this way, they help to take the load off the SBS during peak hours, and I think it is necessary that they should be allowed to carry on for some time.

The question of the bus guide is a most unfortunate one. The bus guide was put up as a commercial proposition by a private firm which obtained information about the bus schedules and other relevant information from the Singapore Bus Service Ltd. As a commercial venture, of course, they canvassed for advertisements. Unfortunately, in finalising the format of the bus guide, they did not consult the SBS. As a result they produced a very poor bus guide and probably lost money in the process. Anyway, arising from this experience, the SBS will probably put up their own bus guide. The suggestion made by the Member for Kim Seng about posting information on bus routes at bus stops will be taken into consideration. I will forward the suggestion to the SBS.

6.45 p.m.

The Member for Kim Seng did suggest that in order to ensure better road discipline there should be heavier penalties. Heavier penalties have been imposed. More details will be given by my Minister of State during, the debate on the ROV. As Members know, and as indicated by the Member for Kim Seng, penalties alone will not be sufficient to raise the standard of courtesy among motorists. There is also the question of education.

As regards his suggestion that ambulances, Police cars and fire engines should have the right of way. I entirely agree with him. Here, again, it is a question of social conscience, and consideration by the motorists, the cyclists, the scootenists, and other road users for each other's welfare and for that of the community. It will come about through education and not through sheer enforcement of penalties. Anyway, there is a saying that a journey of a thousand miles begins with the first step. We have taken the first step to warn motorists that these emergency vehicles should have the right of way. I hope that in time to come motorists will have enough consideration for their fellowmen to decide what is right and what is wrong, and no matter how much they are in a hurry, they will give way to these emergency vehicles.

To come to the Area Licensing Scheme, I do not agree with the Member for Kim Seng when he said that taxi drivers benefit from the ALS. Some of the black sheep do benefit, however. He says that they charge every passenger the ALS fee of $4. If they are able to do this, we would have seen an increase in the number of taxis applying for the ALS licences. In actual fact, there has been a decrease in the sale of ALS licences. Perhaps taxis drivers might be able to get away with this in the beginning. But ultimately the public would get wiser. Anyway, we have a device whereby the time of purchase of the ALS licence by taxi drivers is indicated on the disc. If a passenger is observant, he will notice this and should not pay for it once the taxi driver has recovered his payment for the licence from his previous passenger. He need not pay for it. The Enforcement Officers are going round to see that cheating of this nature does not take place. If a taxi driver is found to have severally charged passengers for the ALS entry fee, action will be taken against him.

6.50 p.m.

[Mr Deputy Speaker in the Chair]

The Minister for National Development and Communications (Mr Lim Kim San): The Member for Kallang has suggested that the Government should participate in the equity holding of the SBS. We are now considering the question of workers participating in the equity holding of the SBS. It is too early in the day for me to make any announcement. But we are seriously considering whether it is advisable to allow the workers to participate in this, and ultimately Government's participation too.

As regards his suggestion that revenue from the increase in road taxes and registration fees should go towards the development of the MRT. I can only say that the increase is negligible. The MRT will cost not millions but billions of dollars. But he is correct in saying that the purpose of the increase in the ALS fee and the other fees is not to raise revenue but to discourage people from owning cars, thus preventing our roads from being choked by too heavy traffic, thereby hindering our economic progress.

He has also suggested that we should revise the commencement of the ALS from 7.30 am, to 8.00 am. This question has been looked into by the experts. His reason is that this is to allow parents to send their children to schools in the CBD. He also says that in his experience he has not seen any traffic jam during this period. I say that if we were to extend the time to 8.00 am. He will experience a traffic jam. At the moment there is no congestion because the ALS begins at 7.30 am. There are very few schools within the CBD. If the parents want their children to go to school by car, there is no reason why they cannot form car pools. The Methodist Girls' School has formed car pools quite successfully. Perhaps their children could take buses because, as he has said, bus services have improved.

He has also said that perhaps the timing of the imposition of the restriction is not quite right. That is a matter of opinion. However, in the same breath he has also suggested that it is time we imposed restriction on entry into Jurong. Here again it is a matter of opinion. We think this is not the time yet. We are in charge of the ALS and we have enforced it in the City area. If the Member were in change he would probably enforce it in Jurong too. But we are studying the problem closely. I agree with him that restricting entry of private cars into Jurong may help to clear the congestion around the periphery of Jurong Town. Anyway we should wait until the Pan-Island Express Way is completed before we go any further into this.

Members may be wondering why I have not touched on the MRT and give some information on the questions which have been asked. If I may, Sir, with the indulgence of Members, call upon my Senior Minister of State, who is very closely associated with the MRT, to reply to Members' comments.

The Minister of State for Communications (Mr Ong Teng Cheong): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I am pleased to confirm the statement made by the Member for Kim Seng that Phase II study of the MRT has just been completed. The final report of the Phase II MRT Study will be ready sometime this year for submission to the Cabinet. It will then be up to the Cabinet, taking into account the socio-economic factors and other considerations, to decide whether or not to proceed with the project. If the decision is to proceed with it, which is planned to be some 45 km in length, of which one-third will be underground, it will take approximately 10 years to construct. Of course, some sections of the system will be completed earlier.

Regarding the construction cost of the system, I am afraid I do not have all the detailed figures with me. Based or the current price at constant Dollar, the estimated cost of the full system is in the region of $1 .7 billion. But taking into account inflation and interests fees that will be incurred during the construction period, the ultimate cost of the full system could well exceed $2.8 billion on completion of the project.

Mr Ivan Baptist: Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I just want to make a point on the refuelling of buses. I have had a number of experiences with buses refuelling at a place off Changi Road. The drivers seem to want to get over with the refuelling as quickly as possible, as I suppose, they have to keep to the time schedule. Therefore, and this is a point which the Member for Anson has brought up, there is a tendency for them to leave the engine on while their vehicles are being refuelled. This is a highly dangerous practice. I hope the Minister will bring this matter to the attention of the SBS so that such a practice can be stopped. This is dangerous for the drivers, the conductors and the passengers.

Mr Lim Kim San: Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, action has been taken to stop this dangerous practice.

Since the Minister of State has already replied to questions on the MRT. I would like to take up the point mentioned by the Member for Anson regarding the long wait for telephones. Earlier in the day n this House, when the question was raised about the waiting time for telephones, the reply given by the Senior Minister of State was that we were making every attempt to reduce the percentage of applicants who have to wait for telephones. Here again, it is not a question of bad planning. When we draw up a development plan for the future, estimates are usually made. We are very wise men indeed if we can be perfect in our est mates. It has been shown that the demand for telephones has risen beyond expectations. In other words, our experts estimated that there would be a demand-increase of 15% per year, but the actual demand has gone up by 20%. There is also the question of backlog. I think credit must be given to the Housing Board for having built houses very quickly, much quicker than we can install the telephones. They are building flats all over Singapore now.

The time-lag for installing telephone equipment is five years. If we draw up the plans today and then place our orders, it will be five years later before we can actually get the equipment. That is one of the reasons why we have to make these estimates. Therefore, given the time-lag of five years and with the Housing Board putting up flats in less than two years in some places, there is this discrepancy. But whatever it is, we are doing our best to catch up with the backlog. In fact, the TAS have been asked whether it is possible to make use of overhead lines because it is faster to install telephones this way. They have made use of overhead lines and that is how we catch up with the demand. But one must remember that lines alone are not enough. There must also be the switching equipment to go with it. Anyway, for the information of Members, we have tried to make use of all the facilities available. For example. Telok Blangah New Town is now being served by the North Exchange sited at the Thomson Road/Whitley Road junction. Since there is excess capacity there, we are tapping it for use in Telok Blangah New Town. Nevertheless, the demand for telephones in Telok Blangah is so great that tapping the excess in this Exchange which is not meant to serve Telok Blangah is still not sufficient. It will be some more time before the equipment is available.

However, the Member for Telok Blangah may be pleased to hear that next month we are putting into service 10,000 pieces of switching equipment. For the Ang Mo Kio New Town, the new Exchange building is scheduled to be completed in October 1976. The necessary switching equipment will follow immediately, and by October 1977 all the residents in Ang Mo Kio New Town will get their telephones. One way in which we can reduce waiting time would be for intending subscribers to come together and share a party line. But quite a number of them are quite choosey. An offer of a party line has been made but quite a number of them have turned it down. If they are really in urgent need, they can always share a party line, that is, if service is available.

7.00 p.m.

Mr Teong Eng Siong: (In Mandarin): Sir, I would like to ask the Minister two questions. First, regarding telephone equipment ordered and bought from abroad. Just now the Minister said that it was necessary to place orders for such equipment five years ahead. Why should we have to wait for so long before we can get them? I would like the Minister to explain.

Secondly, is it possible for our manufacturers to produce telephone equipment here, since we have reached quite a high level of technology? If so, there will be no problem for the EDB and the Ministry of Science and Technology to set up factories to manufacture our own telephone equipment for our own needs. In this way, we will be able to get our telephone facilities earlier.

Mr Lee Yiok Seng: (In Mandarin): Sir, I would like to ask the Minister two simple questions. The first one is: yesterday some Members in this House alleged that the rural people are regarded as second class citizens. I do not agree to this view. However, we can all agree on the point, that the buses used in serving the rural areas are all outdated and useless. I hope the Minister will be able to provide better buses to serve these areas and perhaps also provide good drivers to man such buses.

The second point is about some comments by MPs here that the SBS has improved a lot in its service. Maybe the Minister is very pleased about this remark. But I would like to say something which he may not be pleased to hear. In spite of the SBS service, if you ask whether there are pirate taxis running on the roads, I should say yes. So I hope the Minister will look into this.

Mr Lim Kim San: Sir, I can assure the Member for Sembawang that if we could manufacture the telephone equipment here, we would have done so. We could not get anyone interested enough to join in the manufacture of telephone switching equipment, and therefore the waiting time needed is still five years.

As regards the rural areas, the request is for new buses for rural residents. I think there have been new buses for rural residents but, taking into consideration the nature of rural roads, they become old buses in no time. Much as we like to, we cannot be changing buses every six months.

I think the Member is probably right that there are pirate taxis around. I will alert the ROV.

Mr Lee Yiok Seng: (In Mandarin): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, just now the Minister in answer to my first question said that buses would become old in no time if used in rural areas. But I would say that in the rural areas the roads are also quite wide and metalled, not as bad as the Minister has imagined. The position is this. The rural people will have to walk along bad unmetalled tracks in order to reach the main road to board a bus. So, buses still run on good roads. If you can go there, you will notice this. I hope in the rural areas one can see new buses to provide the rural folks with better services.

Mr P. Govindaswamy: Sir, most probably, the Hon. Minister will agree with me that during the peak hour of about 5 o'clock, buses are seen queueing from the CID building in Robinson Road right up to Market Street. Why does the SBS not take statistics? Somebody must go there to see how many buses are going to Katong, how many buses are going to Serangoon, how many buses are going to Geylang. If they do it, then they will know how many buses are required there. This long queue of buses is seen daily. The Minister can check on it. It is no use to keep 20 buses lined up, while only one bus is full and the others are empty. What is the system of working? I do not understand the SBS's system. In this long queue of buses, there are SBS buses, private buses and shuttle service buses. What is this? I do not understand.

Mr Lim Kim San: Sir, we have taken statistics. So we have staggered the bus stops. Now there are no more queues.

Mr P. Govindaswamy: Sir, in view of the Hon. Minister's explanation, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Mr N. Govindasamy: Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head P he reduced by $10 in respect of subhead CAA 1106*. (* The same amendment also stood in the name Mr P. Govindaswamy.)

Sir, this amendment is moved to make some suggestions in respect of the airport services at Paya Lebar Airport. Those who arrive from abroad, especially during congested periods which often occur at night, find that in our Arrival lounge lots of passengers who have two or three pieces of luggage find it difficult to carry their luggages out. There is a shortage of porters. I do not advocate that more porters be employed. Perhaps manpower should be put to better use rather than just allowed to hang around to carry bags. But I do advocate, and I have made this suggestion some years ago, that we provide these arrival passengers with light hand-trolleys for their convenience. They need not wait. As soon as their luggage comes down the conveyor belt, it would make it very convenient for them to get their luggage out with a trolley.

Sir, the second suggestion I would like to make is in respect of the taxi service at the airport. Here again, especially at peak hours at night, with large planes arriving these days, there is a shortage of taxis. Sometimes one has to wait for 35 to 40 minutes, without exaggeration, because I myself had to wait for 40 minutes for a taxi. I am told that this is the result of a restriction on the number of taxis that are allowed to go into the airport area. Perhaps the Ministry should look into the possibility of increasing the number of taxis allowed in the airport at the moment. With more taxis, perhaps the waiting period could be reduced.

I believe that the taxi service operating at the airport is a very lucrative one because the taxi drivers have other "fringe benefits" and the extra charge which they sometimes impose on arriving passengers from abroad.

Mr P. Govindaswamy: Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir,I fully agree with my colleague, the Member for Telok Blangah However, I wish to raise a few points.

Sir, in the Development estimates, I notice that quite a big sum of money is going to be spent on the extension of the existing runway, additional parking aprons and navigational aids for Paya Lebar Airport. If Paya Lebar Airport is not going to be the main airport in the future and if Changi is going to become our main international airport, then why are we spending money for the extension of facilities at Paya Lebar Airport? Are these expenditures really necessary? Can we not manage with a reduced amount of expenditure for Paya Lehar and concentrate on Changi Airport instead?

Sir, soon Changi will become an international airport. For how long will it remain so, I do not know. We had Kallang at the beginning; then we switched to Paya Lehar, and now we move to Changi, even before the second runway at Paya Lehar and the extensions could be completed Originally, when the Department wanted to expand Paya Lebar Airport, the engineers tested the soil at Changi and they said, at that time, they could not develop an `airport at Changi because the soil was not strong. Therefore, they came back to Paya Lebar Airport Now they say. "Move to Changi". We have spent so many millions of dollars at Paya Lebar and now we are moving to Changi A certain amount of foresight thinking is required. Is Changi Airport really necessary? Are we really going to expect the predicted increase in tourists? Have we given the allowance that many persons think twice before they travel nowadays? Or is Changi Airport going to he one project that will be little used? Could we not just manage with Paya Lebar Airport for several decades?

No doubt certain amount of pollution is involved No doubt reclamation and resettlement of people are involved. But these are unavoidable for an island like Singapore that is too small. For that matter Changi is no better.

I also notice that S80 million is to be spent on land reclamation and $15 million for land acquisition for Changi Airport Where does the Government get the money? From tax payers The Government increase taxes but is unnecessarily spending $95 million for reclamation and land acquisition Need we spend this amount of money on a project, when actually we may not receive the number of tourists that was predicted before the oil crisis?

After building Changi Airport, what is going to happen to Paya Lebar Airport? Will it he closed down and demolished to make way for multi-storey buildings like Kallang? I do not know what is happening. I hope the Minister could enlighten the House

7.15 pm

Mr Ong Teng Cheong: Sir, the Member for Telok Blangah raised two points One is about the push-carts at the Arrival hall of the airport The push-carts were introduced by the Singapore Airport Terminal Services ISATS) in 1974 It has been proved to be very successful and many tourists arriving from overseas, as the Member has pointed out, found it to he very useful. Since early this year an additional 150 push-carts have been put into use, and there are now altogether about 150 push-carts at the Arrival hall.

Regarding the second question raised by the Member about the airport taxi services. I would like to take this opportunity to inform him that the airport taxi service is undergoing a reorganisation so as to improve its efficiency and the conduct of taxi drivers. At the same time we are thinking of further increasing the fleet of taxis operating at the airport.

There are a few questions raised by the Member for Anson One is about the question of the vast sums of money allocated to the development of Paya Lebar Airport after the decision has been made to move our international airport to Changi Sir, the air traffic through Singapore for the next few years will continue to increase and the Paya Lebar Airport will continue to be the main civil airport for Singapore up to 1 980, when it is expected to handle over 8 million passengers a year, or almost double the number of passengers that was handled last year. In 1972 the consultants made the forecast that the number of passengers passing through our airport would reach something like 4 million in 1975, but since the oil crisis in 1973 this figure has been revised. Despite the oil crisis, however, the passenger traffic continues to increase and the actual figure of passenger traffic passing through Singapore Airport last year is not very far off the mark of what was projected. Paya Lebar Airport, besides having to handle all this passenger traffic up to 1980, would still be in use in conjunction with the Changi (Phase I) Airport, which will be completed sometime in 1980 or 1981 because the full Changi Airport Development, including the second phase, will' not be completed until 1982 or 1983.

The Member for Anson also mentioned about the $80 million land reclamation cost at Changi. Of course, the money comes from taxpayers. The actual cost of the reclamation is, in fact, about $235 million for the entire reclamation project, but only $80 million will be required for the coming financial year as the total reclamation work would take over three years to complete.

The Member also asked about the role of the Paya Lebar Airport after Changi Airport. I can assure him that Paya Lebar Airport will be put to good use, as I have mentioned earlier, during the interim period between now and 1982. It will later be used, in addition to military operations, to cater for emergency or overspill of civil aircraft traffic from Changi Airport.

In view of the important role that Paya Lebar Airport will continue to play in this interim period between now and 1982, a new direct express road linking Paya Lebar and Changi Airport will be built. This link-road will be completed by the end of 1979 50 that it will provide a fast and efficient flow of passenger motor vehicles between the two airports.

Perhaps I should also take this opportunity to explain to the Member for Anson the main reasons for moving to Changi. There are, in fact, three major reasons for the Government to decide to move the airport from Paya Lebar to Changi. Firstly, it is a matter of timing. As I mentioned earlier, it is projected that by 1980 we will be handling some 8 million passenger traffic through our airport in a year. But due to the physical difficulties at Paya Lebar airport, such as drainage, canal diversion, squatter resettlement, removal of rubbish dumps and refilling of the swampy areas around our Paya Lebar Airport, our engineers concluded that it would take some nine years to build the second runway at Paya Lebar. This would mean that, if we start work today, the second runway at Paya Lebar would be completed by 1984 or 1985. Obviously this is not good enough because by that time the Airport would face a very serious congestion and we would loose the tourists. On the other hand, the present runway at the Changi airfield could be easily lengthened, widened and strengthened into a runway acceptable for international air traffic operations by the middle of 1980, while the second runway at Changi will be built on land reclaimed from the sea and it could be ready by the middle of 1982. This means two or three years ahead of scheduled completion of the second runway at Paya Lebar. It is therefore a question of timing.

The second reason for moving to Changi is on environmental considerations, mainly noise pollution. If the second runway were to be built at Paya Lebar, the noise generated by the aircraft taking off and landing at Paya Lebar Airport would affect a lot of people living in the area, whose houses are under the flight path. Noise pollution caused to the proposed Changi site will not be spread over as large a sector of the population as at Paya Lebar because a large area of the flight path of aircraft calling at Changi Airport will be over water and not over land.

On the third reason for moving to Changi. I am sure the Member for Anson would be happy to know that the choice was made on the ground that the number of people affected by resettlement would be less compared to the number of people affected, if we were to proceed with the second runway at Paya Lebar. The figure is something like 800 families in Changi being affected by resettlement as against 4.000 families in Paya Lebar. Earlier we have heard grievances expressed by the Member for Changi about the kelong resettlement operations. This shifting of airport to Changi means more saving in costs, very much less irritation and frustration and reduced strain on social structure. From all these considerations, therefore, Changi is a much better choice than Paya Lebar as a location for our main international airport.

On the long-term future of the Changi Airport, the Member for Anson is concerned as to why we moved our airport from Kallang to Paya Leban and from Paya Lebar to Changi and what comes next after Changi. The Member can be assured that Changi Airport with the two runways and all the supporting facilities will be able to handle at least 30 million passengers per year, and this will meet the needs of Singapore up to the end of this century. Provisions have been made for further extension of the Airport to cater for further increases in traffic so that Changi will remain our main international airport well into the 21st century.

Mr Ahmad Mattar: Sir, on a point of clarification. Could the Minister of State inform the House what is the projected number of aircraft expected to land at Paya Lebar by 1985, because this has got something to do with the noise pollution aspect which he mentioned just now.

Mr Ong Teng Cheong: Regarding the annual commercial aircraft movement of arrivals and departures at our Airport by 1985, I have not got the figures for 1985. For 1982, the projected figure is 82,627.

Mr Ahmad Mattar: Is it double the present figure?

Mr Ong Teng Cheong: The present number of aircraft movement is 59.000. This is the expected aircraft movement for 1976.

Mr P. Govindaswamy: Sir, the engineers at first said that the filling for Changi Airport was not very strong. Therefore we have to go back to Paya Lebar. But now the same engineers say that it is very strong. When the Jumbo-jets or Concorde land at Changi Airport, the earth might sink! I am not objecting to the removal of the airport from Paya Lebar to Changi. I am objecting to the soil.

7.30 p.m.

Mr Ong Teng Cheong: Sir, I can assure the Member for Anson that the Jumbo-jets will not sink at Changi airport.

Mr Ivan Baptist: Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, this is again a question of safety at the airport. I have had occasion to be present at the airport and I noticed that a certain aricraft was being serviced during an electrical storm. When questioning the workers with regard to this, I was given to understand that a supervisor urged them to do maintenance work and servicing it. Of course, this electrical storm does not occur frequently, but if it exists at the airport it is very dangerous.

I was wondering if the Minister could take steps to ensure that when such electrical storms do occur workers should not be asked to go out to service the airplanes. Or perhaps more hangars could be built so that these airplanes could be brought into the hangars where proper servicing could be conducted.

Mr Ong Teng Cheong: Sir, I tend to agree with the Member for Potong Pasir that where it is dangerous to work under those conditions, perhaps the supervisor should exercise his discretion as to whether or not the work should proceed. Of course, in cases of urgency where work has to be done, it is not just the safety of the workers at the airport but also the safety of the passengers arriving from overseas that has to be considered. If there are specific instances of incidents which have attracted the attention of the Member for Potong Pasir. I shall be happy if he could let me know and I shall look into the matter.

Mr Conceicao: Sir, in relation to the Minister of State's remarks that Changi will be the main airport. may I ask him this question? Does it imply that there will be a continued and fairly intensive use of Paya Lebar Airport? Because my constituency lies directly under the flight path of planes landing at Paya Leban Airport, I ask this question: what will be the rate of usage at Paya Lebar Airport?

Mr Ong Teng Cheong: Sir. Paya Lebar Airport will continue to be intensively used. Perhaps I should say that the noise pollution will be much less than what would be expected because the noisier aircraft will be diverted to Changi.

Mr N. Govindasamy: Sir, I am glad that the Civil Aviation Department is looking into the possibility of reorganising the taxi service at Paya Lebar Airport.

I remember making this suggestion of trolleys sometime in 1972 and in 1974 50 trolleys were purchased. By the time I used the Arrival lounge last year there were hardly 20 serviceable trolleys around. The very fact that it has been increased by 200 this year, which is more than 200% from what were available, that is a good sign. Perhaps every now and then one ought to check whether these trolleys are serviceable and additional trolleys, should be purchased whenever necessary.

With those remarks, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

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

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

Sir, the Postal Department has now been reorganised and I was told sometime ago that it would be converted into a statutory board. May I know when this conversion will take place?

With the building of many new Housing Board flats in the various estates, it is evident that the workload of the Postal Department has also increased. I am told that there is a shortage of postal staff, especially postmen. As a result, the workers have to work under stress and strain in order to provide an efficient service. I wonder what the Department is doing about recruiting more staff, especially postmen, to cope up with the increased workload. Can the Minister supply some facts and figures on this subject?

Sir, the recruitment of postwomen has in a way lessened the burden of postmen. The uniform of the postwomen appears to be neat, smart and similar to the postmen. I wonder what will happen if the postwomen become pregnant. Did the authorities consider what will happen then? Is the present uniform suited for the postwomen?

I also understand that the function of delivering PUB bills to consumers, which is normally done by the Postal Department, may be taken over by the PUB Meter Reading Section. May I seek clarification on this subject?

Finally, the Nelson Road Postal Centre has still room for improvement. I have received complaints that the sorting frames appear to be untidy. The floors are dusty and dirty. The enclosure for registered items is not fully secured. Anyone can just climb over and fiddle with the registered items. The rest rooms for the staff are limited and they have no proper ventilation and oscillating fans are found to be dirty.

I hope the conditions at this Centre could be improved so that the postal staff could work in a better and meaningful environment.

Mr Ong Teng Cheong: Sir, the Member for Anson has raised a few points. What he mentioned earlier is true - that the National Productivity Board carried out a study in 1971 on the structure and operation of the Postal Department. Following the study, various measures to reorganise the Department and to streamline its operations were implemented. However, there is no proposal to convert the Department into a statutory board in the near future.

The Member is also concerned about the staffing strength in the Postal Department, especially postmen, to cope with the increasing workload. The Member may be happy to note that more staff. especially postmen, have been recruited, The establishment has increased over these years and perhaps I should read these figures to him since he has asked for detailed information. Total Postmen Establishment Establishment 1972 1,434 526 1973 1,461 539 1974 1,461 564 1975 1,500 587 1976 1,531 614 The Postal Department reviews its manpower requirements annually and recruitment exercises are conducted -

Mr P. Govindaswamy: Sir, on a point of clarification. Sir, for last year there were 743 Division IV officers and for this year the provision is 770 Division IV officers. Where did the Minister of State get the figure of 1,500-odd officers?

Mr Ong Teng Cheong: Sir, I am giving him the total establishment and the postmen establishment.

Mr P. Govindaswamy: I am only asking for the postmen establishment.

Mr Ong Teng Cheong: The total number of postmen for last year was 587. For the next financial year, there will be 614 postmen. Sir, as I said, recruitment exercises are conducted as and when necessary to fill all the vacancies which arise.

Regarding the delivery of PUB bills, it is true that the PUB has been using it staffs to deliver PUB bills to its consumers since July last year. Under the Post Office Act delivery of these items by the sender or its staff employed for this purpose is permitted. However, it would be an offence for any person or firm to offer or perform the services of collection, conveyance or delivery of mails on behalf of other people.

On the working conditions at Nelson Road Centre, I do not really quite agree with the Member for Anson because I visited the place only two weeks ago. The place is kept clean. Although the working condition is not first-class, it is quite good. Ventilation-wise. It is very satisfactory. It has got powerful fans located at a high level. There are two restrooms provided for the staff and these rooms have louvred windows and there are also fans installed to provide ventilation. On the question of dirty fans. I will ask the Postmaster-General to look into this, but during my last visit I thought they were quite clean.

As regards the enclosure for registered mail, it is not true to say that anyone can climb over the fence and fiddle with the registered items. During working hours there are workmen working within the enclosure both inside and outside the place. So it is quite safe. But during the period when there are no staff working inside the enclosure, all the registered mails are normally sealed up in bags and kept inside the covered enclosures which are fitted with locks. If there are other further improvements that could be made. I would be pleased if the Member for Anson could let me know so that I can take the matter up again.

7.45 p.m.

The Postal Department is always conscious of the welfare of its staff and it has been regularly reviewing the working environment of the department and other places of work under its jurisdiction.

On the question of the uniforms for postwomen, I am glad that the Member for Anson finds the present uniform suitable. As he has pointed out, the uniform is neat and smart. However, if a postwoman is in an advanced stage of pregnancy, arrangements will be made for her to perform lighter indoor duties. She will naturally be allowed to wear her own maternity clothes.

Mr P. Govindaswamy: Just now I was drawing his attention to the enclosures for registered mail section. I just want to bring to the notice of the Minister that if anything should happen to those letters, the staff should not be made to suffer. That is the reason why I have brought this matter to the attention of the Minister. I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Mr Conceicao: Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head P be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead FAA 1107*. (* The same amendment also stood in the names of Messrs N. Govindasamy, Chin Harn Tong, Ivan Baptist and P. Govindaswamy.)

Sir, I wish to ask for some information arising out of my scrutiny of certain revenue accruing to the Head, Registrar of Vehicles, for the composition of offences. According to the figures which I have garnered for FY 76, the revenue anticipated is $1.1 million. For FY 75 it was $900,000. For FY 74 it was $830,000 and for FY 73 it was one-tenth of that, i.e. $80,000. The question is, to what extent are these monies reflective of our policy of more efficient and greaten enforcement, and has this policy paid out in the reduction of accidents? If one looks at the traffic, one has the impression that there is a very slight, if at all, recognisable reduction in breaches of traffic regulations, especially in respect of those vehicles that I presume come under the jurisdiction of the Registrar of Vehicles. But I stand to be educated by the Minister of State for Communications.

Mr N. Govindasamy: Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I merely want to make a suggestion. When we were speaking on bus services, a lot of bouquets were given to the 585 for the improvement of the bus service. Although the bus service has improved tremendously compared with what it was a few years ago, a large measure of the contribution to this improvement was the result of the utilisation of Scheme B buses as well as the City Shuttle Bus Service. Especially in the housing estates like Telok Blangah, the SBS can improve its services much more. But understandably, perhaps at the moment they cannot do so and. therefore, the complementary transport system provided by the Scheme B buses and the Shuttle Service buses are commendable. But unfortunately some restriction is placed on the Scheme B buses and the City Shuttle Bus Service in respect of the period in which they can operate. I do appreciate that Scheme B buses are mainly meant for transporting school children to and from schools. In spite of this there are other periods in which they can be much more profitably used, especially in housing estates where the SBS is not in a position to provide the sort of service which the residents expect. The Registry of Vehicles should be more flexible and allow the Scheme B buses and the City Shuttle Bus Service to operate even beyond the time that they are allowed at the moment.

Mr Chin Harn Tong: (In Mandarin): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, in order to ameliorate the traffic problem the ROV has placed more and more restrictions on private motor cars and, as a result, public transport vehicles will now play an increasingly important role. On many occasions the ROV has emphasised this fact.

However, what is baffling is that although the ROV has emphasised the importance of public transport vehicles, it has imposed restrictive measures on taxis - an important link in public transport which are contrary to the principles mentioned above. With regard to surcharge on taxis, it was raised from 25% in 1972 to 55% in 1974. It has now been raised to 1 00%. What difference is there between private cars and taxis?

The policy of the ROV is to encourage more people to use public transport. But the ROV has, in fact, applied to taxis the same measures used against private cars. Does it mean that taxis are not regarded as public transport vehicles? The ROy levies an ALS fee which was originally $3 but subsequently raised to $4 a day on private cars entering CBD during the morning peak hours. Now this measure is also applied to taxis. The purpose of levying such fee on private cars is to reduce the number of motor cars entering the City area during such peak hours. But what is the purpose of imposing such measure on taxis? We do not quite know. As we all know, when motorists and their fellow passengers forgo the use of their cans when entering the CBD, they have of course to depend on public transport, especially taxis. Under these circumstances, taxis, as a means for public transport, should be actively encouraged to play an important role.

The Chairman: May I remind Members that if they want a reply, they must give the Minister time to do so.

Mr Ivan Baptist: Sir, do I understand that I will need to say just two words and sit down?

The Chairman: As the Member pleases, if he wants a reply.

Mr Ivan Baptist: I see. Since there is hardly any time, I do not propose to belabour the point I made at the Budget debate or be repetitive like a broken record. There is no time for that.

The Chairman: The Member is wasting time. Can he come to the point?

Mr Ivan Baptist: I then spoke on the problem of taxis in Singapore which was elaborated on by many Members. The Minister for Finance did reply to me by assuring me that the Government plans to do something about this problem. However, he did not have the time to elaborate, and it would appear that the Minister today will not have the time to eleborate too.

The Chairman: What is your point?

Mr Ivan Baptist: I am most obliged. Sir, if the Minister could at this juncture elucidate on the brief comments made by the Minister for Finance a few days ago.

Mr Ong Teng Cheong: Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, thank you for your intervention. The question raised by the Member for Katong was on revenue from fines. It is true that the revenue from fines has increased. This is mainly due to three factors. Firstly, more deterrents and higher composition fines have been introduced. Secondly, with the introduction of the Traffic Ticketing System since March last year, it has enabled traffic reports to be settled more quickly than before. Thirdly, increased efficiency and the setting up of the Traffic Law Enforcement by the Traffic Police resulted in an increase in the number of traffic offences reported. The number of traffic offences reported has increased from 121,648 in 1972 to 191.989 last year.

As regards road accidents, there has, in fact, been a decrease in road accidents. There were slightly more than 36.000 accidents in 1972. But the number has dropped to 31,506 in 1974 and 28,919 last year. This is also the result of the various measures taken to reduce road accidents, most notably the selective enforcement policy, the points demerit system and the enhancement of punishment for traffic offenders. Lastly there was the education campaign conducted by the Ministry of Home Affairs to cultivate good driving habits among motorists.

The Member for Telok Blangah has raised the question of bus service in the new towns. As he will realise, during the transition period where people are just starting to move in, it is not practical to provide a full public transport service in these new towns. I would agree with him that perhaps some Scheme B buses or the City Shuttle Service buses can be introduced into the new towns. This would again depend on whether the operators are keen to operate them.

Mr N. Govindasamy: The hours of operation should be extended.

Mr Ong Teng Cheong: Is the Member talking about advancing the hours from 7.30 am, to before 7.30 am.?

Mr N. Govindasamy: That is night.

Mr Ong Teng Cheong: As the Member has mentioned, the primary function of the school bus service is to provide transport for the school children. To advance the hours from 7.30 am, to before 7.30 am., no. But to extend the Scheme B bus service after 9.30 am, is a question of demand and the viability of the service. From what we know, the Scheme B operators are not interested in providing service after those hours. If they are prepared to provide the service, I would definitely ask the ROV to give permission to provide the service after 9.30 am.

Mr Conceicao: I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The time allotted for Head P having expired, the following amendment standing in the name of Mr Ng Kah Ting was not proceeded with -

(5) That the sum to be allocated for Head P be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead CAA 8108.

The sum of $61,714,480 for Head P ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates.

The sum of $193,671,800 for Head P ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.

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

Mr Lim Kim San: Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir I beg to report that the Committee of Supply has made further progress on the Main and Development Estimates for the financial year 1st April, 1976 to 31st March, 1977 and ask leave to sit again tomorrow.

Mr Deputy Speaker: So be it.