MAIN AND DEVELOPMENT ESTIMATES OF SINGAPORE FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR 1ST APRIL, 1980 TO 31ST MARCH, 1981

Order read for consideration in Committee of Supply (5th Allotted Day].

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

Head J - 2.34 p.m.

Mr Teo Chong Tee (Changi): Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head J be reduced by $10 in respect of Object Group 3110 of Subhead Code JD-01 of the Main Estimates.

Sir, the Singapore Broadcasting Corporation was established mainly to improve the production of good quality programmes in the public interest. It can already be seen that the Corporation is gradually heading in the right direction in achieving this objective. Generally, a slight improvement has been observed so far. For this, the SBC has my compliments.

Since it has become a statutory body, free from any administrative and financial constraints, and with financial backing from the Government, it is imperative that the Corporation develop into a reputable organisation, less profit-oriented and at the same time capable of continuing to improve and upgrade its qualitative services in the interest of its viewers. Under no circumstances should it become a commercialised operation at the expense of good quality programmes as well as at the expense of the community as a whole.

But the recent open dispute on royalty fees among the three organisations, namely, the Football Association of Singapore, the Singapore Sports Council and the Singapore Broadcasting Corporation over the issue of live telecast of the pre-Olympic soccer matches has somewhat tarnished the good reputation of the SBC. As a consequence, it has created for itself an adverse impression of being a profiteering organisation, having acted contrary to its main objectives. The attitude adopted by the SBC has cast doubts in the minds of many Singaporeans who are left to wonder whether the SBC practises what it preaches, in so far as the interest of the viewing public is concerned. The dispute over a small sum of money has also cast unfavourable publicity on the SBC and has unnecessarily projected a bad image among the foreign teams.

In order to clear the doubt whether the SBC has begun to lose its bearings less than two months after its establishment to take over the functions of the Broadcasting Department (RTS), would the Hon. Minister enlighten this House the cause of such an embarrassing event for SBC, and what measures are being taken to prevent such a recurrence in the future?

Haji Sha'ari bin Tadin (Bedok): Sir, on the subject of the Singapore Broadcasting Corporation, once a year broadcasting comes under the close scrutiny of Members of this House. RTS had its share of bouquets and brickbats for its achievements and short-comings. To be fair, one must concede that this young sapling, the Singapore Broadcasting Corporation (SBC), holds much promise but it needs time to reach full maturity.

However, now that the SBC is a statutory board and can enjoy the autonomy which RTS could not when it was a Government department, the SBC should reappraise the full potential of the broadcasting medium and look further ahead. The SBC should aim at providing programmes not merely to entertain but also to inform and educate, thus taking full advantage of the particularly powerful medium of television to reinforce and further consolidate national consciousness which Singaporeans already have in good measure, thanks to the concerted efforts made in recent years by governmental and non-governmental institutions and bodies, and, not least of all, by ordinary Singaporeans who are proud of their identity as Singaporeans.

As nation building is a continuing process, the SBC has the responsibility and a very big part to play in promoting, through its programmes, those values, both traditional and contemporary, which can add to nation building. In the same manner, and if I may add, the SBC could, in charting its course for the future, set its sights higher and be innovative enough to meet the challenge of satisfying the need for Singaporeans to know and understand better the land and the peoples of ASEAN, thereby fostering a greater appreciation of the traditions, the cultures, the hopes and aspirations, the values held, and even the problems of the future shared to a greater or lesser extent between ourselves in Singapore and our ASEAN neighbours. I am not saying that all this is easy to do.

But the SBC can begin its journey of a thousand kilometres by taking the first step of giving its staff the training and experience, and the chance to experiment, in the production of films on the sights and sounds, the history, the many facets of our culture, and our traditions, which are found in our Republic. After a period of experimentation, and when the staff could manage to produce programmes which are documentary in nature but entertaining in their approach, the staff could then go on to more ambitious undertakings, such as the production of programmes on the land, the peoples and the cultures of ASEAN.

Singaporeans are avid cinema-goers. If TV programmes can be produced not so much in the manner of serious TV documentaries but more in the nature of, say, travel films of the cinema, I am sure that there will be sizable and appreciative audiences for these TV films which can not only entertain but also inform and educate at the same time. I would even venture to say that it is not inconceivable that such good interesting films could be sold to other TV stations for broadcast in the countries of ASEAN and beyond.

According to my way of thinking, it is time the SBC began planning with the objective of becoming more than just a vehicle presenting syndicated programmes from abroad, collecting revenue from advertisements, thus trying to survive at a level little better than an ordinary broadcasting medium.

The Chairman: Since the Member for Alexandra has an amendment on the same Subhead Code, would he like to speak now?

Mr Tan Soo Khoon (Alexandra): Sir, I am not speaking.

The Chairman: Dr Ong Leong Boon is not here.

The Minister for Communications and Acting Minister for Culture (Mr Ong Teng Cheong): Sir, it is not the aim of the Singapore Broadcasting Corporation to make exorbitant profits, but it has to generate revenue to cover its operating costs. The recent dispute over the live telecast of the final match of the Asia Group III pre-Olympic soccer tournament, as mentioned by the hon. Member for Changi, was rather unfortunate. It was not SBC's doing that the matter was unduly highlighted in the press. SBC nearly issued a statement on 10th March to clarify its position given earlier by various, press reports on the matter.

The fees that the sponsor had to pay for the telecast of the final match were in no way more than what he would have had to pay for any other sponsored show which included four exclusive minutes of the sponsor's commercial. The air-time charges would have been the same for the four minutes of commercial had the sponsor chosen to sponsor for a variety show or a Shakespearean series. As the match was an outside broadcast, a small production fee was charged. This, again, is standard for all types of outside broadcast which involve additional manpower and equipment. Telecast rights fees are normally paid out of SBC's budget for programme production. It was probable that the organisers of the football matches misunderstood the basis of SBC's charges and regarded them as net profit. Hence, their demand for higher telecast rights fees. I have already advised SBC to work out with the Football Association of Singapore and the Singapore Sports Council some mutually happy arrangement for future telecast of football matches. 2.45 p.m.

Sir, the Singapore Broadcasting Corporation wants to assist in the promotion of sports, but it can only do so if it is sufficiently paid to cover operating expenditure, bearing in mind its responsibility to produce other programmes as well as its overall needs.

The Member for Bedok raised some points about our television programmes. I would like to thank him for understanding the difficulties that the SBC is facing at this embryonic stage. It is difficult to single out specific radio or television programmes or series produced with the objective of promoting a Singapore identity or a Singapore national consciousness, as he has suggested. But the programmes produced by RTS or, as it is now called, the SBC, have in some way or another mirrored life in Singapore. This reflection of aspiration, values, problems and achievements, has helped to make Singaporeans more conscious of themselves and the region surrounding them. Our news output today continues to present events from the Singapore perspective. Our current affairs output attempts to foster a yet deeper Singapore consciousness by highlighting certain aspects of our environment, our history and our neighbours. We will continue to work hard in this respect. I will also definitely convey the suggestions made by hon. Members to the Singapore Broadcasting Corporation.

Mr Teo Chong Tee: Sir, I thank the Minister for his detailed explanation. I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment by leave, withdrawn,

The Chairman: Amendment No. (3), Mr Ng.

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

Mr Tan Soo Khoon: Sir, I beg to move,

That the total sum to be allocated for Head J of the Main Estimates be reduced by $100.

Sir, bold and firm policies implemented by a Government guided by pragmatism since the early 60's, together with the collective and intelligent response of the people, have enabled us to overcome the grim question of our survival as a nation. Whereas other countries, bathing in the throes of newly acquired independence, grabbled around with immaterial and emotive issues of political dogma, language and religion, we took steady and calculative steps forward into the future by marking out for ourselves the fundamentals that shaped our nation. Steeled by memories of colonial suppression and of an even earlier era of persecution by Occupation forces, motivated by the realization that only they can be masters of their own destinies, one generation has built in 15 years of independence, a nation each and every one of us is proud of.

In arriving at political stability and economic and social progress, sacrifices have been made in the past by our people. That they have so responded is indicative of their commitment to this country and its future. No less than a true Singaporean would have participated in the process of nation building, and we have built a nation.

That even later generations will be even more Singaporean is without doubt. Implicit in any sound national education policy must be the need to instil and inculcate good citizenship, good neighbourliness and patriotism. When this is achieved, the individual will think not just of himself but in terms of others. In this respect, it cannot be doubted that we have succeeded. Our young take pride in serving in the defence of our country. No more tears are shed when our young ones answer the call of the nation, for each knows that it is his due to his country. Months later, we see scenes of proud parents beaming with delight as they see their sons marching resplendently past during passing-out parades.

Singaporeans who go abroad return with the feeling that there is nothing like their own country. They are all proud to be Singaporeans, whatever their experiences abroad. A Singaporean abroad identifies himself as one from Singapore. When asked, he does not deny that he is of Chinese or of Indian, or of Malay origin, for the cultural roots are still there, and he cannot hide the colour of his skin. But he is first and foremost a Singaporean, coming from a nation that his father, and his father before him, have helped to build. The strong sense of identity as a Singaporean has been forged since young - at home and in the schools. No doubt when called upon to do so, our younger generation will repeat the sacrifices made by the older generation in the process of nation building.

That Government policies have been geared towards this end have never been in doubt. That our crowds chorused in unison when our national football team won a decisive victory over the Chinese team, as distinct from what happened long ago when our people cheered the visiting Chinese table-tennis team against our very own, is indicative of our having acquired a Singapore identity. In fact, we have been cheering for our home team for years. Our people even travel to Malaysia to support the national team in the "away" matches. They know that every man on the field has made his sacrifice in terms of time and effort spent in training, and when it comes to the time of reckoning he must be backed to the hilt. The Singaporean knows what it is like to struggle against odds, for in the process of nation-building he has been pitted against, and overcome seemingly insurmountable obstacles and, likewise in the field of sports, he can be forgiven if he chooses, like sports fans everywhere, to favour the underdog when his own national team is not involved. For the underdog too faces an uphill struggle and David, not Goliath, has always been the hero.

But in his enthusiasm and zeal, the Singapore sports fan must not go overboard, especially when the underdog is from the land of his forefathers, and the protagonist his close neighbour. For then the Singaporean unwittingly allows himself to be charged with displaying bias out of ethnic considerations. That this has happened in the foreign press has been most unfortunate, for the Singaporean must in sports be a sporting fellow and, as in all other facets of life, display fairness, courtesy and consideration to others and the Singaporean must at all times remain sensitive to the feelings of those close to us. This is what maturity is all about.

The Singaporean must realize that his neighbours also count on him, and he too will have occasion to count on them another day. It is the close neighbour and friend - not the distant relative - who will come to us when we are in need, for they too have as much at stake as we have. Much as we have directed our efforts to forge a national identity, so too must we now do the necessary to drive home this point.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: Mr Speaker, Sir, thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak. First of all, I wish to express my full support for the sentiments expressed by my Friend, the Member for Alexandra. In his reply to queries on the programmes of the SBC, the Acting Minister for Culture mentioned something about Singapore identity. The Member for Alexandra also made the same observation.

In his statement on "A Philosophy of Government" which was part of the Addendum to the Presidential Address dated 8th February, 1977 [Hansard Vol. 36 cols. 52 and 54] the Hon. Prime Minister stated:

'For Singaporeans, it cannot be a simple copying of either China, the Malaysian archipelago, or India, from whence most of our ancestors came. Nor can we be a copy of Britain, which governed Singapore for some 150 years, but as a colony through an appointed governor, not an elected Parliament.

We are different from China, the Malaysian archipelago, India and Britain. We are Singaporeans. We must seek practical solutions, solutions which will work in our context, to our problems which are basically Southeast Asian.'

And he went on:

'Man does not live by broad alone. Hence we take immense pride that in the past two decades we have begun the process of forging one people out of disparate groups brought together by the accident of history. Disasters, floods and famines in China, India and the archipelago around us, led to successive waves of migration of different peoples of different races, different religions and different cultures. We have become a more integrated society than we have ever been in the past.'

What I wish to re-emphasise in the above statement are three simple words: "We are Singaporeans." This is the national identity of Singapore, a Singaporean Singapore which we forge. I had dealt with the need to evolve such an identity in my debate on the President's Speech. Amongst other points made, I suggested how this notional identity can be evolved by the Ministry of Culture through its media of broadcasting and television. And I quote from the same Hansard, Vol. 36, col. 279:

'Its programmes (that is, the RTS, but now the SBC) and productions must be carefully planned, selected and thought out. In short what is relevant to our national cultural evolution towards the Singapore identity should be exploited to the optimum.'

My question is, "How much have we done in this respect?" The radio and TV programmes of the Singapore Broadcasting Corporation must be geared towards inculcating attitudes and political understanding as well as to educate and inform the public.

Whilst I agree that there have been improvements in the programmes, I must say that there is plenty of room for improve- ment; hence the SBC should be aware of its crucial role as the mass media to educate and inform the public and ultimately help quicken the pace towards achieving the national aspiration, that of a Singapore identity. Another question is, "What plans has the SBC got in this respect?" 3.00 p.m.

On the other hand, the Ministry of Culture should keep a very close watch on another form of mass media - the local press. They too have an equally important role to play in the evolution of a Singapore identity. We have seen how press reports slanted; how sensationalism played up: how sentiments whipped up; how editorials stoked up chauvinistic sentiments, and the like. To my mind, press reports should be factual and informative; and if there are criticisms these should be constructive and not destructive or malicious to Singapore. They can also disagree on certain issues. In short, we want fair comment. This view should not be construed as press control. Nevertheless, it should be viewed as maintaining the Singapore identity for, after all, the press is accountable to the people and the nation of Singapore. They must be loyal to Singapore.

On the national front, the Ministry of Culture has been quite vigilant, such as taking action against those who persist in acts detrimental to Singapore. But there are others outside Singapore who for one reason or another, write bad about Singapore because they do not like Singapore. Singaporeans must be aware of them. They are an unfriendly lot who are ever-wanting to put Singapore in bad light for their own ends. They exist even among our ASEAN countries. Take, for example, the badminton match between Indonesia and China played here recently. When the Indonesian men's teem lost, some of the Indonesian papers made adverse reports on the fans who watched the matches. They singled out Singaporeans for attack. Were these so-called papers looking for a scapegoat just because they could not take defeat, or was it because they had other motives? I would like to believe that it is the latter. I do not believe that all the badminton fans, numbering some 7,000, were all Singaporeans and that all except the Indonesian fans were cheering for the Chinese players and jeering at the Indonesian players. The question, therefore, is: "Why do these Indonesian papers want to stoke up heat against Singapore?" They themselves can best answer this question. But I would add that there are much bigger political stakes behind all these campaigns.

Hence, the sooner Singaporeans become aware of power politics behind international games, the quicker we can forge a Singapore identity. By all means, cheer for Singapore when Singapore play against other countries and please, no jeers for the opponents.

Here, I am more than happy to hear the Kallang Roar in the pre-Olympic Soccer match when Singapore beat China. Such is the evolution of a Singapore identity.

My overall question to the Minister is simply: "How soon can we develop the reflexes and sinews of a Singapore identity?"

Dr Koh Lip Lin (Nee Soon): Mr Speaker, Sir, thank you for allowing me to speak.

Sir, I would like to make some comments in connection with the various points raised by the hon. Member for Alexandra and the hon. Member for Punggol. Both Members referred to the recent friendly badminton match between Indonesia and the People's Republic of China and the subsequent comments in several Indonesian newspapers. I was quite disturbed by these comments, particularly the strong words used by some of the writers or editorials. They have made use of this incident to cast doubt upon our achievement in creating a Singaporean identity as well as our sincerity in subscribing to the ASEAN spirit.

Sir, it is quite common for the spectators in a match to give greater moral support to one side than to the other. However, I myself did not attend the matches. I watched part of the match on TV live telecast and read some of the reports in our local papers. I noticed that there were some spectators who cheered for the Chinese players and some write-ups in the newspapers commented on their good performance, but there were also some who supported the Indonesians. I did not realise that the Indonesians were so unhappy to the extent of expressing resentment openly in the newspapers and accusing the Singapore public for being pro-China.

Sir, I think this is a good time for us to look at the problem seriously ourselves. Have we really created a Singaporean identity? Are we the Singaporeans we claim to be? I have no doubt that the absolute majority of our citizens identify themselves as Singaporeans. In fact, many Singaporeans do not realise how Singaporean they are until they go abroad to visit a foreign country. I am sure most of the Singaporeans who have travelled abroad agree with me. Sir, it is not enough just to satisfy ourselves that we are Singaporeans. We must convince our friends, our neighbours and the whole world that we are Singaporeans.

The promotion of moral education has been discussed a great deal recently. I think equally important is the promotion of cultural education. What I mean by cultural education is not only the cultivation of a true Singapore culture but also the promotion of an awareness of a Singaporean identity that should be reflected not only in the behaviour of the individual but also in mass behaviour, whether it be the crowd at a badminton match, the audience in a musical concert or at any other gatherings of Singaporeans, we should make ourselves to be seen and felt as Singaporeans.

For the younger generation, cultural education can be introduced to the general public by incorporating into our moral education programmes the relevant concepts and ideas. It is the responsibility of the Ministry of Culture to ensure, through its various activities and programmes, that the Singaporean public will be properly educated and that there is within each one of us a true Singapore identity.

As pointed out by a number of hon. Members who spoke earlier, Singapore TV and radio, now under the management of the Singapore Broadcasting Corporation, will no doubt play an important role in the cultivation of Singapore culture and the promotion of a Singaporean identity. I am told that 80% of our TV programmes are imported, and these include the most popular programmes. I would suggest that the SBC look into ways and means of producing more Singapore programmes. Being a statutory board now, I am sure the SBC is in a better position to produce more and better local programmes.

Encik Sidek bin Saniff (Kolam Ayer): Mr Speaker, Sir, it took us almost 20 years to build up confidence and faith to finally emerge as a strong and viable nation, free of attachment to any nation.

Under the unhappy pressures of the early 60's, our leaders managed successfully to generate clear ideas about our nation-to-be. With clear perceptions of the problems and with correct values imposed, we managed to build our nation of Singaporeans. The process of nation-building is not complete yet, but we can already feel that a new nation is born. It has emerged out of difficulties and complexities to become strong, viable and proud of its own identity.

To me, this identity at times is more felt than visible. I am made more aware of this new breed of notion every time I go abroad. Once, while in New Zealand, a Singapore student of Chinese origin took time off to visit me in my capacity as a Singapore MP, and not a Malay MP. Incidents like these are very gratifying. I am sure many citizens who have travelled abroad have felt the tie and pride of our nation every time we meet another Singaporean.

As far as our national identity is concerned, I do not think it is a problem yet. We Singaporeans do not suffer any identity crisis. Ours is a new-born nation. Our visible identity as such is freshness and youth. Many nations have recognised us as a strong, viable, industrious, incorruptible and intelligent people. Very soon they will also recognise us as a socially disciplined and a more courteous people. Travellers who stop in Singapore know that we are people of multilingual ability.

Singaporeans are aware that they are multi-racial but they also know that they have no racial prejudice. But there is, among the older generation, some emotional attachments. And among the youth there is some affection as a result of misguided idealism. Nevertheless, I am sure many Singaporeans believe that they can evolve a new civilisation out of the three great cultures and traditions they have inherited. We are a plant with many roots and, as such, we are a strong, green and lively plant to be reckoned with in the near future.

A social scientist by the name of Klapp says:

'What others perceive as our identity is equally important as what we ourselves say what we are.'

He defines identity as:

"All things a person may legitimately say about himself - his status, his name, his personality, his past life. The clue to the problem is to be found in the structural changes in society. If his social context is unreliable, it follows that he cannot say anything legitimately and reliably about himself. His statement of identity has no more reliability then a currency which depends upon the willingness of the people to recognise and accept it. An identity problem is "almost" always associated with unsatisfactory "feed back" from others.' 3.15 p.m.

Since it is difficult for us Singaporeans to be identified by our physical features, we have to project our image by behaviours that we have been known to have claimed. As far as this goes, we have made quite a name for ourselves as I mentioned earlier, "People recognise us as a strong, viable, industrious, incorruptible and intelligent people, with multi-lingual ability and very soon they will also recognise us as a socially disciplined and a more courteous people." The Singaporean is slowly but surely projecting a good image of himself all over the world. I speak with optimism which will be so characteristic of the Singaporean in the future.

A new emerging Singapore cannot help being the centre of attraction among nations. Ours was a bold experiment in nation building and as such became a subject of scrutiny. The pragmatism that had weathered us through the hopeless situation in the 60's to the present progress and achievements have awed many nations to disbelief (and some with envy), and they can only conclude that we have so succeeded at the expense, at the sacrifice, of a national identity.

Many hard-core critics find comfort in continuously painting us as faceless Singaporeans. But to Singaporeans at large, especially the new Singapore generation, these critics serve only one role: a constant reminder of what we should not fall into.

Scientists could be more appreciative of our stature by virtue of their training and their faith in the realm of possibilities. We have seen as a fact that a baby can be born of a mother other than the natural mother. Such new-born babies are new beings and yet similar and normal like others. They have a bit of their natural parents and a bit of their surrogate parent. Such babies are a reality and a possibility of the present age.

Singaporeans are in some ways like this new breed of babies born out of the womb of the goo-politics of this age. We are new-born that some people could only see skin-deep. They quite often fail to see beyond our physical outlooks. They do not see our inheritance, endowments and potentialities and the environment that nurture us. Thus, those critics not only fail to see the difference but also our own special traits. However, social scientists like Ibn Khaldun and Le Play had dealt at great length about "the environmental factor" in the moulding of a person's personality and subsequently the emerging of a nation's identity.

Unlike our critics, the scientist will tell us that if a child looks like his father it does not mean that he will behave exactly like his father and have the same ideal. But common cheap critics will do just that: "because the Chinese form the majority in this state, we will be like China. We will be pro-China always." This is certainly being too simplistic, at the same time socially and politically myopic.

If we have been perceived poorly, may be it is partly our fault. We have not sufficiently projected our image, especially abroad. Foreigners may have known more of our Singapore Girl than the real Singaporeans.

To correct this, I would like to suggest that along with the more conscious role of our mass media, the government services and the private sector should provide more tour opportunities to our hard-working people as bonuses. They should be given holidays, with all expenses paid, to visit ASEAN countries, primarily.

An hon. Member: Hear! Hear!

Encik Sidek bin Saniff: Well, the Japanese did it. This will help us eventually to project a better image of ourselves. If this is done, I am sure that our Singapore Chinese will not be mistaken as Beijing Chinese, Singapore Malays as Kelantan Malays, and Singapore Indian as Kerala Indian.

As an ideal, we must think of a universal identity in which man begins to see common factors and common needs as human beings, not by religious or cultural creeds.

If this is done prudently, it will also rectify certain disturbing characteristics of our young Singaporeans. In this region I believe there is a tendency among some of our people to look upon themselves as superior in many ways. Our people must be made to understand that, with time, there will be better economic growth and more equitable distribution of wealth, and with it a better spread of economic well-being.

Given that prerogative, we and our neighbours will identify ourselves by common impersonal factors and less and less with racial factors and origins.

We will find then that the saying, "Blood is thicker than water" does not hold water; it may not apply anymore. Instead, the Chinese saying Yuan gin bu ru jin ling [ ] which means "Distant relatives are no better than close neighbours" may be more appropriate because close neighbours are often better than distant relatives.

Mr Ho See Beng (Khe Bong): Mr Speaker, Sir, when the referendum for Merger and Malaysia was held in 1962, the questions of citizenship, national identity and the centre of loyalty were subjects of great debate in the then Legislative Assembly as well as in the hustings. The Government of the day then was in grave danger of collapse, with overwhelming pressure of social, economic and political problems brought about by the then opposition parties, Unemployment was critical, and there was no way of solving the problem in the immediate future.

In determining to foil Merger and Malaysia, the Barisan Sosialis used unscrupulous methods to agitate and inflame the feelings of the Chinese with racial and cultural controversies in the hope of swaying their votes against the issue at stake. They even rumour-mongered that if merger between Singapore and Malaya succeeded, the Chinese would not be allowed to eat pork.

Sir, everybody knew what the Barisan Sosialis stood for, and what the consequences would be had they won the Merger and Malaysia issue. Fed with falsehood by the Barisan Sosialis and subjected to overwhelming influences along racial and cultural lines, the Chinese in Singapore, nevertheless, stood up and identified themselves as Singaporeans by voting for Merger and Malaysia.

Mr Speaker, Sir, this historic event proved beyond a shadow of doubt that the Chinese are genuinely pro-Singapore, and what other people say about them does not matter, because events would prove them wrong again in future. If the Chinese people cannot be influenced to support the policy of the Barisan Sosialis in 1962 when Singapore's economy was at a low ebb, I see no reason for them to be pro-China now, especially when our economic situation has improved by leaps and bounds and our per capita income has exceeded $4,000, In the words of the Chinese Foreign Minister, Mr Huang Hua, it would take China 20 years from now to be able to reach $1,000 income per capita. Hence, it would be foolish to say that the Singaporean Chinese prefer China to Singapore.

With regard to the adverse comments made by the Indonesian newspapers on the behaviour and attitude of the spectators at a friendly badminton match between Indonesia and China on 22nd and 23rd February, 1980, strong criticism was levelled at the spectators for being pro-China and anti-Indonesia by Merdeka and its English language newspaper, the Indonesian Observer. These two newspapers appeared to be holding our Government responsible for the spectators' behaviour and attitude. I know in no uncertain terms that the charges alleged by these two newspapers do not represent the opinion of the majority of the Indonesians nor the view of the Indonesian Government. They seemed to be unhappy with us one way or the other. However, I wish to sound a word of caution to the Chinese community of Singapore - they must remain alert at all times and allow no doubts whatsoever to be cast on their national identity as citizens of Singapore.

On this note, Mr Speaker, Sir, may I conclude by reminding these two newspapers concerned that the Singapore ethnic Chinese cannot change their outward features nor need they be apologetic about it, and it would be grossly unfair to penalise them for an accident in life. 3.30 p.m.

Mr Ho Kah Leong (Jurong): ( In Mandarin): Sir, a little while ago Members of Parliament in this House have expressed their opinions and I share the same sentiments with them. We have been independent for over 14 years, but in the promotion of national consciousness and national identity we have not done enough. So we should strive harder in the fields of education and culture.

Sir, a country with its people lacking in national consciousness and identity is like a heap of loose sand. Such a people would only know how to make money and to earn a living. They would take to their heels should a crisis befall them. Lacking in national consciousness and identity sometimes would make a people myopic, their vision blurred because of ethnic, religious and other factors, so that they would not be able to exercise correct judgement on events going on around them.

Of course, we cannot take the response shown by some of the audience at the recent badminton matches between China and Indonesia to be a reflection of the general attitude of the whole populace of Singapore, and thus there is no national identity. The audience of a few thousand people at the Badminton Stadium is only a fraction of the total population of 2.3 million. Therefore, that does not truly reflect the general attitude of Singaporeans. However, it is regrettable that the behaviour of certain fans has aroUsed strong sentiments which have been expressed in the Indonesian newspapers.

We can now take stock of this and see how we can strengthen the inculcation of national consciousness and national identity in our people. Of course, all this belongs to the realm of idealism which cannot be formed overnight and cannot be ordered into being through any magic formula. Just now my colleagues have suggested several methods, including the suggestion that the Singapore Broadcasting Corporation should formulate more good programmes in order to cultivate a sense of national consciousness and identity into our people. There was also the suggestion that newspapers must take up the responsibility of publishing more of such articles to cultivate in our people the aspiration to formulate a national identity. It will take a long time to achieve our aim.

While to teach our people to look after their own national interest first, which is both proper and necessary, we should also be mindful of the interests of our region, especially ASEAN. Just now, the Member for Kolam Ayer correctly quoted the Chinese proverb yuan qin bu ru jin ling ( ) namely, distant relatives are no better than closer neighbours. Our fate is linked with the fate of ASEAN. We must all be united for the sake of political safeguards and economic interests. Therefore, we must take upon ourselves to cultivate in our people the spirit of ASEAN. Between countries, they can have mutual relationship only on the basis of trust and mutual understanding. According to the Member for Nee Soon and also the Member for Kolam Ayer, it is easier for us to understand others but it is not so easy or simple for others to understand us. I feel that in this respect the Government has not done enough.

Let me give my views here for the consideration of the Minister. Firstly, the Ministry of Culture should produce some sort of a pictorial magazine which can be an official publication of our scenes, activities and national policies. This publication may include various articles and pictures, whose content will project our national identity and achieve profound propaganda effect on foreign readers.

Secondly, send Parliamentary delegations abroad on friendly visits to neighbouring countries. We must not depend only on contacts between higher levels for relations between countries. We must also look forward to contacts at lower levels. Through these contacts at various levels and visits abroad, we can, to a great extent, promote a better relationship. As Parliamentary Members, their visits will promote national policies and foster closer mutual relationships.

Thirdly, various international organisations and conventions should not try to economise by cutting down on the number of participants or just sending scant delegations which are hastily-assembled for the purpose. Some of these conferences or conventions might not appear to be capable of yielding worthwhile results. However, there is a saying that you keep an army for a thousand days, so that you can use it for only one day. Sometimes, it may turn out that these conventions and organisations concerned are very useful and necessary. So we must attach great importance to this, and be better prepared to send properly composed delegations abroad to international functions, Although we are small, we still have to engage in international relations, otherwise we may find ourselves in an isolated position.

Mr C.V. Devan Nair (Anson): Sir, when the Senior Vice-Premier of the People's Republic of China visited Singapore, it was politely but emphatically brought to his attention that we do not like to hear the term "overseas Chinese" in Singapore, for there are no overseas Chinese in Singapore. If there are a few, they ought to get back. Neither are there any overseas Indians in Singapore. If there are, they can take a free one-way ticket back to India. And there are no overseas Malays in Singapore. There are only Singaporeans. The Senior Vice-Premier of China got that message.

I know several Members of this House of ethnic Chinese origin have visited China, and they have returned as even more patriotic Singaporeans. I know the Member for Khe Bong, for example, prefers life in Singapore, and if he does respect certain aspects of life in China he prefers to respect China from a very safe distance. I admire the spiritual riches of India, but I like to d9 so from a very safe distance. Among other reasons, I like modern sanitation.

One wonders whether international sporting competitions make for international harmony or international disharmony. I think the English writer, George Orwell, was the first to write very convincingly of the dangers of international sporting competitions. Far from increasing international understanding, very often they tend to arouse not international harmony but narrow national passions.

For the leader writers, reporters and correspondents who have been writing recently in the Indonesian press, I will give them one illustration. This kind of thing can only happen in Singapore. Just two months ago, my son got married to a Chinese girl in a Hindu temple and to make doubly sure of insurance coverage in the beyond they also took the precaution of getting married in a christian chapel. I do not know whether they have any plans for conciliating the Chinese Gods as yet. But that kind of thing can only happen in Singapore.

But we might take this occasion, Sir, to say a few words to all those Singaporeans who flock to Kallang and indulge in what the press has called the "Kallang roar" and ask them to bear in mind that human beings do not roar. Only animals do. The right attitude towards sporting competitions is to applaud, whatever team it may be, for the merit of its performance. I am afraid our football fans have to become a bit more civilised and not to lose themselves in narrow sentiments. That Kallang roar is essentially an idiotic roar. I would hope that our soccer fans and all those who watch sporting competitions develop the true sporting spirit. Please applaud competing teems on their merits and not on the basis of the nationality they belong to. For if they do not do so, they are not sportsmen or appreciators of sports but people who bring about misunderstanding and a bad reputation for this country.

It is to be hoped that community loaders, Members of Parliament, all of us who are in a position to do something, should bring to beer whatever influence we can to get our crowd to behave in a more rational and civilised manner.

Mr Tan Cheng San (Paya Lebar): ( In Mandarin): Sir, the Ministry of Culture has an important role to play in the inculcation of a national identity. Our society is a multi-racial and multi-cultural one. All of us are closely linked together in a common destiny. We have a common concept and a very strong sense of belonging to our Republic of Singapore. Singapore's prosperity and stability are linked with those of ASEAN countries. We have human resources. That our national economy can continue to grow is due to the patriotic spirit of our people. International military, political and economic scenes are changing swiftly. Yet, in the midst of these changes, we are still able to step steadily forward, We were able, time and again, to overcome various problems. Today, our people are enjoying a better livelihood. This is the result of the good leadership of our Government and the people's great love for their own country. Our people have been working hard day and night to create a better life and home. Our young people, full of enthusiasm, serve keenly in the national regular defence force or are in national service receiving stringent military training in order to defend our own country. All this goes to show that we have cultivated a national consciousness and identity among our people. Our entire people are imbued with the patriotic sense of "to be born here and to die here" and the will to strive hard together for the building of a more prosperous and a more stable Republic of Singapore. 3.45 p.m.

Mr Hwang Soo Jin (Jalan Kayu): Mr Speaker, Sir, the objective of the Cultural Programme of the Ministry for 1980 is shown as: "to promote the creation and development of a national cultural identity." The immediate impression conveyed is that a Singaporean cultural identity has not emerged as yet and, therefore, needs to be created and developed. Whatever the correct interpretation, I have no intention of getting involved. I would leave the arguments to the intellectuals. What interests me today is not our national cultural identity but rather our national identity.

As far as the Singaporean national identity is concerned, I have not the slightest doubt that we have succeeded since independence in creating a distinct national identity. We are Singaporeans and proud of the fact. Despite the diverse cultural and ethnic origins of our people, we have succeeded in bringing about a cohesive nation. We have instilled in our people a keen sense of nationhood. The important thing now is to ensure the constant reinforcement of this feeling, this sense of belonging. Our cultural development program me can only be meaningful if it contributes towards the continuous strengthening of the Singaporean identity not only in the hearts and minds of our own people but also in the eyes of our ASEAN friends. In an increasingly turbulent and difficult world, we need friends more than ever. ASEAN has shown its effectiveness as a meaningful regional grouping. We have benefited both politically and economically by being a member. If we hope to continue to derive benefits by our participation, then we must make certain that we continue to enjoy the trust and support of other member-countries.

Members who have spoken before me have referred to the extremely unpleasant reactions of some of the Indonesian newspapers towards the behaviour of spectators at the recent badminton match held here between Indonesia and China. The incident serves only too well to remind us of the delicate balance existing in international relationship. The vulnerability of the situation is such that it could lend itself so easily to devious exploitations by foreign powers out to undermine ASEAN solidarity and to subvert the security of individual member-countries. Fairly or unfairly, our spectators were thought to have displayed excessive chauvinist partisan sentiment for the Chinese team. I have no intention of defending our spectators nor to speculate on the motives of those who spoke out so vehemently against us. What I see in the incident is an important object lesson to be learned and that is: we should endeavour to get our people to think more in terms of ASEAN solidarity.

We may have been remiss in not puffing in more efforts to project the correct Singaporean image among our ASEAN friends. Perhaps the rectification of this serious aberration could be made an additional objective of the Ministry. The breakdown in communication resulting from the lack of social contact is often the cause of misunderstanding and misconception. The Ministry may also consider more frequent reciprocal cultural exchanges aiming at promoting closer people-to-people contact with our ASEAN partners.

The fact that some of us Singaporeans are of ethnic Chinese origin does not automatically make us pro-China or "the loyal citizens of the Middle Kingdom", as some outsiders seem to think, I do not think we need to be apologetic or defensive because of our origin. We may be Chinese by race but our value judgments, attitudes and our way of life are so vastly different from those of the present generation of Chinese in China. These differences are bound to increase further with time. I visited China with a group lost year. The feeling inside me was not one of excitement felt on "home-coming". It was more a sense of curiosity and a sense of shock - cultural shock. I was shocked by the gray uniformity of the teeming mass of people everywhere, gray in appearances and in thoughts. When we were first surrounded and stared upon by a large crowd in one of the cities visited, attracted no doubt by our outlandish appearance and the strange gibberish among ourselves, for once I know how caged animals in a zoo must feel. The expression on the faces of the onlookers was not one of recognition but emotionless curiosity. You might say that the feeling was mutual on our part but on a totally different mental wave length. I told myself, "i don't think I want to be one of them; I don't think I can, even if I try, to tune my mental wave length to theirs. Give me any time my individuality of mind and behaviour; the free and easy atmosphere, not to mention the good life we enjoy in Singapore." Yes, China is great; it has a long and colourful history. It is a vast country with a vast population. But so is India: so are many other countries. Singapore is small, but as far as I am concerned, it is great because it is our own.

Dr Lau Teik Soon (Serangoon Gardens): Mr Speaker, Sir, I share most of the sentiments expressed by my colleagues who have spoken before me. I would like to reiterate a point which has been made, that is, nation building. In the matter of notion building, the Ministry of Culture has a vital role to play. As stated by the Member for Punggol, one of the objectives of the Ministry should be to inculcate in Singaporeans a sense of national pride and consciousness and an awareness of national values and sentiments; in other words, the Singapore way of thought and action. We all know that it is very difficult to define exactly what the Singaporean national identity is. But every effort should be made now to speed up the process of establishing and enhancing national identity.

The process of nation building can be left to the community organisations, cultural groups and clan associations. However, there is an obvious disadvantage if it is left to these organisations alone because of the self-interest involved and the traditionally-bound ways of the cultural and community organisations.

A more effective way would be for the Ministry of Culture to introduce programmes which are aimed at inculcating notional values and consciousness. The hon. Member for Jurong has suggested that a magazine be produced. I support his suggestion. I would like, however, to make another suggestion. Every home has at least a radio or television and the Ministry, through the SBC, therefore, is able to bring the message to nearly every Singaporean. I would suggest, therefore, that the SBC introduce a weekly programme which will expedite our efforts at creating a national identity.

Sir, I would like to deal further with the point that has already been raised, namely, the role of the press in nation building. The newspapers have their contribution to make. The newspaper is read in nearly every home. For many, the day starts with the reading of the morning newspaper. And through the newspapers, the national identity can be enhanced or undermined.

The headlines of newspapers are especially important because they highlight the news items and catch the immediate attention of the readers, who may or may not read the contents or details. And headlines are often sensationalized or exaggerate comment on the news items. Often, they do not bear any relationship to the actual significance or impact of the events. Unfortunately, however, as these headlines are immediately reed, they may create lasting impressions on the readers. And these impressions may not be correct ones.

On the matter of news presentation and its impact on the national identity, I would like to caution newspaper editors that they should be sensitive to certain issues which have a bearing on our efforts in nation building. Sir, the hon. Member for Kolam Ayer has said that perception is an important aspect of our nation building process. It is important to remember that the way in which foreigners, and especially our neighbours, perceive us is as important, if not more important, than the way we perceive ourselves. In other words, we say we are Singaporeans but our neighbours may not think so. And our neighbours' perception may be unwittingly assisted by the way in which our newspapers present certain news headlines.

Let me quote examples from recent reports of two sports events which have already been referred to. In the pre-Olympics football competition, Singapore beat China with a score of 1-0. This, of course, is a matter of great pride to us. The report of the Sunday Times, 9th March, 1980, on page 36 stated "Sensational Singapore" and "Great Wall of China crashes." The headlines are, of course, exaggerated. No doubt, the victory was a tremendous achievement, but I fail to see how the victory of Singapore over China in a football match has led to the crash of the Great Wall of China. Anyway, I am sure that the Chinese are unperturbed by the headlines.

Then there was the friendly badminton match between China and Indonesia. The Sunday Times, of 24th February 1980, gave this headline, "'King' falls and Indonesia crumble." In this case, the headline is most unfortunate. The reporter was ignorant of the sensitivity of the event.

4.00 p.m.

We are all aware that, for the Indonesians, badminton is a matter of national pride. The Indonesians are the unofficial world champions in badminton and Liem Swie King is the All-England champion. In the friendly match here, not only did Liem Swie King lose his match to the Chinese players but the Indonesians lost in the men's event. The report, unfortunately, rubbed salt into the wounds of the Indonesians, when it stated, after the Chinese had won their winning point:

'Pandemonium broke out in the hall soon after the Chinese had seized the winning point, and staunch supporters stampeded onto the court to congratulate the Chinese pair, who were lost for words.'

Then in summarizing the friendly badminton match, the report concluded:

'But the climax of the entire night's proceedings must surely be Liem's dethronement. The crowd broke loose and swarmed the court to chair the now champion. The King was dead. Long live the king.'

Sir, such emotive statements are unnecessary. But, unfortunately, they have given Indonesian editors the wrong impression that all the spectators were for China.

On the first day of this friendly match, China managed to draw with Indonesia. And the same reporter attributed the Chinese efforts in the following terms:

'And it was largely the strong vocal support that the local crowd lent to the Chinese that made this possible.'

Sir, this is pure nonsense. China played according to their own ability - they did not need our support - and we should not claim credit for the Chinese efforts. But because of this statement, others have been left with the wrong impression.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the hon. Member for Anson has mentioned the relationship between politics and sports. Often politics and sports are sometimes inseparable. In the case that I have just mentioned, the reports of a friendly badminton match in the Straits Times and the Sunday Times have been construed by the Indonesian news editors as proof of the empathy of the Singaporeans for China and, conversely, the unfriendliness of Singaporeans towards the Indonesians. This conclusion, in my view, is of course unfounded. But can we blame the Indonesian editors, judging by the way in which the event has been reported in our press?

What I would like to reiterate, therefore, is that newspaper editors in Singapore should be sensitive to issues which may have implications for the nation-building process and particularly for our image as Singaporeans. I hope that in the training programme for reporters, the management of newspapers (such as the Straits Times) would introduce a course which will deal with the subject of news presentation and its impact on sensitive national issues. Sir, I am not for total press control. But I hope the Hon. Minister and the Ministry would counsel the management of the newspapers here on matters like the issues that I have raised.

The Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Labour (Mr Fong Sip Chee): Mr Speaker, Sir, thank you for the permission for me to address the House.

The speeches hitherto seem to imply that the Ministry of Culture has not done enough in the matter of creating a national identity, Sir, I do not wish to indulge in an exercise to blame the press. By the way, the headlines are not written by the reporters; they are written by the sub-editors. Neither do I want to use the House to educate the spectators or the Kallang roar, since the Member for Anson has said that only animals roar and I shall try to refrain from making this House roar.

Sir, I think the basic question is a soul-searching one. It is not so much how we behave or what people perceive us to be in the stadium. National identity is the sum total of what we have been doing, what we manifest, whether we succeed or fail. In fact, I recall that just before the People's Action Party celebrated its 25th anniversary, the Minister for Trade and Industry, the Senior Minister of State for Foreign Affairs (Mr S. Dhanabalan), the Political Secretary to the Minister for Science and Technology and I had a discussion to pick a theme for the celebrations. Several ideas and suggestions were proffered. Finally, I proposed that the theme for the party celebrations was to follow the theme of the exhibition, i.e. "The Party, the People and the State." And thanks to the Political Secretary to the Minister for Science and Technology, he refined it to "The Party, the People and the Nation." He said that "nation" is a more emotive word. Sir, therein lies the crux of the matter: what are we? If I were to sum up what we have done at the risk of being preposterous, then I would say all that the PAP has done, not this year, not last year, but since 1954, right from the beginning is to create that Singapore national identity.

It is an irony that the behaviour of spectators in a sports stadium should command such an interest in the press and also in this House. But really, Sir, this is a question we cannot hide and it is a question that we have been asking ourselves. Try to ask a Chinese, what is a Chinese? Try to ask an Indian who is a Singapore citizen, what is an Indian? Ask an American, what is an American? We find that if we ask 100 Americans, we will probably get 100 definitions of what the American identity is. Someone asked me, "What do you think of the United Kingdom?" I replied in two words, "Strikes and football." Someone asked me, "What is the American image?" I said, "Hamburger." Unfortunately, the Scandinavian countries have taken over the sex part of the American society.

Sir, I remember many years ago an American diplomat and I were having a discussion and, although he did not put the question in plain terms, the Chinese question repeatedly came up. I told him of my experience when I was in Canada. When I referred to the Canadian French, I was promptly corrected, "No. it is the French Canadian." They are all Canadians. They have the English Canadian and the French Canadian. So I told this American diplomat that there are Chinese Singaporeans, Malay Singaporeans and Indian Singaporeans, and not Singaporean Chinese or Singaporean Malay. Of course, I pre-empted his next question. I told him that he probably wanted to know how Chinese we were. First of all, as the Member for Kolam Ayer has said, we are here as a result of an accident in history. It is true that the Chinese people are in the majority in Singapore. I do not think we should apologise for that. Our forefathers were not here of their own free will. I told this American diplomat how Chinese we were or we are today. I said, "We are as Chinese as President Eisenhower was German. He fought the Germans. We are as Chinese as President Kennedy was Irish or a descendant of an Irishman. That was what we were and still are today."

We are here as a result of an accident of history. But the important thing is that we are here to stay. We have seen many newly emerging countries fall flat shortly after they acquired independence or they believed they had independence. As I said earlier, the Singaporean identity is the sum total of what we have done, our education system, our way of life, our thinking, our behaviour, our dress, our speech and even our own Singapore English. Whether it is Chinese slang, Indian slang or Malay slang, it is our English.

Sir, the reason for why we are what we are is that we have succeeded. Many countries have failed because the moment they acquired independence, they could not produce that small group of hardcore, dedicated, incorruptible, honest and pragmatic leadership - that small corps of men - and therefore collapsed. And the moment they collapsed, other forces moved in. The country is there to be grabbed. We have seen what happened in the other continents. After long years of fighting for independence, countries which are very rich in culture, the people have got their own way of life, own languages, their own beliefs, but because they have failed, they are not allowed to be what they were. So other countries move in. Afghanistan is one country where foreign forces have moved in. The country is there for the grab. So there is no national identity to talk about. It is a case of other people imposing their national identity on you. But we are Singaporeans. We have acquired our identity fortunately. because we succeeded. It is as simple as that. Imagine, if we had failed, we would not be what we are. There would not be anybody talking about the Singaporean identity.

Sir, I do believe we have an identity. It is difficult for me to put it in words or in expressive terms. But I like to use a little bit of statistics. Some years ago people talked about the ugly Singaporean. So there is a Singaporean. Whether he is a beautiful or ugly Singaporean, he is a Singaporean. Someone said, "Materialistically, Singaporean has 1-2-3-4-5 identities." A Singaporean has one wife, two children, a three-room fist, four wheels (which the Minister for Communications is not very happy) and a five-figure salary. That is the materialistic Singaporean.

What is the spiritualistic Singaporean then? I used to laugh when mention is made that Singapore is a land of campaigns. You name it and we produce a campaign the next day. In fact, I told the House once jokingly that I would like to have one campaign, one and only campaign that would end all campaigns. I would call it, "The Anti-Campaign Campaign". But, Sir, come to think of it, these campaigns have their usefulness. The Singaporean is a rugged Singaporean. We have a clean and green Singapore, gracious living, bilingual Singaporean, and we can name them. This is what Singapore is.

Sir, much has been said about the behaviour of the crowd at table tennis, football and badminton matches. We need the cultural ballast and we do not apologise that we are Chinese Singaporean, Malay Singaporean or Indian Singaporean. I remember when M.G.R. came to Singapore - I was still in the Ministry of Culture then - there was a packed Jalan Besar Stadium. I remember our Minister for Foreign Affairs was there. M.G.R. was given a standing ovation, not our Minister for Foreign Affairs. Can we say that those Indians are not loyal? The linkage is there, the empathy is there.

The Chairman: Mr Fong, your 10 minutes are up. Dr Augustine Tan.

Dr Augustine H.H. Tan (Whampoa): Mr Speaker, Sir, last night I had occasion to meet with some potential members of the Whampoa Residents' Committee. I raised this issue of the Indonesian reaction to the spectator response to the badminton match which was held in Singapore not too long ago. One of the men attending the meeting stood up and told me something which I have not read or heard anywhere else. He said that in his view the reason for the Singapore spectators booing the Indonesian players and cheering the Chinese badminton players was that, first, the Chinese were the underdogs and, secondly, they conducted themselves at all times with humility; whereas the Indonesian players were arrogant in their attitude and therefore the reaction of the crowd was hostile towards the Indonesians. So perhaps this interpretation might be pursued and analysed to got at the core or the truth, and the truth presented in the newspapers, as a counter-response to the accusations against the Singaporeans. 4.15 p.m.

Sir, by the very make-up of our society, the Singaporean has to be multi-racial in outlook, multi-lingual, multi-cultural and multi-religious. We have had lessons tom our recent past history in the early 60's of bloody race riots. In 1970 when I first came to this Parliament, through a misinterpretation of what I had said, some strong feelings were generated over the language issue. Several Members of Parliament jumped on me at that stage. It was a bitter lesson for me, Sir, but I learned from that lesson the dangers of playing up feelings about language, race, religion or culture. I think the Singaporean has learnt too over the last 20 years that that is the only way to survive for a nation, and no serious political leader worth his salt would be foolish enough to play up such dangerous issues.

Therefore, Sir, as a nation, surely we will not be racial in outlook; we will not be biased in any direction towards any particular nation or any particular religion, culture, or language. Then the very economic basis of Singapore is one where even if we want to be Marxist or Communist, we could not do so. Even the Malayan Communist Party refuses to talk about an independent Singapore but talk about an independent Malays, that means the combination of Singapore with the rest of Malaya. They know their economics. With no natural resources, it is impossible for this place to be a Marxist economy. We have only people, as the Minister for Trade and Industry reminded us; and people can be a liability or an asset depending upon whether jobs are available for them, a means of living is found for them. So just for sheer survival we have to be outward-looking, for sheer survival we have got to depend upon free enterprise, and that is being pursued with a vengeance by the Minister for Trade and Industry.

We have a global orientation in our economic philosophy, but at the same time we have been mindful of our regional interests and responsibilities. And with ASEAN, I believe Singapore has played a very responsible role in economic terms and in other areas of diplomacy. But in economic terms, hon. Members will recall that we participated in the summit conference where five industrial projects were allocated, one to each ASEAN nation. But because of other countries' objection, we could not implement our diesel engine project. There was no uproar in Singapore. An anti-Indonesian feeling could have been played up in the newspapers, but there was not. That shows the maturity, the tolerance of the Singaporeans. We can therefore never be a threat to anybody, whether in terms of race, language, culture, religion or economics.

But perhaps this is a time for us to examine the reasons behind this outburst in the Indonesian newspapers. I venture a number of hypotheses. One possibility is our very success itself in attracting the envy of other people. Secondly, there are racial undertones, probably goaded by mischief-makers and by at least one super power trying to stir up trouble in this part of the world. That is a natural line to take for whoever wants to create mischief. Thirdly, is there such a thing as an "Ugly Singaporean"? Are our businessmen conducting their business in Indonesia and in other parts of ASEAN in an ethical manner? Are they obeying the laws of those countries, or are they bribing their way around corrupt officials? Maybe, Sir, it is time for the Singapore Government to set up a joint consultative body with Indonesia and maybe with the other ASEAN countries to which complaints by people in Indonesia, Malaysia and other countries, and even Singapore itself could be channelled and any abuses investigated and rectified, if possible.

I come to the question of culture for Singaporeans. Maybe this is a time to venture what I have been thinking for quite some time. Every time we have a National Day rally, we have an Indian presentation, a Chinese presentation, a Malay presentation, and so on. I wonder every time, if the Chinese who came from China, and the Malays who came from Malaysia and the Indians who came from India were to visit us and look at the presentation, they will see that this dates back centuries ago. We have made no progress. We have a static culture, taken from the past. Why do we not venture to synthesize, taking good elements from the three main cultures and fusing them together into something distinctly Singaporean, something distinctly creative? Why must we be shackled by the traditions of the past?

The Member for Chai Chee mentioned the spiritual Singaporean, but I am rather disappointed that his idea of a spiritual Singaporean is one who conducts campaigns. That is a very sad attitude, a sad state of affairs. The real meaning of "spiritual" is matters concerning the soul, and perhaps Singaporeans need to look more towards the soul rather than towards sheer materialism.

Finally, Sir, on sports in relation to politics. Look at the Olympics today. It is a big tussle between the super powers. I think we have to learn, and learn fast. It is no mere spectator event, but the big powers have an interest in the outcome of games. Maybe the Chinese lost to us for diplomatic reasons or maybe we won legitimately. Who knows!

Haji Sha'ari bin Tadin: Sir, I would like to take part in this debate. I share all the sentiments expressed by Members on this question of a Singaporean identity and nation-building process. I would like to touch on a small point and that is on crowd behaviour.

Sir, before we level any criticism at the behaviour of the Singapore crowd at the recent China-Indonesia badminton friendly match, We must understand some of the sociological factors underlying general crowd reaction in sports events. I observe that there is always a tendency for crowds anywhere to cheer the underdogs in a match. Spectators will always take sides for personal, group, racial, local patriotic, or national reasons. Of course, the involvement in taking sides varies from time to time, venue to venue, country to country, depending on the competitive climate at the time. To a certain extent the publicity given to a certain Sports event by the mass media also influences crowd behaviour.

Sir, I do not find the behaviour of the Singapore badminton crowd during the two nights of the badminton match that obnoxious as to deserve an outright condemnation. I think, generally, our Singapore sports crowd is quite discerning for our level of literacy. It is generally fair and will cheer the deserving player or team for the display of skills. Compared to crowds in other countries, even developed countries, our crowd is non-violent. And this alone deserves our praise.

Allow me to briefly analyse the crowd behaviour at the Singapore Badminton Hall, at least on the first night in question where I was present as a spectator. The behaviour of the home crowd, though boisterous, was not altogether out of place in an event charged with so much tension and excitement. Singapore spectators tend to support the underdogs in any tournament. In this case they were the Chinese since the Indonesians by right are the reigning world champions in badminton. However, a significant point to note is that the home-crowd, particularly the section of the crowd that was most vocal, did not heckle or intimidate the players. On no occasion was play ever hold up because of crowd intervention. The confrontation was not between the Singapore crowd and the Indonesian players but between the section of the Singapore crowd supporting the Indonesians and the section supporting the Chinese in a face,to-face situation across the gallery. To my mind, this "vocalization" and dramatization cannot be considered unethical. Of course, I agree fully with the views expressed in this House that such reaction could lead to misunderstanding by the other side.

Among other things, the Singapore crowd was controllable, sensible and responsible. It responded spontaneously to the umpire's appeal for calm and silence during critical stages of the contest, thus appreciating the need for a conducive environment for the players to give of their best.

Various people react to our crowd behaviour in different ways. Perhaps the most down-to-earth remark was made by the Vice-President of KONI (Indonesian National Olympic Committee) General Suprayogi when he readily acknowledged in a press statement in Jakarta that "in sports there is bound to be heckling whether we like it or not."

As a result of the heat generated from discussions on the Singapore crowd behaviour, I would like to call upon all sports promotion agencies in Singapore to make the masses understand, through their educational programmes, what true sportsmanship and spectator ethics are. I feel that it is the responsibility of everyone involved in sports to continuously educate people on crowd behaviour and to stifle excesses. We must always acknowledge and cheer good play on both sides whether it comes from the victor or the vanquished.

Crowd outbursts can contribute a major danger to sport. When crowd reaction originates in local patriotism, fierce nationalism or racialism, it can lead to the worst excesses and completely spoil an event by generating a climate of violence and hatred.

There is certainly no place for fanaticism in sports in Singapore, or for that matter, anywhere else in the world. When fanaticism is unleashed, sports is at its ugliest!

Mr Ong Teng Cheong: Sir, thank you for giving me this opportunity to reply. I wish to thank hon. Members for the various suggestions on how to promote the cultivation of a Singapore culture and a Singapore identity.

As an independent nation, Singapore is only 15 years old. During the long period of colonial rule, there were essentially two types of loyalties - first, to Britain as a colonial power fostered over the years by colonial authority; and second, to the countries of origin of the different ethnic communities here by compartmentalising education into different language streams to perpetuate ethnic divisions. The syllabi and textbooks of vernacular education were constantly reinforcing emotional and cultural links with the countries of origin.

From the day it assumed power, especially since independence, the PAP Government has vigorously implemented policies designed to forge cohesiveness across ethnic barriers, notion building and a Singapore identity. They include the revamping of educational policy, now cultural policy, national service and Singapore's foreign policy with its premium upon ASEAN. 4.30 p.m.

The question is, how far have we come since 1965? There is no doubt at all that we have succeeded, since independence, in creating a distinct national identity. We are Singaporeans, as the Member for Jalan Kayu said, and are proud of that fact. The vast majority of Singaporeans do have that sense of belonging - belonging to Singapore rather than to other countries of ancestral origin. The reaction of the crowd during the recent China-Singapore soccer match was one demonstration of this. Little to do with language, culture or religion, many ethnic Chinese Singaporeans who have visited China have returned to realise how un-Chinese they are and are more convinced than ever that Singapore is the place for them to live in. This point has been repeatedly stressed by some of the hon. Members.

Singaporeans have been moulded by more than 10 years of national service and have weathered the uncertainties of economic depression and political unrest. It is true that there has not been a real test of adversity, such as a war, but we have no doubt whatsoever that Singaporeans will rise to the occasion and measure up in the defence of their country if ever called upon to do so.

A national identity takes many years and much conscious effort to evolve. What might have seemed an impossible dream, after 15 years of independence, is closer today to reality than many even among us would dare to hope.

Over the years, many opposition politicians had repeatedly attempted to win votes during the general elections by playing up chauvinistic feelings and making all sons of unrealistic promises, but in vain. They could not swing voting against the PAP which continued to return to power with overwhelming support. This is a measure of our growing up for which we can justifiably congratulate ourselves, especially since it has occurred over such a short span of time.

This is not to say, however, that there is no room for further consolidation of a Singapore identity or that there may not be some differences between the younger and the older generations. There is no need also to deny that there is still some residual sense of attachment to the country of ancestral origin, especially among the older generation, some of whom were born there. This would not be different, say, from the legitimate attitude of loyal Americans of Irish descent towards Ireland, or loyal Australians of English descent towards Britain, as mentioned by the hon. Member for Chai Chee.

There is no need to paint the Singaporean as a saint, for in every way he is a normal, healthy person capable of the natural human emotion.

The China-Indonesia badminton contest is only an example of the sports fans having given free rein to their high spirits and excitement at this chance of witnessing a historic match. Basically, the spectators had their expectations built up to fever pitch. Chine's reputation in badminton was largely based on hearsay. She was known to have produced great badminton players but none of them had been tested in competitions, especially with the acknowledged world's greatest players, namely, the Indonesians.

There are always opposing camps of support in any match. As pointed out by some of the hon. Members, natural crowd sympathy is normally for the side expected to lose the contest or the weaker side. In this instance, it is natural for a neutral audience to be split more on the side of the underdog, in this case, China. It could very well have been Indonesia. The same crowd reaction proved once again during the China-Sri Lanka pre-Olympic football match where the spectators were obviously supporting the underdog, in this case, Sri Lanka.

It is not only unfair but wrong for the Indonesian press to raise doubts about Singaporean loyalty merely by the spectators' behaviour at the friendly badminton match. Singaporeans have shown admirable solidarity and national feeling in the crucial semi-final pro-Olympic football match between Singapore and China. There is no doubt in my mind that the spectators had as much to do with Singapore winning the match as our footballers who knew very well all the time that the whole Singaporean crowd in the National Stadium was behind them.

The Government is always conscious of the powerful influence of the mass media. I agree with hon. Members that what the press report and how they report shapes thinking and attitude. They can promote harmony and goodwill among our people and with our neighbours, and they can also cause anxiety and suspicion.

Our local newspapers have often been reminded of their heavy responsibilities to society and to Singapore. I share the sentiments of the hon. Members on the role of the press, including its role in the evolution of a national identity. They too have to be sensitive and to appreciate the sensitivities of others and, therefore, to exercise restraint. However, there is little we could do about foreign press behaviour.

Some of the foreign press which were critical of us on the spectators' behaviour during the China-Indonesia badminton match are anti-Singapore. They have been and will continue to be persistently against us in every respect and critical of us in whatever we do or say. They have no hesitation in seizing every opportunity to put us in bad light for their own ends, regardless of how damaging this may be to the region or even to themselves.

Some of the Indonesian press which are friendly to us have also been critical due to misunderstanding. This is probably the result of inadequate social contact, as suspected by some of the hon. Members. In this respect, the ASEAN Committee on Culture and Information, whose duty is to promote effective co-operation in the field of culture and information for the purpose of enhancing mutual understanding and solidarity among the peoples of ASEAN, should be urged to take urgent positive steps towards its objective. I agree that more frequent cultural exchanges and visits would also help.

Our local press and SBC do give fair coverage of ASEAN development. No doubt this can be further improved. My Ministry will certainly step up efforts to project our true image overseas. I have taken note of suggestions made by hon. Members and will ask my officials to look into the proposals in greater detail. At the same time, Singaporeans should strive to be much better informed of developments, problems, aspirations and sensitivities of our neighbouring countries, in particular, they should understand the attitudes of these countries to Singapore and the reasons behind these attitudes.

The moral of the lesson is that Singaporeans need to develop a better appreciation of the sensitivities of our friends, This has very little to do with national identity. Often, others do not view us as we view ourselves. Even our behaviour, in a matter like sports, can give rise to misunderstandings.

I would therefore urge Singaporeans not to unwittingly give wrong signals and impression to other countries in the exuberance of sports, as the Member for Anson has urged our sports fans to grow up and be more civilised. Given the ethnic composition of our population, our friends in ASEAN as well as other powers would remain watchful of our attitude, though so far we have passed the test well.

Mr Tan Soo Khoon: Sir, in summing up, I would like to say that what has come across today is very clear, and that is, the Singapore identity has been forged without doubt. We have forged a cohesiveness that cuts across ethnic barriers. We have forged one people out of disparate groups and we are doubtless a more integrated society than ever before in the past. Even as recent as ton years ago there might have been gnawing doubts of this but, today, there is a wealth of evidence that we are Singaporeans first more than anything else.

Some hon. Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Tan Soo Khoon: We do not deny our racial origins and we make no apologies for the fact that we are of Malay origin or of Indian origin or of Chinese origin. We all know what our cultural roots are but we know also that we are first and foremost Singaporeans. But events have shown that we must cast our sights further. The lesson we have learnt from this unpleasant incident is that Singaporeans must at all times remain sensitive to the feelings of those close to us.

Hon. Members have touched on our closeness to ASEAN, and I think it was the Member for Jalan Kayu who said that we have to get our people now to think of ASEAN. On the political level and on the economic level, there is no doubt that ASEAN has made headway as a regional grouping. But what does ASEAN mean to the man-in-the-street? I think we have to examine this question closer.

As a Member of Parliament, I have had opportunities to attend international conferences abroad. My first instinct at each of these conferences is always to look around for my fellow Parliamentarians from ASEAN countries. We know that at such conferences we have much at stake together as partners in ASEAN, and this is the message we must get through to the man-in-the-street. Every responsible person, Government leaders, MPs, community leaders and the press have a role to play in this.

Sir, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment by leave, withdrawn.

The sum of $20.315,260 for Head J ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates.

The sum of $11,928.300 for Head J ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.

The Chairman: I propose to take the Suspension now.

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

Mr Speaker: Order. I suspend the Sitting now and shall take the Chair again at 5.15 p.m.

Sitting accordingly suspended at 4.45 p.m until 5.15 p.m Sitting resumed at 5.15 p.m.

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

Debate in Committee of Supply resumed.

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

Head T -

Dr Lau Teik Soon: Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head T be reduced by $10 in respect of Object Group 1100 of Subhead Code TA-01 of the Main Estimates.

Mr Speaker, Sir, by the end of this decade more than 70% of our population will be resident in HDB new towns. Since such a large majority of Singaporeans have no choice but to live in HDB flats, it is my view that the Government has the responsibility to provide most of the necessary amenities of life to those residents in HDB new towns. Such amenities should be provided even before the residents move in so that the inconveniences and adjustments for the flat dwellers would be minimal.

Thus, I would like to request the Hon. Minister to enlighten this House whether or not a coordinating committee comprising representatives from relevant Ministries and Departments exist which has, as its primary function, the planning and implementation of the various projects connected with the establishment of HDB new towns. Such amenities should include markets, shopping complexes, schools, polyclinics, traffic light system, bus interchange, entertainment and recreational facilities. Even if it is not possible to have all these ready by the time the residents begin to move in, it should be possible to have them completed when the majority of the residents have moved in. I raise this question because many Members of the House have brought the attention of the Hon. Minister to the numerous complaints of HDB flat dwellers concerning the lack of various amenities in various HDB estates.

For example, take the case of Ang Mo Kio New Town, a considerable part of which comes under my constituency. At the moment, there is no polyclinic or outpatient dispensary, and so residents have to travel all the way to Jalan Kayu outpatient clinic to be treated. There is no library located there; so a request has been made for the mobile library to make a visit there occasionally. There is no proper bus interchange, and this has resulted in long queues at the temporary bus terminal and congestion along a certain stretch of Avenue 3 in Ang Mo Kio. There are no traffic lights located at the main intersections, for example, between Avenue 3 and Avenue 8, and between Avenue 3 and Avenue 10. There is no sports complex located in this new town, so a temporary football field has to be located at a vacant piece of land. Even where certain facilities have been provided, for example, the traffic light system between Avenue 1 and Avenue 3, and between Avenue 1 and Avenue 8 and the bus shelters along Avenue 1. these have been provided only after representations have been made by the Citizens' Consultative Committees to the relevant authorities. Surely, if a coordinating committee exists, such problems would not have arisen. I hope the Hon. Minister will clarify this matter.

Mr Speaker, Sir, in view of the prospect of higher prices for HDB flats and higher rentals, I hope the HDB would at least provide the basic services efficiently to the residents, particularly the maintenance of their flats and environment. Time and time again, Members of the House have come across complaints of cracked walls and ceilings, leaking pipes, clogged drains, dirty corridors, filthy lifts, and so on. One source of these problems is the inefficient system of supervision over contractors, who have been negligent in their duties.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I hope the Hon. Minister will look into some of these problems.

Mr Rohan bin Kamis (Telok Blangah): Mr Speaker, Sir, the rationale of the Urban Redevelopment Authority's introduction of the coupon parking system was explained, though not convincingly, in the various press releases. To my mind, it is just a transfer of the burden of writing of those coupons from the URA to the motorist. I feel that if we need to strive for productivity, this is not a good example of a correct approach.

Would the Minister enlighten the House on the progress of the implementation of the coupon parking system to-date? Can this experiment be termed a success? I trust that several systems must have been evaluated before arriving at this current experimental coupon parking system to alleviate our manpower restrictions.

May I suggest that the URA examine the feasibility of introducing a system like the one in the United Kingdom, where a motorist drives into a car park, parks his car and goes to the ticket vending machine where he can buy the necessary tickets for the period that he wants to park. By slotting the appropriate amount of coins, he would obtain a corresponding number of tickets, or labels if we wish to call them. These labels indicate the time when parking starts, and the date is also printed. The back of the label is adhesive so that the motorist can stick the label onto the windscreen of his car. Therefore, the motorist does not have to buy the tickets ahead of time, and there is nothing for him to writs or cancel as in the current coupon system. Of course, a sufficient number of car park attendants must be on hand to police the system.

I agree that sufficient safeguards may need to be instituted to ensure that the system is appropriately protected against unlawful use by motorists. However, with a little more thought and the usual Singaporean touch, I am sure the problems could be overcome.

The Chairman: The Member for Kolam Ayer has an amendment on the some Subhead Code. Would you like to speak now?

Encik Sidek bin Saniff: Yes, Sir, and thank you. I would just like to ask the Minister how soon can the Housing and Development Board complete the installation of closed circuit TV in the lifts in all HDB estates. Secondly, there is the question of rented flats. Over 70% of flat dwellers can purchase their own flats. My question is whether those who do not purchase these flats can still rent them, and for how long? If the monthly income of a flat dweller is more than $2,500, would he be given a chance to buy, say, a five-room HDB flat? I find it rather astonishing how the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Education recently resolved the most important aspect of our education system - at one stroke he took away the Curriculum Development Division from the bureaucratic control of the Ministry of Education and made it into an institution called the Curriculum Development Institute of Singapore. As an HDB flat dweller, I think one of the most important functions of the HDB is not so much in landscaping housing estates - although there is some shoddy workmanship - but the provision of good lifts. The breakdown of lifts is getting rather frequent. Is it possible for the Minister to compare the rate of breakdown of lifts in Singapore with that of certain industrial cities like Hong Kong? If the breakdown is due to the poor quality of the lift, I would suggest that we look for better quality lifts than those already installed in HDB estates. As a flat dweller, I must say that there is a constant uneasy fooling whenever I step into a lift. I think of the possibility of children or even old women being trapped in a jammed lift, say, for half an hour. I would like the Minister to make a thorough investigation into the efficiency or inefficiency of lifts in HDB housing estates.

The Chairman: Is the Member not going to speak on his amendment on Horticultural and Aquarium Fish Exhibition?

Encik Sidek bin Saniff: Can the Minister take that too?

The Chairman: The Minister can take anything. Will the Member please come back to his amendment?

Encik Sidek bin Saniff: In FY 79 there was no allocation for Horticultural and Aquarium Fish Exhibition in FY 80. But for FY 80 there is a provision of $261,000 for this Exhibition, which is slightly more then a quarter of a million dollars. I think it is a big project. Is this project going to be simply a tourist attraction or is it to provide a social amenity, or for both purposes?

Mr Teo Chong Tee: Mr Speaker, Sir, with your permission, may I speak on this amendment so that I do not have to speak on my amendment No. (5) since the subject of HDB has been touched upon?

The Chairman: Your amendment stands in the names of several other Members too, and unless the other Members also join in now, subject to there being no objection from the Minister, you may have to wait your turn.

The Minister for National Development (Mr Teh Cheang Wan): I have no objection, Sir,

The Chairman: The Minister does not mind. Please carry on, Mr Teo.

Mr Teo Chong Tee: Thank you. Sir. Sir, resettlement in Singapore has become the order of the day. People are being shifted from one place to another in order to make way for redevelopment. Today, the people have come to accept as a fact that the transformation of Singapore is one of the essential ingredients of our progress. A complete change to a new way of life in an entirely different atmosphere and environment is something which they have also come to accept. More and more people are living in HDB flats, and they do so out of their own choice or as a result of resettlement.

As far as resettlement is concerned, the priority allocation of HDB flats to most applicants is processed reasonably fast because the HDB wants them to quit the acquired site as quickly as possible. But in some instances, before the resettlement victims have been allocated flats by the HDB, they are already issued with a Quit Notice by the Resettlement Department, requiring them to vacate the site within a specified period. This is grossly unfair to them as it causes them undue worries because the HDB has not finalised the allocation of flats to them. 5.30 p.m.

This is either an administrative short-coming of the HDB because there is a lock of proper cooperation and coordination between the two departments, or is it just a more formality practised by the Resettlement Department to worry the resettlement victims? Perhaps the Hon. Minister could clarity such a practice.

In the case of normal applications for flats, the applicants have to wait for as long as three years, maybe longer, to got their flats in locations of their choice. It is known that the priority allocation of flats to resettlement victims has undoubtedly slowed down the allocation of flats to applicants not affected by resettlement. Thus, such applicants have to wait for a longer period for their flats. May I request the HDB to expedite the allocation of flats to these people.

There have been cases where people who have registered themselves to purchase flats in the area of their choice are told later to transfer their choice of flats to other areas because the applicants are not likely to got flats in the location of their choice in the near future. In the first place, how could the HDB accept such applications if it is known that the applicants could not get fiats in a location they have registered for? The HDB should have known in advance the number of flats in each zone to meet the demand of applicants.

If the number of flats in a zone is not adequate to meet the popular demand of normal applications as a result of the priority needs of resettlement cases, then the HDB should have advised these applicants to opt for flats in other zones when making their applications, and not to accept them first and then advise them later to effect transfers. This practice has disappointed many applicants. In view of this prevailing problem, will the Hon. Minister revise the system on acceptance of applications so as to reduce the unnecessary disappointment to applicants?

Now that the Hon. Minister has publicly announced that the price of HDB flats will be increased very shortly, I hope the HDB will not deliberately slow down the allocation of fiats to applicants who would probably be forced to pay a higher price when the new price is implemented later.

Sir, the next topic I would like to touch on is the communal TV antenna installed by the HDB. It is good that the HDB started installing communal TV antenna. I personally feel that it is an excellent facility, but I regret that I have to point out the HDB's highhanded manner of compelling tenants in the older estates to use the communal TV antenna. It is understandable if these TV antennae are installed in new fiats and new tenants moving in have to make use of them. In the older flats, most of the tenants have already installed their own antennae, some of them expensively, and yet the HDB sent out circulars asking tenants to remove their TV antennae within 14 days or else the antennae will be removed by the Board without further notice. Consequently, the tenants have wasted their money installing their own TV antennae and now they have to incur extra expenses to remove them as required by HDB, besides having to pay for the use of the communal TV antenna. I must say that the charge for the use of the communal antenna is reasonable but the principle is not correct. May I suggest that for tenants who have already installed their own TV antennae, they should be permitted to use the communal TV antenna without any charge for one year at least because it is no fault of the tenants. It is just that the HDB had not thought of this communal TV antenna system earlier. The HDB had become wiser recently. But should the HDB become wiser at other people's expense?

The Chairman: Mr Tan Soo Khoon is not here. Dr Ong, your name has also been listed under amendment (5). Do you like to speak now?

Dr Ong Leong Boon (Kim Seng): Yes, thank you, Sir. Since we are on the subject of the Housing and Development Board, I rise to make some comments. First, I would like to speak on the attention paid by the HDB to the development of new housing estates. A lot of attention is paid to these new estates. As a Singaporean, I feel extremely proud that our new estates are definitely greener with better lay-out and a lot of social amenities which is rightly as it should be. However, the problem is that in Singapore, we have many old estates. At the present moment, I get the impression that insufficient attention has been paid to the improvement of these old estates so much so that, among the people living in HDB estates, we now have a privileged sector in the now estates and the less privileged sector in the old estates, like mine. So I would like to know if the Housing and Development Board intends to intensify its efforts to give a new face-lift to the old estates because they tend to be less well kept in the sense that the buildings are very close to one another. Also there have been and there will be frequent problems with the lifts, corridor lighting and so on.

In my constituency, for example, we have a lot of old buildings and many of these flats were built at the time when there was a social need for these new flats, particularly after the fire. We still have a high percentage of one-room standard emergency type flats. In fact, I also have 16 blocks of four-storey SIT flats. One of these blocks presently looks very much like the Leaning Tower of Pisa, although I have been assured by the Structural Engineer of the HDB that none of my residents will fall due to gravity. Therefore, I would like to ask whether the HDB has any demolition/conversion scheme for the one-room flats. I think it is important that, in carrying out this scheme, consideration ought to be given to preserving some of these blocks because there is a social need for retaining them. There are enough old and poor people who still require one-room flats, although there is no question that even then these flats must be renovated before they can be preserved.

The next question I would like to ask is: what plans are there for the four-storey blocks? I am particularly interested in this because in my constituency, Sir, as I said earlier on, one of the four-storey blocks is standing very precariously.

The last point I would like to ask the Hon. Minister concerns his recent announcement of a price hike for HDB flats. Since his announcement a week or two ago, I experienced an increase in the number of residents approaching me for assistance to get flats. The Minister has given a time schedule of two months. Perhaps he could advise us more about this price hike.

Mr Rohan bin Kamis: Sir, with your permission, may I speak on my other Amendment (4) as well?

The Chairman: Yes, if the Minister does not mind.

Mr Teh Cheang Wan: I do not mind, Sir.

Mr Rohan bin Kamis: As the Hon. Minister is aware. Telok Blangah is a pleasant urban constituency.

Some hon. Members: Hear, hear!

Mr Rohan bin Kamis: It is well-landscaped and is situated next to Mount Faber. There is a hill facing Blocks 59, 60 and 71 at Telok Blangah Heights, and it could be convened into a park to complement Mount Faber. This hill is popularly known as Mount Washington, and currently a portion of it is badly eroded by the elements and is unsightly. I notice that bird-lovers gather at this part of the hill and hang their bird cages. Furthermore, the water from a stream that runs down this portion of the hill is pretty clear and it is used by many residents to wash their cars. Will the Minister consider converting this portion of Mount Washington into a park to complement Mount Faber, thereby further beautifying the neighbourhood? I suggest that it could include a fitness park, an appropriate corner for bird-lovers to hang their bird cages, and maybe a pond to retain part of the water from this stream for children. Of course, the other parts of the hill should not be tampered with drastically, as the natural environment deserves to be preserved. Can I have the Hon. Minister's favourable reply, please?

The other point, Mr Speaker, Sir, is that the HDB has been trying very hard to maintain the flats in Telok Blangah. Generally, they have done a reasonably good job, but I trust that they would further strive to upgrade their standards. I notice that flats are no longer repainted in white. This good practice should continue as it adds colour to the environment.

We all know that sometime ago the HDB experimented on closed circuit television in lifts as an approach to better living conditions. Will the Hon. Minister enlighten the House of the progress of this experiment, and when can we expect all lifts to be fitted with closed circuit television?

HDB car parks in my constituency previously had directional arrows painted on the ground. Will the Hon. Minister enlighten the House as to the rationale for removing these directional arrows? Will he consider putting them back should residents request them through the Residents' Committee or the CCC? I notice that on request chairs are provided and power points installed at the void decks of every block of flats for the convenience of authorised users of these void decks. This is much appreciated, and I hope that the Minister would consider speeding up this process.

Mr Eric Cheong Yuen Chee (Toa Payoh): Mr Speaker, Sir, the massive public housing programme undertaken by the HDB since its inception in 1960 will provide homes for nearly 68% of the population by the end of this year. With such a large proportion of the population residing in HDB estates, the social and recreational needs of residents will increase. Since the HDB's housing programme will be slowed down, perhaps some of its resources could be directed to looking into the social problems of residents. Here, I would like to suggest that special units be established in the various Ares offices to look after the social problems of residents.

I would also like to bring to the notice of the Hon. Minister some of these problems. In a family, parents and their children may be residing in more than one HDB flat. If one of the parents who is a lessee dies, it is customary for the eldest son or daughter in the family to be nominated an administrator or co-administrator of the estate. If any one of the siblings already owns an HDB flat, will this affect his or her status as a lessee? In one case, the son of an HDB lessee was affected by an HDB redevelopment scheme. He was denied alternative HDB accommodation on the ground that he was a co-administrator of his father's estate. He has no interest in his late father's HDB flat as his brothers and sisters are living there. Another case concerns a rented property. The tenant died but the Board refused to transfer the tenancy to the son, although he is a permanent resident and an approved occupier of a flat. His family has been residing in the flat for many years, and to evict him will be inhuman. 5.45 p.m.

On the question of insufficient number d persons making up a family unit, the HDB has a peculiar way of advising lessees to take necessary steps to comply with the requirements. Sir, I refer to divorce and separation cases. If one spouse is separated from another and the family unit falls short of the minimum number required, the lessee is advised by the HDB to take steps to comply of may have to look for a smaller flat. Although no eviction action has been taken in any of these cases, I feel it is not right for the HDB to treat tenants or lessees in this manner. Separation from one spouse is not something to be relished. To those affected by such domestic problems, it is a traumatic experience. Instead of sympathy, the HDB has added on to their woes. There was the case of a couple who are permanent residents. They went to the HDB to apply for the purchase of a flat. They were told that they could apply only if they had a child. Is this in line with the Government's policy of family planning? Such insensitive advice given by certain HDB officers caused not only embarrassment to the people concerned, but also put the HDB in a poor light.

Another point I wish to raise is this: the HDB should give priority to applicants who wish to reside near to members of their family and their place of work. This will help those working parents who have to have someone to look after their children. Secondly, they would not have to travel long distances to work. This could reduce the number of commuters travelling to work. The Hon. Minister has made similar statements in his constituency rounds. This has prompted applicants to see their Member of Parliament to obtain such preferences.

The last point I would like to raise is in regard to the impending increase in the price of HDB flats and rental of HDB properties. Will the Hon. Minister consider raising the income limit in proportion to the increase in the price of flats?

I hope the Hon. Minister will seriously look into the various points that I have raised.

Mr Tan Cheng San: ( In Mandarin): If I may now speak on my amendment. Sir, it is obvious that the Housing and Development Board has gained outstanding achievements in its Home Ownership Scheme. The interior as well as the exterior designs of the HDB flats are also more and more fascinating. Now HDB even plans to build new 5-room split level apartments in Hou Kang New Town so that there will be more and more residents living in luxurious flats. This is the contribution and achievement of the HDB. It is also a breakthrough achieved by the HDB.

In spite of these achievements, there are some shortcomings in the resettlement scheme of the HDB in my constituency, that is, Paya Lebar. In the past the HDB would first measure the house of the resident affected by resettlement. Then it would compensate the resident according to the measurement. This is the correct way to solve the problem. However, we do not know why the HDB does not deal with this problem in the same way recently. The HDB does not measure the affected house any more before asking the resident to leave. The residents are very unhappy after they have shifted, as they do not know the result of the measurement. I feel it is not right for the Resettlement Department of the HDB to act in this way.

Sir, for the benefit of the residents affected by resettlement, I hope that the HDB, in dealing with such cases in future, will first measure the residents' houses and tell them the amount of compensation before asking the residents to shift out, so that the residents can leave with peace of mind. The HDB is very efficient in helping the residents affected by resettlement scheme to get their flats or shops so that they can settle or continue with their business quickly. The efficiency of the HDB in this respect is praise-worthy. However, the HDB should note that the complaint of the residents is that they do not know the compensation before being asked to shift. It is also unfair to measure the houses of the residents after they have shifted, as they would then not know what the measurements are and thus the amount of compensation.

Dr Augustine Tan: Sir, about half of the Whampoa constituency is under privileged, like the Member for Kim Seng's constiuency. St. Michael's Estate is a very old housing estate and, therefore, I would like to ask the Hon. Minister what plans the HDB has for upgrading St. Michael's Estate. There has been some anxiety among the residents, particularly, residents of the one-room emergency flats, as to when the HDB is going to demolish the building or to upgrade the buildings. So they are worried about having a place to stay.

Secondly, I wrote in to the HDB, shortly after the last elections, requesting that a piece of vacant land next to the Whampoa community centre be used for a swimming complex. I did not get a direct reply to my letter, but indirectly I learned that there were plans for such a swimming complex. Could the Minister please confirm that there are such plans, and if he would let us know how soon the swimming complex will be completed?

Thirdly, as part of the HDB's attempt to upgrade the older housing estates, second lifts are being installed in certain blocks in the St. Michael's Estate. Along Jalan Bahagia there are some blocks of three-room flats where the HDB is currently building a second lift. However, in designing this second lift, somehow the engineers have placed the lift right outside the front door of some of the dwellers. They could have, with a little bit of imagination, sited the lifts in such a way as not to face directly the front door of the flats. I did ask the Housing Board engineers to look into this, but apparently they could not come up with any solution. It may be too late to do anything about the lifts in the St. Michael's Estate but, for the sake of other constituencies, maybe the Hon. Minister would take note of this complaint.

Fourthly, I support the point raised by the Member for Toa Payoh regarding the need for flexibility in the Housing Board's policy on allocation of flats or hawker stalls. The Housing Board should try to ensure as far as possible that people are located near their business, their jobs, or their education. Otherwise, Sir, a lot of unnecessary commuting will result when people are transferred far away from either their jobs or education or place of business.

[Mr Deputy Speaker in the Chair]

5.55 p.m.

Dr Augustine Tan: The fifth point that I have, Sir, relates to the cost of Housing Board flats. There have been reports that the Housing Board will shortly increase the prices of their flats. May I just ask the Hon. Minister whether he intends to increase the resettlement benefits so as to enable people who are being resettled to afford the higher-priced Housing Board flats?

The sixth point I wish to raise relates to the numerous requests that I get from time to time from hawkers regarding change of trade. These may be raw-produce hawkers who would like to have a cooked-food stall. I do understand the problems involved if everybody is given that flexibility or that leeway. But there are genuine hardship cases where a fishmonger or a pork seller has to wake up at two or three o'clock in the morning to collect the fish or the pork. And as they get older, this becomes quite a strain on their health. Would the Hon. Minister consider more sympathetically such requests in future, especially when the Member of Parliament writes in support, stating the facts of the case that I have mentioned.

Next, I have a problem with the Jalan Tenteram hawker centre. This centre has been in existence for nearly 10 years now, but business in this centre has always been poor because there are no proper car park facilities. The road there is a one-way street and traffic along Jalan Toa Payoh cannot get into that area easily enough, although there is a piece of land right beside the Jalan Toa Payoh Expressway which could be converted into a car park if the HDB or the Ministry of National Development wanted to do so. Perhaps the Minister could give some thought to see whether he could make this centre a more viable place because, as I understand it, only about a third of the stalls are currently taken up and two-thirds are empty.

An eighth point concerns arrears of rent. From time to time I get requests for help from residents who, being financially strapped, owe quite a few months of rental to the Board. We have a Welfare Fund which helps them to some extent, but my complaint is that very often the Housing Board does not give me a chance to help these people. They simply drag them to court and as a result their arrears of rent double up because of the court-cost involved. I would like to have the Housing Board drop me a note on those people who are in arrears of rent, so that we can investigate their case and see what help can be rendered before adding on to the financial plight of these people.

One last point I have relates to the Parks and Recreation Department. When we travel abroad and come back to Singapore, we are all very grateful that we have a very clean and green city; and when we see attempts by countries around trying to emulate us, we feel very proud of the efforts of the Parks and Recreation Department. But there is just a little complaint that I have. I notice that along stretches of certain roads the lamp posts are now being decorated with creepers climbing up the lamp posts. I just have a couple of questions. First, how would the Parks and Recreation Department go about repainting those lamp posts when they need to be repainted? Secondly, these creepers might overwhelm the light itself. How then do they go about preventing the creepers from reaching the lights and dimming the lights? Alternatively, why do they not simply paint the lamp posts green?

The Chairman: Are there any other hon. Members who wish to speak on the Housing and Development Board before I call on the Hon. Minister to reply? 6.00 p.m.

Haji Sha'ari bin Tadin: Sir, I would like to make two small complaints to the Hon. Minister. One is the construction of a petrol kiosk along Bedok South Avenue 1. I have received complaints from the residents of Block 23 that the construction work has been creating noise pollution. I thought that in the past we had agreed that the Member of Parliament concerned should first be informed of any development or construction of any project that was going to take place in his constituency. In this particular instance, I knew nothing about it and when the residents came to complain to me I had to tell them that this had nothing to do with the Member of Parliament and that the Housing and Development Board had a right to do whatever they liked with their piece of land. Sir, I hope in future the Hon. Minister would at least inform the Member of Parliament of projects that are going to take place in his constituency.

The other complaint that I have received is from some lorry drivers who are living in Blocks 201 and 202 of Bedok Town Centre. They complained that they were not allowed to park their lorries in the car parks within their blocks of flats. I understand the HDB is now planning to have a special car park for lorries and buses at Blocks 510 and 539. I would like to know from the Minister whether this plan is going to be implemented.

The complaint is that the lorry owners have to walk about nearly a kilometre to the car park from the place where they are living, and this has caused a lot of inconvenience to them. I would like to know whether the Minister would consider allowing them - there are only about four or five of them - to park their lorries nearer to their blocks of flats. The reason given is that these lorry drivers have to wake up early in the morning at about 2 or 3 a.m. Sometimes they have to carry cash and they are afraid that they might be confronted by robbers. I do not know whether the Minister would be able to enlighten us on this policy of building special car parks for lorries and buses only, and whether there is any possibility of complying with the special request of these lorry drivers.

Mr Teh Cheang Wan: Sir, several Members have expressed concern about the impending increases in prices of HDB fiats and in rentals. I would like to give some more information to clarify this matter.

The construction cost of public housing, unfortunately, has been very seriously affected by the world oil price increases. Inflation for HDB flats has been considerably higher than the general rate of inflation in Singapore. This is because of the hike in the production cost of building materials, like steel, cement and bricks. Two-thirds of the cost of bricks is due to energy cost, while energy cost constitutes 50% of the cost of production of steel. Sir, as you can see, this is a very serious matter. If the oil price continues to rise, I am afraid the inflation of building costs would just follow the oil price increases. It was because of the stability of oil prices in the years prior to 1973 that the HDB was able to keep its prices unchanged from 1960 up to the end of 1973.

Members can see that the Housing and Development Board has kept the selling price of flats stable for a very long period. The first price adjustment was made only in 1974. Between 1974 and 1978, building cost has inflated by about 30%. In mid-1979 HDB increased its selling price of flats by 15% and rentals by 10%. So HDB has absorbed more than half of the inflation between 1974 and 1978. Unfortunately, in 1979, the oil price increased by almost 100% and the HDB building cost has been inflated by about 30% in 1979 alone.

I will give the figures for the construction cost. I do not want to bore Members but I think it is useful to give these figures. In 1979 the construction cost for a three-room new flat increased by 34% or $6,050, from $17,750 to $23,800. If we add the land cost of $6,000 per unit and the financing cost of $3,000 during the period of construction, then the total cost for a three-room now flat is $32,800. Today, the selling price of a three-room new flat is $18,200 in the New Towns, and therefore HDB has to subsidize 44% or $14,600 per unit. At present, the subsidy which HDB carries for every unit of three-room flat is 44% or $14,600 per unit. It is quite obvious that the HDB cannot go on subsidizing forever. If we continue subsidizing for another two or three years, HDB will become bankrupt. In other words, HDB will have no money to build any amenities which Members have requested. Also, the HDB will not be able to improve the old estates. So it is essential that we make a price adjustment.

For a four-room flat, the subsidy is 33%, and for a five-room flat, the subsidy is slightly less, 27%. The subsidy is very high. As the HDB has absorbed half of the increase in costs for the period 1974 to 1978, it is not possible for the HDB to absorb a very substantial part of the 1979 inflation. So HDB has requested for a 30% increase in the selling price. But I have asked HDB to try its best to see how much the Board can help to absorb the increase in costs so that the full 30% inflation need not be passed on to the purchasers. In other words, I have asked HDB to try to work hard and they are still working hard on it. At this stage, I am unable to inform the House of the exact price increase. I hope that it will be less than 30% but I must say that it will not be substantially less, which means that the HDB will not be able to absorb half of the inflation. So the increase will be more than 15% but I hope it will not be by a very big margin.

One hon. Member is worried that the HDB's slow-down in its building programme will make everybody pay more. My intention is, in fact, just the contrary. If that is the intention, I would not have requested the public to accept the flats allocated to them. I will give some figures on this. HDB currently has 4,280 units of new flats being offered now to those on the waiting list. In April and May, another 4,678 flats will be ready for balloting. I have made public the HDB's intention to raise the prices, so that 8,958 new flats can be speedily allocated to applicants before the price increase takes effect. So from now until May there will be about 9,000 flats to be sold at the old price. I hope that those who are lucky enough to be offered a flat would not turn it down. They should accept it.

In the last 20 years, HDB has only increased rentals once, and that was by 10% in 1979. Although HDB is now also planning to increase rentals, the proposed increase will be on a lower percentage than that of flats for sale. I share the sentiments of hon. Members in this House and, in fact, quite a few Members have spoken to me that we should not increase rentals too substantially because a large percentage of tenants are living in one-room flats. I share the view that tenants staying in these flats are from the lower income group and so they are least able to afford any increase in rental. So the increase in rental will be minimal. I would like to assure Members that the rental of the flats has always been and will continue to be heavily subsidized. Whatever increase levied on rentals will only be a token increase.

On the question raised by the Member for Kim Seng on the improvement of old estates, I would just like to give some figures. HDB has not neglected the old estates. In fact, we have been continuously improving the old estates. The HDB is spending about $21 million on the installation of steel windows to the balconies of the old flats, and about $45 million on the provision of additional lifts for the old blocks of flats which have only one lift each. HDB has spent $2.5 million on the installation of safety features, like alarms and sirens in the lifts. HDB will spend another $20 million on the installation of automatic rescue devices for lifts. Some of the Members in this House have said that the lifts have not been performing satisfactorily. I can assure the House that HDB will spare no efforts to improve the safety features of the lift and other amenities in the old estates.

Dr Ong Leong Boon: Hear, hear!

Mr Teh Cheang Wan: In addition, HDB is looking into the feasibility of installing closed circuit television for its lifts. We are still carrying on with our experiment to find out the effectiveness of closed circuit television. A decision will be made in about six months' time on the installation of this device.

As Members know, HDB has also spent a very considerable sum of money in providing sports and recreational facilities to improve its old estates. Some examples are the Delta Sports Complex along Alexandra Road, which was completed a few months ago; the Katong Swimming Complex which was completed to cater for residents in the Old Kallang Airport Estate and Tanjong Rhu Estate; the Geylang East Swimming Complex which was built to serve the old estate in MacPherson and also the new estates in the Geylang East area. Also, currently under construction are the Kallang Basin Complex and the Bukit Merah Complex. These sports complexes are built to serve the old housing estates.

Members can see that HDB will never be able to recover the amount of money it has spent from increases in the rental of flats in the old estates. I will give you some figures. The last increase was in 1979. For the one-room improved flat, the actual increase was $2.50 per month. The increase was, in fact, very minimal. 6.15 p.m.

On the point raised by the Member for Serangoon Gardens, the Ministry of National Development has a Master Plan Committee, and all plans for New Towns are evaluated by the Master Plan Committee. The Committee comprises representatives from relevant Ministries and departments. Its function is to ensure optimum land use and the provision of adequate land for all the amenities necessary for the well-being of residents in the New Towns. This includes the provision of markets/hawker centres, shops, recreational facilities, schools, bus terminals, bus interchanges, roads, industries, etc. I must emphasise here that at present the construction industry in Singapore is stretched almost to the limit. Therefore, it is not possible for the HDB and other Government departments to provide all the amenities at the same time. I share the view of the hon. Member that if we can provide all the amenities at the same time in the new towns, namely, schools, recreational facilities, libraries, polyclinics, that would be ideal. But, unfortunately, our building industry is not in a position to provide them all at once. What we do is this. The more essential amenities, such as markets and shops, are usually provided first to minimise the inconvenience to the residents who have moved in. Other amenities will be provided by various other authorities and the HDB as and when the need arises. I agree with the Member that the need arises very early after the residents have moved in, but the facilities are provided later. However, the land for the various facilities such as school sites have been provided. The Ministry of Education and the PWD are trying their best to provide for schools in the New Towns. Even after the flats have been occupied, the HDB continues to coordinate with other Government departments to ensure that the residents' welfare is taken care of.

The Member has also touched on the defects in the HDB estates. It is the HDB policy that all minor defects, such as cracks in the walls and ceilings should be made good by the building contractors within the period of ons year from the date of purchase of the flat. Every effort is taken to ensure that these defects are made good as soon as possible. If the defects appear after one year, the HDB will either advise the owner to carry out his own repair or, if he has not got any contractor and does not know how to go about it, the HDB will usually supply him with the name of the term contractor of the HDB. The HDB can also make arrangements for the owner to contract the term contractor to repair the defects.

On the point raised by the Member for Telok Blangah regarding the coupon parking system, this system was introduced on 1st February, 1980. The use of the coupons will be strictly enforced only from 1st May, 1980. In other words, we are giving the motorists a three-month grace period to adapt themselves to this system. A survey on the use of the parking coupons has shown that by the end of February 55% of the motorists are already displaying their own coupons. This is to say that only one month after the introduction of the coupon parking system, 55% of motorists are familiar with this system. We are confident that the motorists will get used to the coupon parking system after three months. In February, 164,000 parking coupon booklets were sold. In March, an average of 5,000 coupon booklets were sold per day.

The coupon system has been adopted after very careful study because we are of the view that mechanical devices, like parking meters, have several drawbacks. For example, they are subject to breakdown and damage either by vandalism or exposure to the elements. Parking meters also require a large manpower for their maintenance. The automatic ticket booth suggested by the hon. Member is suitable for a large centralised car park with limited entry and exit points, as in the case of HDB car parks. I understand that the HDB is now installing an automatic ticketing device in one of its car parks as an experiment to see how it works.

What I want to say here is that the coupon parking system was introduced with the object of killing two birds with one stone. First, it will result in substantial savings in manpower by the URA. This is very important because we are short of manpower. We do not want our able-bodied people to work as car park attendants. Secondly, once the motorists have got used to it, coupon parking is more convenient than employing car park attendants. This is something which very few people realised. A motorist needs to carry only one or two booklets of coupons and once he learns how to use them, he simply needs to cancel out the appropriate time and date and display the coupon on the car windscreen. This is more convenient than the old system of having to wait for the car park attendant. Sometimes the car park attendant is not around because he may be attending to a long stretch of cars parked on the kerbside. In the case of the coupon parking system, he does not have to wait for the car park attendant. And if a motorist presents a $10 note, the car park attendant may not have any small change, particularly if he has just come on duty and will not have any money to change. This can lead to an argument, which can be a problem. The coupon parking system is therefore very convenient. A car owner can certainly afford to buy $10 or $20 worth of coupons to keep in his car. This system will be very convenient for the car owners.

The Member for Kolam Ayer has asked about the provision of $261,000 for the Horticulture and Aquarium Fish Exhibition. This exhibition will be held in the third quarter of 1980. It will be the third exhibition in the series organised by the Ministry of National Development. As some hon. Members in this House may remember, the first exhibition was held in 1972 in conjunction with the Heads of Commonwealth Government Conference. The second exhibition was organised in 1976 as part of the Tree Planting Day campaign. The exhibition in 1976 attracted over 113,000 visitors. The aim of the next exhibition is to promote an interest in the creation of a pleasant environment and to encourage the pursuit of hobbies such as aquarium fish-rearing, orchid growing, gardening and fruit growing. This show is expected to last for five days. It will have four sections, that is, horti-culture, aquarium fish, fruits and vegetables, and a commercial section. Out of the allocation of $261,000, the lion's share of the budget, that is, 54%, will go towards the payment of rental for the Exhibition hall. The remaining $120,000 will be spent on the construction of stalls, booths and fittings, purchase of materials, transport of the exhibits and publicity. It is expected that the cost of mounting the show will be totally recovered from the sale of admission tickets, stall rentals, advertisements, etc. In other words, we hope that no public funds will be expended on this show.

The Member for Telok Blangah has also asked whether the Parks and Recreation Department can develop part of Telok Blangah into a park with various amenities. I will ask the Parks and Recreation Department to look into this matter.

The Member for Toa Payoh has raised several points. One is the registration for a new flat which I believe is the same point raised by the Member for Changi. The Member for Toa Payoh asked what would happen in the event of the death of the owner of a flat if the co-administrator had no beneficial interest in the estate. I would like to clarify that in such a case if the co-administrator has no beneficial interest in the estate of the deceased, he can apply for an HDB fist. If the co-administrator has a partial interest in the estate of the deceased but is not able to take possession of the inherited flat for his own use such as other members of he family are living in the flat, he is eligible o apply for exemption and thereby register for a new flat. This is the point which has caused complications.

Another point raised is what will happen if the size of a family staying in an HDB flat is reduced by natural causes, such as death or marriage? If only one person is left to occupy a three-room flat, the HDB will encourage him to get his relatives to live with him or to sublet the rooms under the HDB approved sub-letting scheme. The idea is to make full use of the flat. What we do not like is the idea of having a three-room, or a four-room or even a five-room flat with only one person living in it. Another reason is that, if the only occupant is an old man or an old woman and he or she falls sick, there is no one to help. We do not like a situation where an old folk dies in a flat, and we know next to nothing about it until the body smells. That is the reason. Therefore, it is undesirable for an old folk to live by himself or herself for this reason. It would be better if there is a sub-tenant or a relative living with the old folk.

As regards rented fiats, if the size of a family living in a three-room flat is reduced and only one person is left, the same rule applies. He or she can either got a relative to live with him or her or to sublet the rooms. If the person still insists on living alone we usually try to persuade him to move into a one-room flat. The reason is that the one-room flats are closer to one another and if he gets sick or something goes wrong, he can be given assistance. I think it is much better. 6.30 p.m.

On the question of increase in income limit, more or less the rule of thumb is this. For the payment of the instalments for the purchase of HDB flats, usually the amount should not exceed the purchaser's monthly CPF contribution. So a purchaser's take-home pay will not be affected. Whether or not we increase the income limit, we will work it out in this way. As I have said earlier, I have asked the HDB to try its best to see how it can absorb a certain part of the increase in cost. After the HDB has proposed the percentage of increase in the selling price, then we will work backwards. If we find that it is necessary to increase the income limit, then we will increase it. But if we find that it is within their income limit and they are still able to pay the instalments out of their CPF contributions, then there is no point in increasing the income limit. On this question of income limit, the HDB has been very flexible.

On the question of allowing people to transfer to flats near their working place, I think the HDB is really doing the other way round. For example, a hawker has a stall in the city ares but he lives in Bedok. That means his stall is a great distance away from Bedok. If there are empty stalls in Bedok, he can submit his application for transfer and the HDB will favourably consider allowing him to transfer his stall to Bedok on account of a change in residence.

The Member for Kolam Ayer raised the point about Housing Board tenants who have purchased new flats. He wants to know how long the Board will allow the tenant to remain in his rented flat. After the balloting, we usually allow him three months to carry out renovation and improvement to the flat. Then he has to move in. But here again, we are quite flexible. If he says that he needs another month to finish the renovation, we usually allow him. We do not chase him out.

The Member for Kim Seng raised several points. I think I have already touched on some of the points, but not all. I would like to assure the Member that as regards the four-storey SIT fiats, there is no proposal to demolish these flats at present. In fact, the tilt of several blocks of flats is due to the subsidence of the piling. As the Member is aware, those blocks with serious defects have already been demolished earlier and in their place we have built new flats, near the Delta Circus. On the particular tilted block, the HDB is carrying out a regular six-monthly chock. If we find that the subsidence has stopped which means that there is no danger to the residents, then we will not do anything. But once we detect the subsidence to be a continuous one which means that there is a possibility of danger to the residents, then before that point is reached, we will offer the residents alternative accommodation. And when they have moved out, we would demolish the flats. The Member can be assured of that.

Regarding the emergency flats in the Member's constituency, we are demolishing the one-room emergency flats as part of the improvement programme for the old estates. In their place, we are building new three-, four- or five-room flats. Alternatively, if there is need for a community centre, we will allow for the building of a community centre. If there is a need for open space, we will allow for the expansion of open spaces. This is part of our programme for the improvement of the old housing estates.

As regards the one-room improved flats, at present they are still very popular. There is no proposal to convert the one-room improved flats. That is the reason why we are spending part of the $21 million to install metal windows at the rear balcony of these old one-room improved flats. That covers most of the points raised by the Member for Kim Seng.

The Member for Paya Lebar raised a point about resettlement. I must say that the complaint is really one of misunderstanding. The issue of a Notice to Quit is a more formality. It is a legal requirement. Although the notice says, "You are to vacate the place within one month", no physical action will be taken to move anybody out within one month after serving the notice. This is only a legal requirement. This is a formal notice to tell the squatters that the land that they are now occupying is required to be cleared and they should vacate the site by a certain date. Following this formality, the squatters will be offered resettlement compensation according to their entitlement. They are only required to vacate the site after they have been compensated for their houses and other improvements and given alternative accommodation, if they are eligible. But before that, we will not move them out.

The Member for Telok Blangah raised the point about road signs in the car park. We have removed the road signs because we discovered that some of the roads in the car park, although meant for one-way traffic, are wide enough for two-way traffic. We have observed that some drivers do not follow the road signs because the road is wide enough for them to take the shortest way out of the car park. We think it is quite reasonable for them to do that, and so we have removed the road signs. For those roads which are wide enough for two-way traffic, we have removed the "one-way" road signs. The "one-way" road sign remains in car parks only where the roads are narrow and suitable for one-way traffic.

The hon. Member for Bedok raised two points. As regards petrol stations, it is an essential service within housing estates. In the allocation of petrol station sites, the HDB takes into consideration the convenience of the car-owning residents, who need these facilities, as well as compatibility of the site in relation to the surrounding land use. A petrol station is a standard provision within HDB estates. It is the practice of the HDB to keep the MP informed of the major developments within his constituency. However, the details of the planning are dealt with by the HDB planners in consultation with the relevant Ministries and departments. We usually do not bother the MP with the details, because they are very cumbersome, involving a lot of authorities.

The HDB has set aside two car parks in Bedok New Town for lorries and buses. This has been done as a result of complaints by the residents that their cars have been scratched and dented by lorries. This is only a pilot scheme. So for the majority of the bus and lorry drivers have found this arrangement to be satisfactory, although I have no doubt that some lorry drivers would like to have the convenience of parking their lorries right in front of their flats. However, as a result of the complaints and because the car parks are not large enough to accommodate the lorries, we are experimenting with this segregation of the lorries and cars in different parking places. If this pilot scheme is successful, it will be introduced in other car parks.

Again, there is a conflict in Members' complaints. For example, the Member for Telok Blangah complained to us that the car owners had complained to him that the lorries had scratched their cars. Now the Member for Bedok has brought up the point to say that the lorry drivers are not happy because they have to park their lorries some distance away. I understand that everybody likes to park his lorry or car in front of his flat. So we are carrying out this segregation as an experiment and as part of our programme to solve parking problems.

The Member for Whampoa raised many points. I think he was talking about one -room emergency flats in his constituency. As I have said just now, the HDB is planning to demolish all the one-room emergency flats. It will cover Whampoa as well. The Member spoke about a sports/swimming complex to be built on a piece of land which he had indicated to me earlier. Unfortunately, I understand the Master Plan Committee has allocated a bus terminus to be built on this piece of land. Since a bus terminus is required, they decided that this is the most suitable piece of land for it. Anyway, I will ask the Master Plan Committee to look for an alternative site for the building of a sports complex in that area; not just for Whampoa constituency but for the surrounding residential estates in that particular zone.

On the siting of a second lift in a block of flats, this is a bit unfortunate. It is very difficult to add an additional lift once the building of a block of flats is completed. Very often, we have to find a suitable location and no matter where we place the second lift, there are bound to be complaints and difficulties. So we locate the lift in a place we consider to be most practical and perhaps least objectionable. 6.45 p.m.

On his request that the allocation of flats be made more flexible and that we should allocate fiats near to the residents' place of business, I say that if we do that there will be considerable difficulties and it will even create confusion. So the rational solution would be to bring jobs to the doorstep of the people, i.e. to set up industries in all the new towns. So those who wish to work near their residence will have the opportunity to get jobs either within the Housing Board estates or in industries near the Housing Board estates.

On the question of a change of business by the hawkers, I would like to mention here that the HDB has, in its experience over the last 20 years, worked out the ratio of cooked food stalls to the number of flats. So if we maintain this ratio, then the number of stalls will be adequate and the stallkeepers will get reasonably good business. Unfortunately, it is quite often said that the cooked food stall makes more money, and therefore the hawkers want to convert their stalls to cooked food stalls. But if we convert all the stalls in the market to cooked food stalls, then the end-result would be a surfeit of cooked food stalls and their business will suffer. This is also because the number of flats and the number of residents are fixed. If anything, in the normal course of events, the number of residents will reduce once the children are grown up and leave the family and set up home elsewhere. So in the old estates, we have experienced a gradual reduction in population. Therefore, we cannot upset this ratio drastically because to do so will mean that, instead of solving a small problem just to satisfy one or two applicants for conversion of stalls, we are creating a very big problem when all the hawkers of cooked food stalls come running to complain that they have not enough business. So we cannot upset this ratio.

The Member for Whampoa mentioned about creepers growing on lamp posts. If the creepers grow properly on the lamp posts, and they are very luxuriant, then it is not necessary for us to paint the lamp posts because the lamp posts will be well covered. So the question of painting the lamp posts does not arise. The other point is that the Parks and Recreation Department will trim the creepers. We will not allow the creepers to overgrow so that the lamp itself is covered up. We are also not growing creepers on all the lamp posts. In areas where there are trees we do not usually grow creepers on the lamp posts. We grow creepers on lamp posts only in places where there is a lack of greenery. The growing of creepers on lamp posts is carried out only as an experiment, not on an island-wide basis. This experiment will be reviewed in a year or two, We will then decide how many lamp posts should have creepers and what type of creepers should be grown.

The Member also raised the question of an increase in resettlement benefits. Resettlement benefits have just been increased recently. We are going to set up a committee to look into special cases in order to enhance their compensation. These are resettlement cases who have been subjected to a second or third resettlement, i.e. those who have already been resettled in one area are asked to move again. This situation arises in an ares where no development project was thought necessary a few years earlier but subsequently a new project has sprung up and therefore these people have to be resettled again. We appreciate the problems and the loss these people suffer when they are subjected to a second or third resettlement. That is the reason why the Ministry has set up a committee to look into the question of higher compensation for such cases.

Dr Lau Teik Soon: Sir, I would like to thank the Hon. Minister for the many assurances he has given and for his detailed answers. I am sure all the Members who have spoken, maybe with the exception of the Member for Whampoa, would be happy with his reply. I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment by leave, withdrawn.

Mr Ho Kah Leong: Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head T be reduced by $10 in respect of Object Group 1210 of Subhead Code TH-01 of the Main Estimates.

Some people have a misconception that our farmers are uneconomically occupying the land for farming activity and think that the best way is to drive all the farmers away and lease the land out to multi-national tycoons who are likely to pay higher rentals. They seem to have forgotten that man has to eat in order to live. Although our farmers do not grow the main crops, credit must be given to them for producing a sufficient supply of pork, chicken and eggs and some other farm produce. If all our farmers are forced to change occupation, we will have to import everything we eat from abroad. In time of peace, this will be no problem. We can get our regular supplies of food so long as we are able to settle the foreign exchange with the suppliers. However, since the world today is in such a turbulent state, it is hard to ascertain what will happen next. Many of us can still remember the bitter experience of living on tapioca during the Japanese Occupation. If all the farming lands are taken away, then in times of crisis, unless a general supply of food is ensured, we will not even have tapioca to eat.

It is not an uncommon phenomenon that our farmers are being chased from place to place. In particular, the pig farmers are the most pitiful lot. They have been chased from Jurong to Chua Chu Kang, from Chua Chu Kang to Punggol, and now from Punggol back to Lim Chu Kang. I wonder why the Government could not set out a long term agricultural policy and set aside certain parts of our island for agricultural development. The intensive farming scheme which the Primary Production Department has been advocating for years and the hydroponics scheme which the same Department is so proud of its discovery are two interesting areas in agricultural development. Why then have these two schemes not been fully implemented?

As farm licences are recognised as documentary proof of bone fide farmers, it is natural for the farmers to regard them as important documents. According to press reports about a fortnight ago, there seems to be some confusion as to the policy of transfer of farm licences. Will the Minister care to state categorically the policy in respect of transfer of farm licences?

Mr Teh Cheang Wan: Sir, land and labour are scarce resources in Singapore. We must ensure that both are put to maximum productive use. The Ministry of National Development is currently reviewing its agricultural policy to ensure that the land to be allocated for agriculture is put to maximum efficient use. This will require the farms to be organised on a commercial scale with minimum plot size and maximum output. At present there are farmers in Singapore who are eking out a marginal livelihood on their farmland. In view of the manpower shortage in other sectors of our economy, it would be better and more profitable for the farmers to convert to other means of livelihood. Alternatively, they may get together to reorganise their farms on a larger and viable commercial basis. Otherwise it is unlikely that they can compete effectively with the modern production methods of commercial farms.

A farm licence is an important document conferring enhanced resettlement benefits on those who may be affected by clearance schemes. Stringent control is, therefore, exercised on the issue and transfer of farm licences. However, where existing licensees are too old to continue farming or who have died, the Primary Production Department will consider the transfer of farming licences to their next-of-kin. The following are the criteria for the transfer of farm licences. The farm lots should lie within an agricultural or rural ares. The applicant should be a member of the immediate family concerned, residing at the site and working full time on the farm and dependent on the farm for a livelihood. The type of farming carried out on the lot must be acceptable to the Primary Production Department, that is, no pig farming or duck-rearing unless the area is designated for such a purpose.

Mr Ho Kah Leong: Sir, the Minister has not told the House how successful the two schemes have been, that is, the intensive farming scheme and the hydroponics, which the Primary Production Department is so proud of.

Mr Teh Cheang Wan: Sir, we are reviewing the farming policy. In fact, the Member has quite rightly pointed out that previously we have not had a definite agricultural policy, and the pig farmers have to move from one place to another. At present we are looking into a more permanent agricultural policy. So these two experiments carried out by the Primary Production Department will be taken into consideration in the formulation of this farming policy. I hope this policy will be ready in three to six months' time. Then we will have a more firm basis on the allocation of farmland.

Mr Ho Kah Leong: I take the word that a more firm agricultural policy will be formulated in three to six months' time. On that note, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment by leave, withdrawn.

The sum of $201,377,700 for Head T ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates.

The sum of $1,485,063,100 for Head T ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.