MAIN AND DEVELOPMENT ESTIMATES OF SINGAPORE FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR 1ST APRIL, 1981 TO 31ST MARCH, 1982

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

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

Head T - (cont.) 3.00 p.m.

Mr Goh Chee Wee (Boon Lay): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head T be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead TA-01 Project 8101 of the Development Estimates.

Sir, as Singapore becomes more developed and our population becomes more affluent, let us not forget that a substantial number of our fellow citizens are still residing in the rural areas. They do not even have the chance to enjoy the basic facilities brought about by modern civilization, like street lighting and metalled roads.

In this connection, I would like to comment that the provision of $3.96 million for kampong roads and $1 million for street lighting under the Urban and Rural Services programme for the whole of Singapore is grossly inadequate. Take Boon Lay Constituency, for instance. The allocation for the current financial year is a miserable $116,000. With rising cost and inflation, this miserable sum of money is sufficient only to repair and patch up some holes in existing roads. A large proportion of our rural population will have to continue to live in these substandard conditions for many years to come, if there is no change in our allocation policy.

In requesting the Ministry of National Development to consider increasing the budget allocation under this vote, I hope the Minister will give this matter his serious and sympathetic consideration.

Mr Ho See Beng (Khe Bong): Sir, may I have your permission to speak now so that I do not have to move the next amendment standing in my name?

The Chairman: All right.

Mr Ho See Beng: Sir, before the introduction of parking coupons to replace the ticket system in the collection of parking fees, there was no surcharge collected if parking exceeds the time limit. The parking attendant would simply put a pink notice on the windscreen of the car to remind the motorist to pay another 40 cents as parking fees. But now things are different. If a motorist parks his car in excess of the time limit, he has to pay a surcharge of $2. Sir, why cannot the Car Parks Division, which is under the Urban and Redevelopment Authority, continue its former practice of charging another 40 cents if parking exceeds the time limit? The coupon system benefits the Department but creates a lot of inconvenience for the motoring public.

In view of the impracticality of the coupon parking system, coupled with the unfair surcharge, I would like to urge the Minister to consider waiving the surcharge if he insists on carrying on with the coupon system.

The Minister for National Development (Mr Teh Cheang Wan): Sir, the allocation of funds under URSC for each constituency is based on the location and the population in the constituency. Constituencies which have bigger projects or require more funds can make use of the savings available from other constituencies which do not make full use of their allocation. The URSC has monitored this procedure and found it to work satisfactorily.

Funds so far allocated to the URSC programme have been adequate for projects, which are required by each Citizens' Consultative Committee, to be carried out in stages. The budget rose from $3.98 million in the financial year 1976 to $5.3 million in the financial year 1980. This will rise again to $5.63 million in the financial year 1981 to meet the demand for more services. I would like to assure the Member for Boon Lay that. additional funds can be made available if it is required.

On the point raised by the hon. Member for Khe Bong, as I have told the House repeatedly last week, a grace period of five minutes for over-parking is given. In fact, this grace-period is often stretched to 10 or 15 minutes. The motorist should display sufficient coupons if he wishes to park for a longer period.

A surcharge for over-parking is necessary as a deterrent to prevent abuse by motorists. If no surcharge is imposed, motorists will invariably display only the minimum number of coupons, and hope to get away with it. And they will not be unduly worried about parking over-time because if they are caught, they would not have to pay any surcharge. This is undesirable because more manpower will be required to check the coupons, to compute the additional fee and to collect the additional parking charges. It defeats the main purpose of the coupon parking system, i.e. to save manpower.

Mr Ho See Beng: Why is the Minister worried about whether the motorists are worried or not so long as the URA get their parking fee of 40 cents or 80 cents or whatever the charge is. Payment of the fees due is the important thing, as far as the URA is concerned. If the motorist parks his car beyond the grace period of 15 minutes, the car park attendant is there to place a pink notice to remind the motorist to pay the fees. Whatever it is, the URA is not losing any revenue. So why does the Minister want to create worries for the motorist?

Mr Teh Cheang Wan: Sir, the purpose of the coupon system is to save manpower. With the coupon system, the URA is able to reduce its manpower from 1,000 car park attendants to about 200 or 300 car park attendants. Therefore, there is a manpower saving of about 70%. If we have to station car park attendants in every car park to issue the pink ticket, then we will have to go back to the old system of engaging those staff which we have saved with the implementation of the coupon system. The Member for Khe Bong is, in fact, advocating that we go back to the old system, which means that the URA will have to engage the same number of car park attendants. I would be very happy indeed if the Member for Khe Bong can come out with a system whereby we can save manpower and also at the same time satisfy the motorists.

Mr Ho See Beng: I have no doubts that the Minister will be very happy because he has saved up to about 70% expenditure on manpower. In the nature of things, Sir, if somebody gains, somebody else must lose. Otherwise how can the Minister save the money? He is saving money at the expense of the motoring public, which I think is not fair.

Why cannot we go back to the old system? In this coupon system, we are still using a car park attendant to inspect whether the motorist has displayed the coupon or not. We can still carry on with the coupon system. Should the car park attendant see that the motorist has parked beyond the time limit, he just puts a notice to remind him to pay another 40 cents. Why cannot that be done?

Mr Eugene Yap Giau Cheng: Sir, can I just join in to support my colleague?

The Chairman: Yes.

Mr Eugene Yap Giau Cheng: I see the problem like this. If an electric wire is to carry a high consumption load or very high voltage, the insulation is thicker and greater. Therefore, I presume the Minister most probably cannot feel what the ground reaction is like. Perhaps my colleague can.

I think we can actually go back to the pink slip system. With all our computers and so on, we can trace back to recalcitrants, those people who habitually park for more than five or 10 minutes. Once the attendant places a pink slip on, he already has a record that this motorist has committed an offence once, and he can always trace back when necessary. And the fact that the motorist has to go to town to pay that parking fee is an inconveni- ence and, therefore, it is a deterrent by itself. I would like to support my colleague in this case.

Mr Rohan bin Kamis (Telok Blangah): Sir, last year I suggested to the Minister to install a slot machine system so that the motorist can walk up to it, put in his coins in exchange for the correct number of labels with an adhesive back, and stick them on to his wind-screen. I understand that system has been tried. Would the Minister inform the House the finding on that system which I think is far superior to this coupon parking system that just shifts the burden from the car park attendant to the motorist.

Mr Teh Cheang Wan: Sir, to answer the Member for Telok Blangah, I think the experiment has not been successful. What it amounts to is asking the motorist to walk up to the slot machine and get the ticket from the slot machine. This is equivalent to buying a coupon. So whenever a motorist wants to park his car, he has to go and buy the ticket from the slot machine and walking back to the car and putting it on the car. This would cause great inconvenience to the motorist. Would it not be better for the motorist to buy a book of coupons at any convenient time and put it in his car. Any time he wants to park his car, he just tears off a coupon and put it on the wind-screen, instead of having to walk to the slot machine and buy one coupon and come back to the car and put it on. Therefore, that system has not been successful. 3.15 p.m.

I cannot agree with the Member for Khe Bong's suggestion and the reason is this. The only situation when a motorist will complain that he is losing some money is this. He estimates that he requires two hours to attend to his business. So he puts the coupon for two hours. He goes away to attend to his business and finishes it in one hour or in less than one hour. He then feels very unhappy because he has paid for two hours' parking and feels that he has overcharged himself. If we allow this calculation of overpayment to reverse our policy on surcharge, then every motorist, despite knowing very well that he needs to park for two hours, will say, "Look here. Maybe I can finish the business in one hour because a few weeks ago I had that experience" and proceeds to put the minimum number of coupons, either half an hour or one hour, because he has no fear of any surcharge. Sometimes even though he knows that it takes three hours to attend to his business, he will display a one-hour coupon because he knows very well that if he finishes his business in two hours, then he only needs to pay for that additional hour. In the end, everybody will pay the minimum charge, which means that the URA will have to engage a sufficient number of car park attendants to man each and every car park. So we will go back to square one.

I will be the first person to admit that the coupon system is not a perfect system because, as I mentioned earlier, some motorists may have to pay more than the actual fee required. We have to admit this fact. But taking the system as a whole, when we in Singapore are short of labour and the various authorities are having difficulties in getting staff, I think a system that can save us 60 to 70% of the staff is a good system. If one or two motorists have to pay one or two dollars more on one or two occasions, I think this is unavoidable. But on the whole, for the country's economy, this one or two dollars extra revenue is not too heavy a burden on the motorists.

Mr Eric Cheong Yuen Chee (Toa Payoh): Sir, I would like to join in the argument. With the introduction of the coupon system, I believe the URA and the HDB have saved a tremendous amount of manpower, as indicated by the Hon. Minister. At the same time, the two authorities have indirectly imposed upon the motorists the duty of part-time car park attendants.

Basing on the Minister's arguments just now that some motorists may have to pay a few dollars more, the question is: why cannot the two authorities be a bit more flexible? In actual fact, some motorists have been paying more than the actual fee required. Therefore, there is no substantial loss insofar as over-parking is concerned. The coupon itself indicates the actual time in minutes. So what the two authorities should do is to exercise some flexibility in this regard and apply the surcharge only in cases where a car has parked over and beyond, say, half an hour. Below that excess, some flexibility should be given, and I do not think all motorists would want to cheat the URA and the HDB. Let us not assume that every motorist is a potential evader. I think that is wrong. In our election campaign, all of us 75 Members here have been going round our constituencies and asking our citizens to place their trust in us. But here, the two authorities have no trust in the motorists. They should have some trust in them. I do not think every motorist is a potential wrong-doer. I think the benefit of the doubt should be given to them.

Mr Teh Cheang Wan: Sir, I am not saying that the motorist is a wrong-doer. The motorists are very intelligent people and they follow the rules. The rules say that if he parks longer than the validity of the coupon, he would be allowed a five-minute grace, and for any parking over and above that five minutes, there would be a surcharge. Therefore, he makes his own calculation and displays his coupon. And if we say that there will be a half-hour grace period, then he will take that half an hour grace period into his calculation but he will still come back and say, "Why not 35 minutes?" i.e. an additional five minutes. Therefore, if we say that we are not going to impose a surcharge and that we will only collect the fee for the time in which the vehicle is parked over and above the time covered by the coupon, the motorist will display the minimum coupon necessary. We expect the citizens to be law-abiding. We expect them to follow the law. So when the rules say there will be a $2 surcharge, they will make their calculations and say, "It is not worth the while. Perhaps I should put a 40-cent coupon more." But if the rule says, "No, even if you park longer than the coupon permits, you will not be penalized", then naturally they would put the minimum coupon and there is nothing wrong because he need only pay for what is over and above that hour. He is not cheating. There is no question of cheating. He is just following the rules. So we must have a set of rules which will enable us to use the minimum manpower to look after the car parks.

Mr Goh Chee Wee: Sir, I just do not understand how my comments and points about rural development have led to a discussion about parking coupons. In fact, on the question of rural development, car parks and parking coupons are of least concern to me. What we need are more roads and lightings, and not car parks or parking coupons.

But anyway, since the Hon. Minister has assured me that more funds will be allocated to my constituency, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment by leave, withdrawn.

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

That the sum to be allocated for Head T be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead TC-02 of the Main Estimates.

Sir, I wish to commend the Public Works Department for doing a good job in constructing the Pan-Island Expressway. This is what I call a well thought-out project. However, my regret is that not all road-building projects are so well planned as to take into account both present and future needs of road-users. I am thinking particularly of two main arterial roads in the eastern part of the island, namely, the East Coast Parkway and the sections of Sims Avenue East and New Upper Changi Road leading into Chai Chee housing estates and Bedok New Town.

The East Coast Parkway was planned to take the traffic between Changi and the City and vice-versa. It was originally conceived and executed as a dual carriageway with a large road-divider running along the middle. Now, the stretch of road-divider which is beautifully planted with trees, shrubs and grass is being dug up in order to provide a third lane to cope with the heavier traffic load and thus causing congestion and inconvenience to motorists in the process. Fortunately, part of it has been completed.

The stretch of road leading into Bedok New Town and Chai Chee Estates, i.e. the sections of Sims Avenue East and New Upper Changi Road at the junction with Siglap Road, is a classic example of a bottleneck caused by insufficient planning by the road builders. The four lanes of Sims Avenue East flow into the two lanes of New Upper Changi Road to serve not only the thousands of residents of Bedok New Town and Chai Chee Estates but the whole of Changi as well. The situation is made even more intolerable by the fact that the two lanes debouch into the very busy Chai Chee Bus Terminus and Bedok Interchange and are consequently choked up with buses not only from the SBS but also the buses transporting children to and from schools and workers to and from their factories.

True, work is now under way to convert the central road divider, replete with grass and trees, into an additional lane or two to cope with the increased traffic load. The PWD had the foresight to leave room for future expansion when they laid the road some years ago. But with hindsight, the PWD must by now have realised that their foresight is actually a severe case of short-sightedness. When they planned the original road they must have known about the HDB's plans for a new town to house around 300,000 people, not to mention Chai Chee Estates and Changi. Sir, I am referring to Bedok New Town. What then was the logic of having only two lanes in each direction? The bottleneck situation arose three years ago when people moved into Bedok in large numbers.

All these examples bespeak of poor planning and insufficient coordination between the various Governmental bodies - PWD, HDB. Sir, I wonder who pays for all these consequences. No wonder the Hon. Minister for Trade and Industry refused to grant more reliefs in personal income tax. With proper planning a lot of the taxpayers' money could have been saved and the travelling public would have been spared much inconvenience and time wasted in traffic snarls, not to mention acute frustration and tension.

Sir, I call upon the relevant authorities to coordinate their activities more closely in order to avoid further social costs in terms of time, money and inconvenience.

Mr Teh Cheang Wan: Sir, I wish to thank the hon. Member for Changi for commending the good work of the Public Works Department. It is a very rare occasion that any Member has expressed appreciation of the work carried out by my Ministry.

I agree with most of the comments of the Member for Changi. In the past, funds for road construction were only given on the basis of actual perceived traffic demands. Therefore, when the roads were built the practice was to set aside a reserved lane for future road-widening. The East Coast Parkway, from Fort Road to Bedok South Avenue 1, was constructed between 1972 and 1976 to open up the East Coast reclaimed land for development. The construction was undertaken before it was decided to build the new Changi Airport. So at that time a dual two-lane road was considered adequate. With the decision to build the new Changi Airport at Changi, the East Coast Parkway has to be widened to cater for the traffic expected to be generated from the airport development. This project is similar to the case with the Upper Changi Road which was built between 1972 and 1975 as a two-lane dual carriage-way with a wide central divider to accommodate a third traffic lane in the future.

I share the sentiment of the Member for Changi that additional cost and inconvenience would arise when roads have to be widened. Indeed, I have recently instructed the PWD to seek funds to build new roads to their ultimate capacity even if present traffic count does not warrant the implementation of the additional investment. I can assure the Member that, in future, in any road-widening project, the inconvenience caused to the public will be lessened.

3.30 p.m.

Mr Teo Chong Tee: Mr Speaker, Sir, the answer from the Minister appears to be quite satisfactory. In view of this, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment by leave, withdrawn.

Mr Yeo Toon Chia (Ang Mo Kio): ( In Mandarin): Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head T be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead TC-04 Project 8106 of the Development Estimates.

Sir, Ang Mo Kio New Town is a beautiful and impressive new town. The residents in the new town are generally happy with the environment. But in terms of safety facilities, I think there is room for immediate improvement. Public safety calls for immediate action. For example, in the town and commercial centre where there are crowds and crowds of people, thousands of students in schools in the town, and the crowds at the markets and in the hawker centres, there is a need to build overhead pedestrian bridges in this new town for the safety of the people. This is, indeed, a very urgent task. Sir, in a beautiful housing estate, it is very essential that the residents are able to move about in safety and in peace.

A few days ago, the Minister for Home Affairs said in this House that there was a gradual reduction in crime rates in the HDB estates over the last few years. I think this is mainly because there is more opportunity of employment and also because of the improved design and construction of the HDB flats. On this point, I would like to thank the designers and architects of the HDB. I would like to thank them on behalf of the residents of my constituency. At the same time, I hope the Minister concerned would take a serious look into the overall safety of the pedestrians in Ang Mo Kio New Town and to take prompt action to build overhead bridges at busy pedestrian crossing sites to reduce accidents.

Mr Teh Cheang Wan: Mr Speaker, Sir, I wish to thank the Member for Ang Mo Kio for speaking very highly of the planning of Ang Mo Kio New Town. I think my colleagues in the Housing and Development Board will be very happy with the good comments.

On the question of the safety of pedestrians in Ang Mo Kio New Town, four overhead pedestrian bridges will be built in Ang Mo Kio New Town in the coming financial year. They will be located at Avenue 3, near the Oriental Emporium: Avenue 3, linking the Town Garden to Neighbourhood 4; Avenue 4, near Neighbourhood 6 shopping centre; and Avenue 1 near Neighbourhood 3 shopping centre. Another eight pedestrian crossings have been planned for the new town. They will be constructed at the beginning of 1982. Of the eight crossings, six will be overhead bridges and the remaining are push-button crossings. I hope that the provision of these pedestrian crossings on the busy roads in Ang Mo Kio New Town will be adequate.

Mr Yeo Toon Chia: ( In Mandarin): Sir, in view of the Minister's assurance that four overhead pedestrian bridges will be constructed in the coming financial year and another eight pedestrian crossings for the next financial year, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment by leave, withdrawn.

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

That the sum to be allocated for Head T be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead TD-02 Project 8401 of the Development Estimates.

Sir, under this Subhead, there is a provision of $50,000 for Land Acquisition for Parks Development, unlike the estimated provision of $1.124 million for FY 80. I have been trying to find the reason why there is a gross reduction. In the Memorandum on the Budget, it is stated that this increase is "mainly because a higher provision is required for the maintenance of parks and open spaces." Further on, it is stated:

'The total area of parks, vacant state lands and open spaces to be maintained has increased and efforts to turn Singapore into a garden city will be intensified.' Sir, in this respect, I have a few questions to ask the Minister for National Development. In view of the small provision, is the Parks and Recreation Department planning more parks? Will this small allocation of funds really be sufficient to open up more parks and open spaces? How will this help to contribute to the intensification of making Singapore a garden city?

Mr Teh Cheang Wan: Mr Speaker, Sir, for the financial year 1981, the Parks and Recreation Department has been provided with adequate funds for the continued development of Central Park, East Coast Park, Pasir Ris Park and West Coast Park. Two new parks, Sembawang Park (Phase II) and Mount Faber Park (Phase (I), are now being planned.

I agree with the Member for Punggol that the provision does not appear to be enough. The reason is that the plan has not yet been finalized and, therefore, we are not able to arrive at the exact figure for the additional funds required. Therefore, funds will be sought for their implementation in May when the detailed planning is completed. In fact, we will be asking for more money. The Member's observation is correct.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: Sir, that brings me to another matter which I raised in this House a year or two ago, that is, the planting of trees for the beautification of Singapore. Every year we have Tree Planting Day on the first Sunday of November. We have planted many trees and shrubs. But I think it is about time we planted fruit trees, not only in the housing estates but also in open spaces. I can sense that the Minister is thinking of the problems that will crop up when the fruit trees are full grown and are bearing fruits - who is going to look after them?

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for National Development (Mr Lee Yiok Seng): In Punggol?

Mr Ng Kah Ting: Sir, I am not asking for fruit trees to be planted in Punggol. The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for National Development need not worry. They can be planted in Marsiling in his consti- tuency. It is about time that we thought of planting fruit trees in housing estates. Land is getting scarcer and scarcer; even the rural areas have to give way to low-cost housing development by the HDB. We should plant trees like rambutan, mangosteen, chiku -

Mr Yeo Toon Chia: Durians.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: And even durians, as the Member for Ang Mo Kio has just mentioned. I think we should plant them in the housing estates and in the open spaces. We must bring up another generation of young Singaporeans who should know that these are tropical fruits. Otherwise, they can only watch the television and say, "These are tropical fruits." I do not know how much they know about tropical fruits.

I hope the Hon. Minister will enlighten this House as to whether there are plans to plant fruit trees in housing estates, in parks, and in open spaces.

Mr Teh Cheang Wan: Sir, the planting of fruit trees has, in fact, already started. We first planted fruit trees in the schools and army camps. This is important because all our children who are now in school will get to know the various fruits trees. Let them get used to the idea of seeing fruits on the trees so that they will not try to pluck them before they are ripe.

In the second phase, we have planted fruit trees in the housing estates. Our intention is that when the trees are established we will hand them over to the Residents' Committees. They will look after them and when the fruits are harvested, they can distribute them to the residents or to members of the senior citizens' club. Eventually we hope to be able to plant fruit trees along public roads when our citizens have already got used to the sight of fruits hanging from trees and will not make any attempt to pluck them.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: Sir, since the Minister has given more than a satisfactory reply, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment by leave, withdrawn.

Mr Tan Soo Khoon (Alexandra): Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head T be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead TE-01 of the Main Estimates.*

*The same amendment also stood in the names of Mr Teo Chong Tee, Encik Othman Haron bin Eusofe, Mr M.K.A. Jabbar, Mr Goh Chee Wee, Mr Rohan bin Kamis, Encik Saidi Shariff and Mr Ch'ng Jit Koon.

Sir, today I would like to say a few words of praise, for a change. Some years ago I used to complain of the frequent breakdowns of lifts in the blocks of flats in my constituency. Not only has the HDB done its best to repair these old lifts, but I have also found out that new lifts are being installed in most of the blocks. Most of my constituents are certainly very happy over this sudden change of heart on the part of the HDB.

I also used to complain of a lack of follow-up action by the Area Office whenever the residents made their complaints. I am also glad to note that in the last one or two years there has been a general improvement in the response of the HDB Area Offices to the complaints of residents. In this respect, I would like to say that in one of these Area Offices, that is, the Stirling Road Area Office, the new estate officer who took over the post last year has done a commendable job.

I would just like to give one example. Two years ago residents in some blocks complained that the sockets for the TV antennas were inconveniently located near the door. Although I brought up this matter at that time, nothing was done. When I brought up this matter again recently, the Area Office made all the necessary changes within a matter of two weeks.

But there is still room for improvement. People do make complaints. They complain of a variety of defects. If in every block of flats there are 120 units, there will be 120 different types of complaint. But when the people complain of building defects, this is particularly important in the case of a resale of the flat because the HDB has to rectify the defects immediately. Sometimes it is not done and after a while, when the residents complain again, the HDB says, "Why didn't you complain earlier?"

3.45 p.m.

People also complain of a variety of things, like leaking pipes, low water pressure, broken rubbish chutes, leaking toilets. Sir, it may interest you to know that quite a number of my residents have complained that the leaking toilets are those located upstairs, not the ones that they are using. In fact, one of them told me that the leak was so bad and no action was taken by the HDB that, each time he went to the toilet, he had to carry an umbrella with him to shelter him from whatever was dripping down on him from upstairs.

Residents also comment that the corridors are not cleaned as frequently as they ought to, although I must also admit that there has been a remarkable improvement in so far as cleanliness is concerned. However, there have been a lot of reports that the people who do the washing merely spray the water and do not take greater care in removing a lot of the rubbish. I am wondering, Sir, whether on some occasions it is possible for these people to use some detergent when they wash the corridors.

Sir, the next point I like to bring up concerns the number of empty flats in my constituency. Very often, I get requests from residents for transfer to bigger flats. And I tell them that they have to register for a transfer and to wait for their turn. Many of them point out to me that there are plenty of empty flats in the constituency and why they cannot be given these flats and why do they have to wait. Sir, I am aware that many of these flats are reserved for resettlement cases. But it becomes increasingly difficult for me as the MP to explain to them why some of these flats are left empty for half a year, if not almost a year. I think we will have to ensure that such flats do not remain vacant for too long.

Sir, the last point I would like to raise concerns the HDB Sales Office. It seems to me that some individuals in the Sales Office are now engaged in a little game which I call "passing the buck." In this case, the buck ends with the MP. Recently the Minister told us that there is to be no queue-jumping, in so far as the application for HDB flats are concerned. I think this is a very good statement that he has made and I can think of no fairer way for all HDB applicants than the "first-come-first-served" basis.

But apparently what happens in the Sales Office is that a lot of applicants who go there to ask the officers on duty whether they can have the flat early, they are always told, "Go and see your MP. He can get it for you." Sir, in the last few weeks, I have received a sudden spate of such requests from people who have only submitted their applications to purchase or to rent flats only a week before. I questioned each of these persons who came to me, and all of them said that they were told to see the MP because the MP could get them the flat faster. May I suggest that the Minister, besides just telling all of us here that there is to be no queue-jumping, should also issue such a statement to his Sales Office. It is not that MPs want to shirk their responsibilities. For me, I do not mind explaining the HDB's policy to such applicants who come to me. But I think the officers should not tell them at the Sales Office that they can see the MP who can get the flat earlier because, by so doing, we are only giving these applicants unnecessary false hopes.

Mr Teo Chong Tee: Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to add on to what my colleague, the Member for Alexandra, has just said about defects in HDB flats.

Singapore is justifiably proud of the speed of its public housing construction and this is something that many countries talk about. However, the HDB is now facing the problem that is a concomitant of speed in many areas of human endeavour - lack of quality. After people have moved into HDB flats, they have lots of complaints about defects such as water seepage through walls, cracked walls and leaking pipes. Since approximately 70% of Singaporeans are now HDB flat dwellers, lack of quality finishing is a problem affecting a sizable proportion of the people.

In view of the fact that the HDB is competing with private housing developers in a tight labour market, we can expect a further deterioration in the standard of finishing in HDB flats. My question to the HDB is whether it has any plans to prevent this from happening.

The warranty period for HDB flats is one year, but often the defects become evident only after the warranty period has expired. The flat owners must get the repairs done and pay for these themselves. Are HDB flats built to last only one year without defects? The root of the problem appears to be a lack of proper supervision of building contractors.

When contacted for repairs and maintenance, it takes the HDB an unconscionably long period of time to get the defects rectified, by which time the warranty period may have expired and the poor flat owner will have to foot the repair bill and eventually become even poorer. Such a situation affects primarily those who cannot afford to do up their flats extensively before they move in.

When one steps into a flat, it becomes immediately apparent that the finishing is poor - from floor to ceiling. Is the delay in the HDB's response to complaints about defects due to a shortage of contractors for repair work? If that is the case, there should be proper supervision of the construction of flats. This would break the crux of the twin problem of having to rectify a large number of defects and the slow response to flat owners' calls for repair work.

Another solution to the problem of poor finishing in HDB flats is to provide standard fittings, such as terrazzo flooring, with different colour schemes for different blocks so as to give the flat applicants a choice. Other standard fittings would be window grilles, tiling for the kitchen, bathroom floors, walls, and so on. The flat owners could pay for all this from their CPF and this would benefit the less well-off. A desirable by-product of this is that each block would have a character of its own, and thus would be entirely in keeping with the HDB's efforts at decorating the external walls to enliven HDB estates and to give each estate some sense of architectural identity. Should the HDB decide to provide standard fittings, it would enjoy economies of scale which could be passed on to flat-owners.

Finally, the HDB should also seriously consider extending the warranty period so that any defects could be rectified without affecting the flat-dwellers' finances.

Another major cause of dissatisfaction among flat-owners is that, although conservancy charges have been raised, there is no noticeable improvement in the condition of HDB blocks. The lifts are just as dirty and foul-smelling and the corridors and staircases are not being cleaned often enough. In fact, what the cleaners do is just to throw water and sweep it down the staircase; no attempt is made to scrub them. Garbage bin chutes are not properly cleaned too.

Mr Speaker, Sir, all these multiple complaints are common among HDB flat-dwellers. I am sure they are often brought to MPs' attention when MPs make their constituency tours. I have come across them myself when I visit my constituents in Bedok North. Usually, it is only after the M P's intervention that the HDB would take quick remedial action. Mr Speaker, Sir, why must this be so? I urge the Hon. Minister for National Development to seriously look into these problems of HDB flat dwellers.

Sir, the next topic I want to touch upon on HDB is the sale of flats by owners. In this regard, the HDB requires the owners to pay $600 cash as registration fee if they intend to sell their flat on their own and 5% of the sale price after the deal is concluded. If they sell their flat to the HDB, then the registration fee is $200. The HDB's charge of a $600 registration fee is too steep for many people wishing to dispose of their flats to purchase larger ones, especially when these people have not yet sold their flats and received payment. Can the HDB not consider lowering the registration fee from $600 to a standard rate of $200? What is the rationale behind this inconsistency? After all, the HDB will be reaping in 5% of the sale price when the flat is sold.

Encik Othman bin Haron Eusofe (Geylang Serai): Mr Speaker, Sir, I have also filed an amendment to this Subhead because I wanted to make some complaints against the HDB, particularly those which have been made by the residents occupying the older blocks in the estate in my constituency.

On Friday, the Hon. Minister has given an assurance that he will tackle the problems arising out of the low water pressure in the top floors of the older blocks, as quickly as possible. I hope that he can also give an assurance now that he will be expeditious in tackling the problems of the other defects in the older blocks in my constituency. 4.00 p.m.

Mr M.K.A. Jabbar (Radin Mas): ( In Tamil): Mr Speaker, Sir, this is the third time that I am speaking in this House regarding the problem of lifts. Every week I meet the people in my constituency. I visit their homes. Yesterday morning, I visited my constituents and the majority of them complained to me about the Housing Board flats, mainly the problem of the lifts. Women and children are mainly inconvenienced because the lifts are not functioning properly. Since these lifts are too old, the Minister would look into the possibility of replacing them. As the people are paying conservancy charges, the Government should look after their interests. When I look at the condition of the lifts, personally I do agree with them that the lifts are in a bad shape. I was also told that this problem existed for more than two years in Radin Mas. This is the third time I am asking the Hon. Minister about the lifts. The people in my constituency are fed up and the women and children are inconvenienced by the poor condition of the lifts.

Secondly, people in the lower income group are also suffering. Both the husband and wife go to work, leaving behind the children and the old folk. When only the old folk and children are at home, mischievous people come and indulge in various anti-social activities, such as theft, because the corridors are not properly lit. We should not give such people an opportunity to commit offences. Even if there is only one lamp, its brightness will prevent such offences from taking place. Even during the daytime some of the lamps in the corridors should be lighted so that such offences can be prevented . I hope the Minister will look into this problem.

The problem of the lifts has been there for a long time, and therefore the Minister should look into it in this financial year. If something can be done, the people in Radin Mas will be grateful.

Mr Goh Chee Wee: Sir, in spite of the rising construction cost and the programme to build better quality flats, I note that the grant to the Housing and Development Board is to be reduced from $64 million to $55 million. It is not clear whether the reduction is due to the slow-down of the HDB building programme.

I would therefore like to seek the Hon. Minister's clarification of the Government's policy regarding subsidies for public housing. I would like to know the cost and the current Government subsidies for the various types of flats built by the HDB. I would also like to know if it is the intention of the Government to reduce the amount of subsidy for HDB flats progressively. Will our citizens be asked to pay for the full cost of HDB flats in the same way as they are asked to pay for the full cost of utilities, transportation and others?

Mr Rohan bin Kamis: Sir, I endorse most of the complaints voiced by my colleagues. Although there have been cases where HDB has done well, I always believe one must always be able to improve as one goes along. In this regard, as the Minister is fully aware, Telok Blangah is a pleasant urban constituency. However, I would like to request the Minister to consider giving more sports and recreational facilities for Telok Blangah.

The other matter is something which I cannot understand. What is the rationale for putting aeration slabs in the car parks when the trees are already there. The idea of the aeration slab is to help the trees to grow. Instead it creates a hazard to women with high heels. It is also difficult for motor-cyclists to park their motor cycles as the holes in the aeration slabs are an obstruction.

Another matter is that the refuse compounds in the housing estate are badly designed, in my opinion. In collecting the rubbish from the compound and carrying it to the refuse trucks parked outside the compound, the collectors invariably spill the rubbish, thereby dirtying the road and causing a smell nuisance. Would the Minister please comment.

Encik Saidi Shariff (Kaki Bukit): Sir, lot me take this opportunity to reflect the frustrations and inconveniences suffered by my constituents, particularly those living in the new Neighbourhoods VI and VII at Bedok North. There are still many more blocks under construction in Neighbourhood VI. I hope the Hon. Minister will take into consideration whatever is being said today so that the same complaints could be prevented from occurring again.

Residents are greatly inconvenienced when they move into the flats because many basic facilities, such as roads, street lights, and feeder bus services are not ready yet. When this matter was brought to the attention of the respective departments, there appeared to be a lack of coordination and the departments resorted to playing the game of passing the buck. When the PUB was asked why the street lights were not switched on, even though the lamp posts were already installed there, we were told that the PWD had not requested them to do so. When contacted, the PWD officer said that the roads were not ready yet for use since they were still levelling them. When asked why were the residents told to move in, the PWD officer said, "You ask the HDB. They are not supposed to move in yet because many of these services are not ready." May I suggest that the necessary infrastructure in any neighbourhood of a housing estate should be ready before allowing the residents to move in. May I take the opportunity to add here also that the HDB Area Office in Bedok North has done a commendable job by taking action readily on whatever complaints that the residents brought to them for their action.

Mr Ch'ng Jit Koon (Tiong Bahru): ( In Mandarin): Sir, I would like to take this opportunity to speak on matters relating to the Housing and Development Board and some other related problems in my constituency. I have already raised these issues with the Housing and Development Board, but I have not got any satisfactory answers. So I am taking this opportunity to raise them here in the hope that the Minister will give serious consideration to them. However, judging from his performance in this House over the past few days, it would appear that my hope of getting any solution is rather slim. Perhaps I may suggest that he refer these matters to his Parliamentary Secretary because, according to the Minister himself, he is more flexible in dealing with such matters.

Sir, the 779 units of pre-war flats in Tiong Bahru were built in 1936 by the former Singapore Improvement Trust. It was said that these flats were intended for sale to the public but for some unknown reason the sale was not effected. Instead these flats were let out at rentals ranging from $20 to $50 per month. Sir, according to the level of living standard in pre-war days, those who could afford such high rentals must be well-to-do people.

After the war, Singapore was faced with a very severe housing shortage. To prevent profiteering by increasing the rentals on the part of the landlord, the Rent Control Ordinance was enacted by the then colonial government to protect the interests of tenants of pre-war premises. Because the Tiong Bahru flats were built before the enforcement of the said Ordinance, this protection was also extended to the tenants of these flats.

In 1959 when the PAP took office this housing shortage was at its peak. To solve this acute housing problem, one of the priority tasks of the PAP Government was to establish the Housing and Development Board with the objective of building low-cost flats for the people of Singapore. Over the years with great efforts, the HDB has achieved great success, which is evident to all of us.

Following the establishment of the HDB, the Singapore Improvement Trust (SIT) closed down. The flats built by SIT were then transferred to the HDB's jurisdiction. This, however, brought about an anomaly. People living in the same HDB flats, i.e. those who were eligible for low-cost housing, had to pay a rental of about $60 for the newly allotted flats, whereas those who were occupying the pre-war flats in Tiong Bahru, although they were better off financially, were only required to pay $30-$40 in rent. In 1965 the HDB decided to rectify this anomaly by selling these pre-war flats in Tiong Bahru to its sitting tenants at their market prices and with a lease of 99 years.

These pre-war flat dwellers, as they had been enjoying the benefit of low rents for a long time, were unhappy about the decision of the Government, and they opposed it. Fortunately, with the patient explanation and great effort of Mr Lee Teck Him, the former PAP Member for Tiong Bahru, a great majority of the tenants were persuaded to purchase the fists. So this storm in the tea cup was abated.

In the contract of sale, it is provided that, irrespective of the types of flats, the flat owners have to pay $100 conservancy charges per year to the HDB for the maintenance and provision of common facilities like the lights in the common corridors, etc. These conservancy charges have to be paid in advance at the beginning of each year.

However, as a result of inflation and wage increases, the HDB raised these charges for the first time in July 1974. They were raised from $100 to $204 per year for a two-room flat, $240 for a three-room flat, $300 for a four-room flat, $360 for a five-room flat and $420 for a six-room flat. 4.15 p.m.

Sir, in August last year, they were further revised upwards, resulting in $228 for a two- room flat, $276 for a three-room flat, $348 for a four-room flat, $420 for a five-room flat, and $490 for a six-room flat. This caused more dissatisfaction among the flat owners, The tallest buildings in this estate are 5-storeys high, and they number very few. The majority of them are two or three-storeys high. They are therefore of the opinion that the flats there are much easier to maintain as compared with other HDB high-rise flats. There are also no common corridors. Therefore, there is no need for the lights to be switched on throughout the night. Moreover, there are no lights along the staircases and there is no lift for these low-rise flats. The end result is much lesser consumption of electricity. As for floor washing, the flat owners have to provide their own water. There is no rubbish chute in each flat. Almost all the open spaces have been converted into car parks. So, instead of spending money for maintenance, there are in fact extra incomes for the HDB.

So the flat owners feel that it is unfair for them to pay so much for so little in return. Since they have to pay as much as the other flat owners, they expect similar facilities and services to be given. Their main vexing problem now is a lack of children's play-ground and facilities. The roads are narrow. This causes inconvenience to both vehicular traffic and pedestrians. There is an inadequate supply of car parks. They would like to know what kind of remedial plans the authority will undertake to help solve their problems.

Sir, I mentioned just now that these flat dwellers have to pay in advance conservancy charges for a whole year. For the wage-earners it is not easy for them to pay $300 to $400 in one lump sum, especially when they are also required to pay property tax and income tax almost at the same time. It is hoped that the HDB will allow them to pay their conservancy charges by monthly or quarterly instalments.

Another matter that causes unhappiness is this. Before the upward revision of conser- vancy charges was implemented, they had already paid one year's conservancy charges in advance. But in the last revision in August last year the flat owners were required to pay the difference as a result of the higher charges. Sir, in the case of other levies such as road tax and driving licence fees, the respective departments have not found it necessary to collect the difference in revision nor are they imposed with retrospective effect. Why should the HDB make an exception to this standard practice?

Sir, there is the recent circulation of surprising news that the HDB intends to acquire these pre-war flats for redevelopment, despite the fact that there is the 99-year lease. This could have been caused by the up-and-about-turn policy changes by the HUDC. It really makes the people there feel uncertain and worry about it. To set their minds at rest, I would like the Hon. Minister to state the Government's position on this matter.

Dr Yeo Ning Hong (Kim Seng): Sir, in the upgrading of our neighbourhoods and physical environment, more and more one-room flats have to make way for more effective land utilization programmes. In my constituency at Kim Seng, such a programme is currently going on. The tenants affected include many senior citizens who have lived in those flats for a long time and they are to be relocated to other one-room or one-room improved flats. Many of these senior citizens seldom venture from the vicinity of their homes.

I know for a fact that the HDB is doing its best to relocate them within the neighbourhood, if at all possible. Regretfully, as the demand for these flats in the neighbourhood far exceeds availability, many of these residents have to be relocated to other constituencies. For such cases, I would like to ask the Hon. Minister for National Development if he would seriously consider the possibility of giving due weight to requests by neighbours with senior citizens in their families to be relocated together in new constituencies so as to minimize the traumatic experience that these senior citizens have to face. Any mutual support and companionship among the neighbours that can be preserved, I am sure, would be greatly appreciated by the senior citizens in their old age.

Prof. S. Jayakumar (Bedok): Sir, may I join in this debate? My concern like many of the others who spoke before me is with the defects, complaints and grievances of the many residents in constituencies which are principally or exclusively made of HDB flats. Before joining the chorus of voices by other hon. Members on this matter, to be fair to the HDB, I must first acknowledge and concede that it must be a monumental task to maintain and attend to problems in the many HDB estates which exist in Singapore. Second, I must concede that defects are bound to happen in public housing of such a great scale and, third, I must admit that the solution to some of the problems in the housing estates must rest with the residents and the civic groups, particularly where the problems concern good neighbourliness, a sense of community spirit and looking after common facilities.

But the problem that worries me is not that there will be defects but the response to these defects when complaints are made by residents. As other Members have pointed out, HDB residents are aggrieved at the amount of time which the authorities take to respond to complaints. This makes me wonder whether the problem has been sufficient personnel in the HDB to attend to these matters. I would be grateful if the Hon. Minister could enlighten us on whether that is the problem.

Some of the problems may appear mundane to others but, from the viewpoint of the residents in the HDB estates, it is of utmost importance. They are living in the flats and for them that is their immediate and most intimate environment. Some of the problems, of course, can take some time in being attended to but there are other problems which I would respectfully suggest have to be attended to very quickly, such as lift breakdowns, which, as pointed out by the Member for Radin Mas, pose a problem for the older folk, women and the children. Lighting in corridors which fails is another urgent problem. When the corridors are dark there is a genuine concern for the security of children and women and old folk, and third, as mentioned by the Member for Alexandra, the rather nauseating problem of seepage and leak of sewerage pipes. This not only poses an unsanitary situation but also an unbearable living condition.

I am at a loss to understand what is the problem here. I must immediately qualify my remarks by saying that I do not think the problem is one of lack of dedication or sincerity by the HDB personnel for, in my own experience, I found that the personnel in the HDB Area Offices in my constituency are always dedicated and willing to respond with sincerity.

This leads me to a more general point, Sir, and that is, what is the role of the HDB today? The other day the Hon. Minister took us back to the early days where he graphically outlined to us what were the pressing problems. It seems to me that when the HDB was set up, the single objective was to provide public housing on a wide scale to the many who did not have housing. But today we are told that we have 67% of our population in HDB flats. Maybe the percentage has even gone up to more than 67%.

Taking the position as of today, perhaps we should rethink the role of the HDB in contemporary Singapore. What should its role be, considering the fact that a large majority are already housed? To me, it seems there are two possible roles in present-day Singapore. One, of course, is to provide housing for those applicants who do not already have housing and also to provide better housing for those who want to transfer from a two-room flat to a three-room flat, and so on. Secondly, and here I am talking about the vast majority who already have housing, we should not take the position that the problem has been solved for, in view of the many points mentioned about defects, I think the second and important role of the HDB would be to ensure that there is continuing development, maintenance and upgrading of the environment, conditions of living, attending to defects and repairs so that the majority of the 67% of our population are reasonably happy with the living conditions of the HDB. If we do not do so, then I think we will have a very serious sociological and political problem where the majority of Singapore's population feel that the authorities, having provided them with housing, take a position thereafter of not caring for improvement and maintenance.

Sir, I hope the Minister for National Development will give his attention to these points for I feel there is a two-fold role of the HDB today - to provide housing for those who do not have it, and to constantly maintain and keep the premises of those who already have housing in reasonably good condition.

Dr Augustine H.H. Tan (Whampoa): Sir, may I first of all add to the chorus of compliments for the Housing and Development Board. For such a large bureaucracy it has shown itself to be remarkably responsive to complaints and upgrading of facilities.

The people of Whampoa are particularly grateful for the additional lifts which have been provided in many of the older blocks, particularly in St. Michael's Estate. However, Sir, about half a dozen of the blocks in St. Michael's Estate have been left out and these are the blocks which are six storeys high. There is no lift at the moment at all. Presumably,' the Minister thinks that everybody is as fit as himself and able to climb six storeys. I would hope that he does one of two things. One, that he provides the missing lift. Alternatively, perhaps these buildings could be demolished to make way for better quality buildings.

I agree with the Member for Bedok that even as the Housing Board progresses in terms of development in Singapore, there should be a constant upgrading, particularly of the older estates.

In St. Michael's Estate, Sir, the car parks are built in such a way that when the cars are backed into the parking lots the fumes from the exhaust go right into the ground floor apartments, and I have had quite a few complaints from residents about this particular problem. 4.30 p.m.

I would like to ask the Hon. Minister to consider thinning out the St. Michael's Estate and other similar older SIT estates, that means, to remove some of the blocks in order to provide more lungs, more open spaces. If we were to make a comparison between the older housing estates and the newer ones, the first thing that strikes us is that the older housing estates are very much overcrowded. I certainly think that the residents of the older housing estates deserve something better.

Furthermore, Sir, I would like to ask the Minister to improve the recreational facilities in these older housing estates. I believe we are too stingy in terms of providing swimming pools in the Housing Board estates. Every time I raise this matter, I am referred to the swimming pool in Toa Payoh. It is true that the swimming pool in Toa Payoh is not too far away from Whampoa, but if the Hon. Minister were to monitor the use of the swimming pool in Toa Payoh, he will find that it is really over-used. There is need for more swimming pools in other housing estates.

I believe that investments in facilities, such as swimming pools, are certainly worthwhile from the social and even economic point of view. I would rather see our young people swimming and exercising themselves than to spend their time in night clubs, street corners, or dark places smoking marijuana and consuming heroin and other dangerous drugs.

Another point I would like to make concerns the demolition of the one-room emergency flats in Whampoa constituency. There are about five blocks of these flats. First of all, I would like to ask the Minister to review the removal allowance. I believe a small removal allowance of $50 or so is given to each household. The Minister has lately commented on inflation in Singapore, and so I hope he will look into this question. Fifty dollars will not get the residents very far in terms of getting a lorry and labourers to carry the furniture upon removal. Secondly, I would like to ask him to assure me and the residents of these flats that, as far as possible, the HDB would do its best to locate them in their area of choice. Many of them have indicated to me that they would like to remain within Whampoa. If possible, would the Minister allow them to do so?

Thirdly, in connection with the one-room emergency flats, I have had some representations made to me by some of these residents that they have been told to pay the full 20% down-payment for the purchase of flats. These are residents of the emergency flats which are about to be demolished, and so they have to be resettled. But they have to pay the full 20% of the purchase price. As a Member has noted earlier, these people who live in the one-room emergency flats are very poor people. Many of them are without CPF funds at all. They are put to great hardship in finding the 20% cash down-payment. I hope the Minister would consider their case sympathetically and allow them to put the minimum as a deposit, much smaller than 20%.

I now wish to make some general comments. As the Housing and Development Board develops more housing estates, the newer ones will be located in the outlying areas and further away from the City centre. But there is some redevelopment occurring in some of the older estates, for example, in Whampoa and in some other areas in the urban and suburban areas. In view of the popularity of these urban and suburban areas, could the HDB not consider higher blocks of flats for sale, in other words, build upwards and with a higher density? Instead of 10 or 12 storeys high, build 20 or 30 storeys high. I know there is a problem in providing car parks and so on. But he could levy a suitable charge for car parks for people who prefer to be located nearer the City centre.

Mr Teh Cheang Wan: Mr Speaker, Sir, I wish to thank the Member for Alexandra for his kind words about the HDB, especially the good response and cooperative attitudes adopted by the Area officers.

On the Member's point about lifts, the HDB has been receiving complaints about lifts for many years. As Singapore develops in accordance with the financial capability of the Singapore Government, so will the HDB. In 1960 the HDB was not able to provide additional lifts for those flats which have one lift in each block. We could only afford to provide one lift in each block of flats. But now, as the financial position of HDB has improved and also with increased Government subsidy, we are able to provide additional lifts for those blocks of flats which are above seven storeys high. It is unfortunate, however, that in Whampoa the flats there are only five or six storeys high, and so it is missed out. But I will deal with the points which have been raised by the Member for Whampoa later on.

On the question of empty flats in Alexandra, this is not just a problem for the Member for Alexandra. It has also become a problem for me when I face my constituents during my Meet-the-people sessions. They would come to me and say, "Why don't you give me the flat next door? I know that the flat next door has been empty for the last six months. You are telling me that the flat is not vacant or not available and yet it has been empty for the last six months." The position is that the HDB allocates flats either on a first-come-first-served basis to the public or resettlement cases.

When the HDB allocates a flat to a person, it gives him two weeks to say whether or not he accepts the flat. Although the HDB gives him two weeks, it does not re-allocate it to another applicant after the two weeks' period. The HDB may wait for about three weeks, and only when he says "No" will the HDB allocate it to the next person on the list. So if we were to offer a flat and unfortunately for one reason or another, all the first 10 applicants for the same flat say "No" to the offer, we end up with the flat remaining unoccupied for 30 weeks. That accounts for the fact that a flat can be unoccupied for a long period.

This is the case with some unpopular areas. For example, take the Punggol Estate. The hon. Member for Punggol knows about the problem because I have written a letter to him. In the rural area of Punggol where there were vacant flats, we have had to make offers to 11,000 applicants before the flats could be filled.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: But I must point out that I did not ask for the flats to be built in that part of Punggol.

Mr Teh Cheang Wan: No, it is not because of the Member's request but for some other reasons. I am just giving an example. The flats have been vacant for two or three years. Since we offered the flats on a first-come-first-served basis, that accounts for the long period during which the flats have been vacant. It is not because we are not trying to fill them. We are trying very hard. In Punggol, the HDB tried 11,000 times in order to fill up the flats.

On the question of misleading information given to the applicants by the Area Office, I do not think that is so. Again, we know this from our experience, and quite often what happens is something like this. A person goes to the HDB Ares Office and says, "Look here, I want to get married" or "I have been thrown out by my former landlord." He then says, "I need a flat quickly." Those in the HDB Area Office know that it must be on a first-come-first-served basis and it is therefore not possible for that person to jump the queue. Thus, it is not possible to allocate a flat to him. He will then say, "Look here, if you do not want to allocate a flat to me, I am going to see my MP." He may threaten the officers in the HDB Area Office by saying, "If you do not want to give me a flat quickly, you are being very unhelpful. I am going to complain to my MP." So the officer may reply, "If you want to complain to your MP, what else can I do? You can go and see your MP." It is not the HDB Area officers who are really misleading these people. A constituent who goes to see his Member of Parliament will not normally tell him the true story of what has happened. He will just say, "I have been sent by the officer from the Area Office to see you, If you can give me a letter, it will help me."

I get similar problems during my Meet-the-people sessions. A person may come to me and say, "The Immigration Department says I need a letter of introduction from a Member of Parliament." Some of my constituents genuinely believe that a letter from me will help them get their citizenship earlier, or it would help their sons to do part-time national service instead of full-time; or if their children have been detained under the criminal law provisions and are in prison, a letter from me will enable them to be released immediately. They hope for such things. They come and tell me all sorts of stories which, I would say, may be untrue. But we can well appreciate their situation. They are desperate for something to be done, and so they do not mind coming up and telling a story to the Member of Parliament in the hope of getting something done earlier.

I would like to assure the House that the HDB staff know very well that the policy is first-come-first-served and they should not send any applicant to see his Member of Parliament. They know full well that this will only create additional work for them because if a Member of Parliament writes to the HDB, it has to be replied. I do not think the HDB staff will do that. I have been there for quite a long time.

As regards the question raised by the Member for Changi, previously, when the HDB offered flats for sale, the maintenance period was six months. In other words, all defects have to be reported to the HDB within six months, after which period the owner is responsible for making good any defects. But as a result of complaints made in this House, I think the maintenance period was extended. I was not here then. It was the time of my predecessors, i.e. the present Minister for Law and Science and Technology, Mr Barker, and the former Minister for National Development, Mr Lim Kim San. Eventually we extended the liability period to one year. In other words, after the sale of a flat, all defects have to be reported to the HDB within one year. The HDB will then arrange for the contractor concerned to make good all the defects. After one year, any defect discovered will no longer be the responsibility of the contractor.

Some Members of Parliament have suggested that we should extend the period from one year to 18 months or even two years. But we thought that this would be rather unwise because the contractor will put a very substantial amount of money in his tender to cover the extended period. In fact, when we extended the period from six months to one year, the contractors added in a substantial amount of money in the tender.

We had several meetings with the contractors. They brought up some problems faced by them. For instance, there is a small defect to be attended to, such as a door cannot be closed properly, and it needs some slight adjustment which may take a carpenter one hour to rectify. But when the contractor and his workmen go to the particular flat in the day and knock at the door, the lady inside will tall them, "My husband has left word with me that I should not open the door to strangers if my husband is not in." So the contractor cannot do anything. 4.45 p.m.

Then they ask the lady, "What time does your husband come back?" She tells the contractor, "My husband comes back at 6 p.m." At 6 p.m. the contractor goes back to the flat and knocks at the door but nobody is in. Perhaps the husband and wife have gone out for dinner. Then the contractor goes to the Housing Board Area Office and says, "Look here, you are chasing me to make good the defects. I have called at the flat twice but I am unable to get into the flat." Then the HDB will ring up the owner of the flat and make arrangements for the contractor to go to the flat to make good the defects.

The repair cost is very cheap, maybe $1 or $2 for adjusting the door which may take one hour of the carpenter's time. But if we add up the transport costs - he went to the flat three times with his tools - instead of $1, it becomes $50 for making the three trips. This is a quite common occurrence. On the one hand, the owner of the HDB flat complains that the repair work is too slow. On the other hand, the contractors complain to the HDB, "Whenever I go to do the repairs, I cannot get into the flat."

Today, Singapore is experiencing a great shortage of construction workers. Wages of construction workers are very high and, therefore, if we are going to extend the maintenance period to more than one year, even perhaps for as short a period as six months more, I think for each flat we will have to pay several thousand dollars more. The HDB thinks so, and I personally agree that it would be rather unwise to extend another six months and to allow the contractors to charge several thousand dollars more.

Also, if we extend it for another six months, there is no guarantee that the defects will not occur in the 19th month. Still we are going to have a lot of complaints. Previously, when the maintenance period was six months, they said, "I have defects appearing after eight or nine months." So we extended it to one year, and the complaints appear after the 12th month. And if we extend it to 18 months, there is no guarantee that the defects will not occur on the 19th month.

As regards the complaints on defects, the HDB has rationalized the response to the complaints. The HDB has set up the 24-hour emergency service. The HDB has separated the complaints into two groups, namely, defects which can wait and which can be attended to by the contractors. But for serious complaints, such as somebody being trapped inside a lift, or the WC is choked and overflowing, or the electricity is out of order and emergency repairs have to be carried out, the HDB has a 24-hour emergency service unit which will respond to these emergency calls. The other defects will be attended to through the normal procedure.

Of course, I must admit that there are good contractors who respond reasonably quickly and there are also bad contractors who respond rather slowly. In our experience with the not-so-good contractors, we find that the owner of the flat suffers the frus- tration of having to wait for the repair jobs or maintenance work to be carried out slowly. But in a situation like Singapore where at present the HDB has a very large building program me, coupled with development in the private sector, we have a serious shortage of construction workers. We must therefore accept that the response to requests for repair work cannot be as quickly as we would like it to be.

The Member for Changi complained about poor standard of cleaning work. The Member for Bedok also touched on the subject and asked whether or not the HDB has sufficient cleaners. My answer is "No." In fact, less than 90% of the vacancies in the HDB's establishment are filled. In other words, we have a fairly large number of vacancies of cleaners as the job of cleaning is not popular. Singaporeans generally shy away from it. For most of the time the number of vacancies remains large.

In the HDB, we have allowed 50% of the cleaning work to be done by our own HDB workers and 50% by the contract workers. Again, we find that in the last two or three years, the contractors are also facing the problem of getting sufficient cleaners in spite of a very substantial increase in the contract price. They are facing this problem because cleaning is a very dirty and unpleasant job and the social status of a cleaner is relatively low. Young Singaporeans generally prefer other jobs to cleaning. Because of the shortage of cleaners, the HDB is not able to do as much as they would like.

But I would certainly not give the excuse that because there is a shortage of workers, therefore, the housing estates should be dirty. That is not an excuse. But this is a fact - we are short of workers and the HDB is trying to do the best possible job with its limited workforce. Our supervising officers are very strict on the contractors who do the cleansing job and make sure that they provide sufficient workers under the contract to do the cleansing job.

On this matter, I would say that the Residents' Committees, another grassroots organization, can help to get the message across to the residents that littering, or the throwing of rubbish, all over the housing estate only increases the cost of cleaning and maintenance. Vandalism or damaging the amenities in the housing estate, again increases maintenance cost. If the residents can cooperate with the HDB by reducing acts of littering and vandalism, the HDB will be able to save on maintenance and cleaning costs and our housing estates will be much cleaner.

The Member for Changi raised a point about deposit. The HDB's rule is that if a person already owns an HDB flat, let us say he has been living in a three-room flat for less than three years and wants to buy a five-room flat, he is only required to put a deposit of $200. But if he has lived there for more than three years and, having been allocated a five-room flat, he intends to sell his three-room flat in the open market and make a profit, then the HDB will ask him to put a deposit of $600. I think the hon. Member is aware of the prices advertised in the newspapers on the sale of old HDB flats. The owners are, in fact, making a very substantial profit and I believe the additional $400 deposit will not cause a hardship.

The Member for Radin Mas complained about lifts. I am aware of the situation. The breakdown of the lifts in Blocks Nos. 1 to 6, Telok Blangah Crescent - which are not in Telok Blangah Constituency but in Radin Mas Constituency - these six blocks of flats have a much higher rate of breakdown. The HDB has carried out a series of checks on the lifts and has replaced the defective parts. The frequency of breakdown of the lifts in these six blocks has been reduced from 2.3 breakdowns per lift per month in December 1980 to the rate of 1.53 breakdowns in February 1981, which means that the defective parts have been replaced and there has been a very considerable improvement.

I would like to give the hon. Member for Radin Mas an assurance that we will continue to try to improve the lifts. A lift has an average service life of 20 years and some of the lifts installed by the SIT are still functioning quite well for more than 20 years. The lifts in these six blocks of flats are only 7 1/2 years old. I would like to give the Member the assurance that if our efforts to reduce the frequency of breakdowns are not successful, then we will consider replacing these lifts at an earlier date.

On the question of poor lighting in the common corridors, I will ask the HDB to look into it and, if necessary, we will switch on some of the lights in the day-time in these corridors.

On the question of housing subsidy raised by the hon. Member for Boon Lay, the subsidy to the HDB is based on the overall deficit in the income and expenditure account of the HDB. Though there was a provision of $64 million for subsidy to the HDB for the financial year 1980, the actual deficit incurred by the HDB in the year was $53 million. This year's provision is $55 million, and there is therefore no reduction in the subsidy.

Another part of the subsidy which is not shown here is actually the land subsidy which means that the HDB actually provides a nominal land cost when it computes the prices of flats for sale. As all hon. Members here in this House know, if the HDB is going to use the market price of land, then the cost of HDB flats will be much higher than the present selling prices. So this land subsidy is not reflected in this provision.

While the Government would like to be able to progressively reduce the subsidy over the years, this is not possible. In fact, the housing subsidy has continuously increased with inflation and with the increasing oil prices. The Government recognizes that there is a need to keep housing price within the reach of the lower income-group. Therefore, I would like to assure the Member for Boon Lay that it is not possible for Government to pass on all the cost to the purchaser even if the Government wants to because this is not practical. This would price the house well beyond the reach of many Singaporeans.

Hon. Members must have read the newspapers about the sale of private flats in the Katong area. A 500-square foot flat which is slightly bigger than a one-room improved HDB flat but much smaller than a two-room flat has been sold at $240,000 and people are queuing up overnight to buy these flats. So it is quite obvious that the HDB flats cannot be priced at market price because this will be beyond the reach of our citizens.

On the few points raised by the hon. Member for Telok Blangah requesting for more facilities, the policy of the HDB is to continuously upgrade the facilities in all HDB estates. So Telok Blangah is included. Additional sports and recreational facilities such as jogging tracks, hard courts and keep-fit playgrounds will be provided in Telok Blangah Constituency, and I hope work will start soon because I am told that the tender has already been called.

On another point raised by the hon. Member about the bin centre, bin centres at all HDB housing estates will be modified so that the collection of refuse can be done within the bin centre itself. Improvements will be made and it will include Telok Blangah. 5.00 p.m.

Several Members have questioned the need to provide aeration slabs. They consider it a waste of public funds. I want to assure hon. Members that it is not so. In fact, several Members have questioned the need to spend large sums of money on aeration of trees in car parks.

Since the "Make Singapore Green" campaign in 1963, the Parks and Recreation Department of my Ministry has been monitoring the growth of trees in all parts of Singapore under different conditions. Observations show that trees planted in tarmac car parks grow very slowly because their roots are unable to obtain the necessary moisture. Results from a series of tests and experiments conducted by the Department indicate that the most efficient way to channel moisture to the tree roots in large tarmac areas is to dig up the tarmac and replace it with perforated or aeration slabs.

To a layman, trees planted in the tarmac car park appear to be growing well and aeration seems to be a waste of money. In reality this is not so. Aeration is essential to promote the tree growth and it is not a waste of public funds. As all Members know, the Ministry of Finance has been very careful about approval of public funds. If this is a waste of money, I am quite sure the Ministry of Finance will not grant its approval for the provision of aeration slabs.

On the point raised by the Member for Kaki Bukit about the lack of essential facilities in a housing estate, such as a police station, I would like to inform the House that a revised procedure is now being worked out to ensure that the essential facilities are provided in time when a HDB new town is ready for occupation. When this procedure has been finalized, the facilities will be provided together with the development of public housing.

On the question of street lighting of PWD streets, the point is that HDB will not hand over the keys to the owners or tenants of the flats when the facilities such as street lighting around that neighbourhood are not ready. But PWD roads are a separate matter because PWD roads have their own programme, and this is not part of the HDB programme, I will pass this information to the PWD to see what can be done in the Kaki Bukit area about the PWD roads and the public lighting.

On the point raised by the Member for Tiong Bahru, the pre-war flats sold to the residents in Tiong Bahru come under a different set of conditions. They are not similar to the Home Ownership Scheme. In other words, the owners of these flats are allowed to sell their flats, to assign or rent their flats. They are allowed to do virtually the same as private flat owners. For this reason, they are under different conditions.

The hon. Member has requested that the residents be allowed to pay their maintenance service and conservancy charges at quarterly intervals. I will ask the HDB to look into it and, if at all possible, I will ask them to accede to the request of the hon. Member.

As to the lack of a playground, the position is this. Previously when there were some open spaces they complained that there was the lack of car parking facilities. So the open spaces were converted to a car park to satisfy the parking requirements. Once the open spaces were converted into car parks, naturally there were no more open spaces for the construction of a play-ground. This is one of those situations. To solve the problem, we may have to resort to acquiring the whole area for redevelopment. But I would like to assure the Member and the residents there that the HDB has no such intention. Therefore, they can continue to own the flats but they have to put up with this lack of open spaces because the open spaces have been used as car parks.

As regards the relocation of residents which was brought up by the Member for Kim Seng, the HDB allows the family members to live together on relocation. That is to say, brothers and sisters with their parents can live next door to each other. But as far as the request that neighbours be allowed to live together, I say that each case will have to be considered on its own merit. Just for argument's sake, if there is a senior citizen who is very old and some neighbour is willing to look after him upon relocation, I would say that the HDB will be prepared to consider the allocation of adjoining flats to the senior citizen and his neighbour only if the neighbour can give an undertaking that he is going to help the senior citizen. But this will not be the general case with neighbours both of whom are old citizens.

I think I have touched on most of the points raised by the Member for Bedok.

On the point raised by the Member for Whampoa on the provision of lifts for the six-storey flats, I will ask the HDB to make a study of it. If we want those flats to remain after this decade, i.e. after 1990, we will most probably have to consider installing lifts. But if HDB intends to demolish those flats within this decade, then the installation of lifts would be a waste of public funds. What we will do is to allocate the flats at the top floors to those families with younger members who are able to climb up to the upper floors, and to allocate those on the ground floor to families with senior citizens or older people.

On the question of allowance for removal expenses, I will deal with this matter together with the Resettlement vote which is going to be discussed subsequently.

On the area of choice, HDB's policy is that whenever residents are relocated, if accommodation is available in the same constituency, we will give priority to the residents. That has been the existing policy all the time. They are considered as resettlement cases and they are given priority.

On the question of 20% deposit for the purchase of flats, we cannot waive this condition. This is the standard requirement and it does not apply only to the emergency one-room flats. It is applied uniformly throughout. Although I am quite sympathetic towards the emergency one-room flats owners, I am sorry to inform the Member that I cannot waive this requirement.

As regards overcrowding in the swimming pool in Toa Payoh and that it is essential to have a swimming pool either within the Whampoa constituency or nearby, I generally agree with the Member's observation and I will ask the HDB to look into it. We will find a place to build a swimming pool either within the Whampoa constituency or around Whampoa constituency.

Mr Tan Soo Khoon: Sir, from the lack of Members standing up to respond to the Minister's reply, I take it that we are all very grateful to him for his answer, and I beg leave to withdraw.

Amendment by leave, withdrawn.

Mr Teo Chong Tee: Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head T be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead TG-02 of the Main Estimates.*

*The same amendment also stood in the name of Encik Saidi Shariff.

Sir, the Housing and Development Board made a survey of Lorong Dangai and found that this place was suitable for a sand quarry. A resettlement exercise was carried out by the HDB and approximately 20 families were hurriedly resettled elsewhere. In the process, many of those affected, who were pig-farmers, had to get rid of their pigs at a cheap price. They were then "uprooted" and later resettled in an entirely different environment.

Sir, resettlement has become a way of life in Singapore and people who are affected have accepted the fact that it is their duty as loyal citizens to make sacrifices for the country's redevelopment. If not, Singapore would not have been what she is today.

However, Sir, months have gone by and nothing has so far materialized at Lorong Dangai. What happens to the proposed HDB sand quarry? Has HDB finally found out that there is no sand in this place? If that is so, then the survey conducted by some HDB so-called "experts" was not correct. This obviously must have caused my constituents a great deal of inconvenience. Perhaps the Hon. Minister could enlighten me on this.

Sir, the compensation rate for resettlement cases cannot catch up with the rising cost of HDB flats. Would the Hon. Minister review the compensation rate to meet with the present situation? This will help to relieve the hardship faced by the people who are resettled into HDB flats. 5.15 p.m.

Encik Saidi Shariff: Sir, with your permission, I would like to take the opportunity, in speaking on this amendment, to reflect the views, hopes doubts and fears of my constituents relating to the question of re-settlement'. I am aware that it may be a futile effort on my part to achieve my objectives and, in fact, may even jeopardize my sincere intentions later. What I would like to do is to comment on two aspects of the Government's resettlement policy. One is in regard to the compensation rate and the other is the need to preserve certain features in the area which is scheduled for clearance. In doing so, Sir, may I use my constituency of Kaki Bukit as a case in point.

Kaki Bukit Constituency is a vast estate consisting of two distinct areas - the suburban HDB area concentrated mainly in Bedok North and the more rural or kampong area of Jalan Lembah Bedok, Lorong Kancing, Lorong Waii and the Jalan Eunos/Kaki Bukit Malay Settlement. Into the HDB area have come in people who have been resettled from other places taken over by the Government for redevelopment. Since all the residents are, in the main, almost total strangers to one another, it is my responsibility to help them adjust to their new surroundings and eventually to help evolve a more cohesive, friendly, vibrant community.

On the other hand, the rural or the kampong area has in an ironic sense an exact anti-thesis of the atmosphere still prevalent in most HDB estates. Having lived in the settlement for the last 50 years or so, a closely-knit community already exists among all the residents here. The community is bound by traditional ties of friendship, mutual respect and the spirit of gotong-royong. In this community will soon descend the unsettling thought of resettlement. It would be difficult to blame them for these unsettled feelings, if we can but capture a little of the 'soul' of such a community.

I am tempted to invite my fellow hon. Members to make an extensive tour of the area so that they can better understand the misgivings of being resettled elsewhere. This applies, in particular, to the older generation, made up mainly of people who have loyally served the nation in various capacities in the past. Their homes represent their life savings and their dreams of spending their retirement years in the placidity and peace of kampong living surrounded by neighbours and friends of many years' standing. To them, resettlement is a symbolic 'uprooting' from all they have known so far. They do not share the adventurous spirit of the young. Hence, there is a greater emotional attachment to the settlement and if they are given a chance, they would rather stay where they are.

To these people, in particular, there is a greater need for an assurance that they would be moving into a better environment with more modern amenities and better living conditions. However, being loyal and pragmatic Singaporeans, they recognize the need for resettlement of people within the Singapore context and have therefore accepted the concept in principle. This appears to be a typical reaction in other areas. Apart from having to explain the rationale for resettlement, we should try our level best to evolve an enthusiastic response from the residents to the reality of resettlement.

The Hon. Minister's recent response to my question in the House when he said, "The affected residents will be resettled according to existing policies of the Resettlement Department" is a typical, cut and dry, unemotional, official and terse statement. It attempts to say many things but ends up in revealing nothing. I do not envy the job of the Hon. Minister for he has the unpleasant duty of having to resettle people and in some ways indirectly helping to uproot people. His task can be less unpleasant for himself and those thousands concerned if, in having to remove soul from the body, he still leaves behind a small semblance of the original 'soul' so that people can still identify the colourful and exciting past with any spot that has been so developed that it is now beyond recognition. I believe that the Hon. Minister is a kind-hearted man and I would be grateful indeed if he would consider the following for his guidance.

In Singapore, so much emphasis is now being laid on our cultural heritage and our cultural roots which inevitably means that we must maintain our links with the past. May I, therefore, propose that the existing resettlement policy includes a deliberate attempt to preserve something of the past whenever an area has to be developed. Such efforts are seen to have been done in other areas, for example, Toa Payoh has its own temple which has been rebuilt and has become a tourist attraction.

Whenever I visit the HDB estate in Jalan Bukit Merah and Telok Blangah Way, I remember Kampong Silat where I grew up and Kampong Radin Mas which used to be my playground. The kampongs have vanished but the two temples and a mosque remind me of the past. This is where I grew up and played. This is my kampong, my country and I will strongly defend it against any foreign invasion.

But were such preservations implemented out of a conscious effort to link the past with the present, or were they accidental freaks of development as they blended with the new landscape? Cannot the same be done with Kaki Bukit or any other areas that may need development in the future? It does not really matter in what form the preservation takes, be it a street name, a religious building or even a physical feature, such as a hillock or even a stream. I am also a child of resettlement but whenever I pass by the area where Kampong Silat, Kampong Radin Mas, Kampong Heap Guan San was, I remember happy childhood memories associated with the Sikh Temple, Chinese Temple and the mosque still left magnificently intact amidst so many new changes.

I fully realize that there may be cost and space constraints, but such constraints are man-made and can be weighed in the balance if the promotion of moral health merits far more important consideration. It cannot be avoided that old buildings have to be demolished to make way for development which is done in the national interests for the benefit of the mostest people. In its past development work, the Government has been cautious and gives due consideration before buildings of historical value and highly respected by the residents are pulled down. It is my hope therefore that the Hon. Minister will give the same weight of consideration in the redevelopment of Kaki Bukit.

Secondly, may I propose that the compensation rate be reviewed with greater frequency. I believe that the last revision was done exactly two years ago on 22nd March, 1979. Government generosity is much appreciated even if it keeps to a regulated time schedule. Unfortunately, the spectre of inflation which roams our land has scant respect for Government schedules. The prices of HDB flats will continue to rise. The number of times such costs are raised is not regulated by light time schedules but the spiralling costs of labour and building materials. I am not even proposing that the rates of compensation keep pace with rising costs; what I am proposing is that these rates be reviewed at more frequent intervals, say, annually or once every two years. The additional sum will come in very handy to the residents involved for they are not from the millionaires' row but ordinary workers, wage-earners and retired senior citizens or pensioners. It may cost the Government a little more but the goodwill it will generate is surely worth the extra financial sacrifice.

Sir, as a new Member of Parliament, I am comparatively less experienced in the school of politicking and the cut and thrust of parliamentary debate. But I would be failing in my duty if I fail to reflect the views, hopes, doubts and the fears of my constituents.

The Chairman: Encik Saidi, your time is up. As a new Member of Parliament, perhaps you may want to know that you are allowed only 10 minutes in Committee of Supply.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: Sir, can I have your permission to speak now so that I need not move my amendment (9)? It is on the same subject.

The Chairman: Yes.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: Thank you, Sir. With regard to the matter of resettlement, allow me to say that since 1971 Punggol has been under constant resettlement over the last 10 years. When the first phase for the development of Punggol Estate was carried out in 1971 - to date, some 3,000 housing units are up - a large number of families had to move out and subsequently lands in Lorong Buang Kok were compulsorily acquired to make way for the development of pig farms. Now, Sir, the latest exercise is this: large chunks of land have been compulsorily acquired to make way for the Hou Gang New Town. That is going to involve some 2,000 families and it is going to be a massive exercise on resettlement. Thus I am sure the Resettlement Department will have a heavy load in their hands.

Here, Sir, I would like to 'refresh', if I may use the term, the Hon. Minister for National Development to a statement made by our Prime Minister. After the 1976 general elections the Prime Minister said that we should make resettlement less painful and be more humane. Of course, I must bear in mind that the Resettlement Department has done a very good job in resettling people into the various housing estates. But, as pointed out by the Member for Kaki Bukit, vis-a-vis the compensation rates which have been revised from time to time, the uprooting of families, which have been living in that area for a generation or more, into a new environment and surroundings will of course create a lot of problems.

I am not going to raise the other problems connected with resettlement except the question of cost, i.e. the increase in the price of HDB fists. In the 1960s when a three-room flat cost only about $7,800 we had the problem of distinguishing bona fide farmers from non bona fide farmers. We had lengthy debates in this House trying to convince the then Minister for National Development (the former Member for Cairnhill) as to why we should regard all of them as farmers as it was difficult to determine their status as bona fide farmers or non bona fide farmers. That matter was resolved in 1979 when the present Minister for National Development conceded the fact and therefore granted a $15,000 compensation for those who held farm licences. In addition to that, there was a package deal to increase the rates of ex-gratia compensation, i.e. pay- ment out of grace and not as a matter of right.

But here I would like to ask the Hon. Minister to consider this matter very seriously and more than sympathetically, and that is, there is now the need to revise upwards the rates of compensation because the cost of flats has gone up. If the rates of ex-gratia compensation for resettlement are not revised upwards, the question is how are these families going to fit themselves into their new environment, having been up-rooted from their old kampong homes where the cost of living was not high. The Hon. Minister for Trade and Industry has likened it to a "firewood economy", i.e. one need not have to spend much if one would chop some tree branches to set a fire to boil water or to cook. But moving into a Housing Board flat will incur additional costs. There are all sorts of charges, conservancy charges, PUB bills, etc. This would mean that the resettled families will have to take time to adapt themselves, and together with the increase in the cost of living it will certainly bring about not only unpleasantness but also unhappiness. I have had this experience and I had brought this matter up many times in this House. I have also brought this up with the Minister direct, and that is, wherever possible, to relocate these families as close as possible. 5.30 p.m.

The Member for Kaki Bukit mentioned about keeping the families together. From my own experience I do not think it is possible. Of course, I am not here answering for the Hon. Minister. But from my own experience, families will have to go, houses will have to be pulled down first and where can these families go to? They must be relocated to the available flats in HDB estates.

For this particular exercise which I mentioned earlier and which affects that part of Punggol some 2,000 families are affected. All I am asking for are two things. There should be an upward revision in the rates of compensation for those affected and there are also some families who are small-time land owners. They own a small plot of land and they have to give it up either encumbered or with vacant possession. If they give it up as encumbered land, they get priority for Housing Board flats. But if they want a higher rate of compensation, then they have to consider giving up their priority for Housing Board flats. But unfortunately, Sir, in some cases the quantum of compensation for land with vacant possession is not sufficient for them to purchase a private residential property. I hope the Hon. Minister would be kind enough to pay attention to my remarks.

Dr Koh Lip Lin (Nee Soon): Mr Speaker, Sir, thank you very much for allowing me to make some comments. I would like to support the hon. Members for Changi, Kaki Bukit and Punggol for their request to review and revise upwards the current compensation rates for resettlement. The compensation rates were last reviewed and revised in 1979. The compensation rates have been quite reasonable for some items but for others they are unrealistic.

To cite an example, Sir, let us take fruit trees. I do not know whether the Minister for National Development eats durians, but judging from his appearance I would say he does. Am I right? [Mr Teh Cheang Wan indicated in the affirmative.] He should then know that the market price of durians is from $5 to $8 per kilogram, if we were to buy from a roadside stall or in the market. A full grown durian tree in a good season can produce at least about several hundred kilograms of durian. This comes to several thousand dollars worth of durian. Even in a poor season I think it should at least fetch the farmer about $500. But how much compensation is given for a full grown durian tree? It is just $120. We can imagine how unhappy owners of durian trees are when they are paid $120 as compensation for something which can fetch them a yearly income of several thousand dollars. I hope the Minister will consider our request to revise upwards the compensation rates for resettlement cases.

Another point I would like to raise is the allocation of HDB flats as a resettlement benefit. The policy on priority is now based on the family unit. Each family unit will be allocated one flat. As it so often happens, in the rural areas a family unit can be quite large. One family may comprise five or six members; another family may comprise 10 or 12 members, and so on. It will be quite inhumane to allocate only one flat to a family of, say, 10 members with grown-up children and teenagers. I remember the Hon. Minister commenting the other day that members of a large family did not arrive all at one time. I agree with him. But in the villages, especially before the days of family planning, people tend to have big families. To allocate to a family comprising a husband and wife with eight children who are teenagers, a three-room, four-room or even a five-room flat is not sufficient. Will the Minister therefore consider allocating more than one HDB flat to a large family affected by resettlement?

Dr Chau Sik Ting (Thomson): Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to support hon. Members' views on the rates of compensation.

First, I would like to touch on the temples in my constituency. I believe my constituency has the most number of temples and they are affected by public redevelopment schemes. Can I ask the Hon. Minister what plans the Minister has on the resettlement of these temples, big and small, which have been in existence for maybe 30 to 50 years?

Secondly, I notice in a recent newspaper that the HDB has published the sites for open tender for the construction of temples. Would the resettlement cases be considered on a priority basis or on certain other basis?

Thirdly, I wonder whether the Minister can give some assurance as to whether some of the temples which are considered landmarks will be allowed to remain?

Mr Teh Cheang Wan: Mr Speaker, Sir, the Member for Changi has raised a point about the sand quarry. The sand quarry project in the Lorong Dangai area has not been shelved. The project has been delayed because of problems in clearing the two saw-mills at the site. Tenders for the operation of sand quarry have been called, and quarrying will commence after the award of the tender.

As regards the Member for Kaki Bukit's point on the preservation of the unique features in the Kaki Bukit area, the HDB will take note of the hon. Member's comments. The HDB will consider the retention of these features if they are consistent with the over-all redevelopment plan of the area.

On the request by the Member for Nee Soon to allocate more than one flat to a large family which is generally found in squatter areas, I think much depends on the number of persons in a family. Quite often in one household where the family is really an extended family, they get four, five or six flats. This is not unusual. But cases of a large family comprising the husband and wife with 10 grown-up children are very rare. Even if there is such a family, I would suggest that they take a five-room flat. I suppose the grown-up children will get married sooner or later. They can submit their respective applications to the HDB, and they will be allo- cated additional flats when they have settled down. But if they have not settled down, we cannot allocate two flats to a family. Once we allocate two flats to a family, we will create a precedent and that will create a lot of problems for us.

The Member for Thomson brought up the question of temples. The resettlement policy is that when an area is being cleared, we ask the various Chinese temples to group together and the HDB will allocate a site to them at a very low land cost so that they can jointly build a temple. But if any individual temple affected by the clearance is financially strong and the owners want to build their own temple, they are certainly welcome to tender for the temple site. All things being equal, since they are paying the same premium for the land, a site will be allocated to them. For example, if they have tendered a sum lower than that of the highest bidder, the HDB will be prepared to ask them to up the price and allocate the land to them so that they can build a temple. This consideration is being given to all the affected cases.

However, if the temple has certain unique features worthy of preservation and that it does not interfere with the development of the land, as I have assured the Member for Kaki Bukit, the temple will be preserved.

On the last point, a very eloquent plea has been made by some Members for a need to revise the compensation rate for resettlement. I am prepared to say that the compensation rates will be revised. In fact, the policy of the Government is such that compensation rates are constantly being reviewed. The last review was in 1979 when compensation rates and cash grants to farmers were generally increased. We are currently reviewing the rate to take into account inflation and the rising cost of housing. When finalized, the new rates will take effect from today. Those affected by resettlement and who move out today, but before the new rates are announced, will therefore still be entitled to the increased rates.

Mr Teo Chong Tee: Sir, I think the Hon. Minister is more than kind to agree to an immediate revision of the rates upwards, I am sure those constituents who are due to be resettled will be very happy to hear that. On this note, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment by leave, withdrawn.

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

That the sum to be allocated for Head T be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead TH-06 of the Main Estimates

Sir, in moving this amendment, I just wish to ask the Minister a couple of questions on the Fisheries Research Programme, such as, the fish farming experimentation undertaken by the Fisheries Division of the Primary Production Department. I would like the Hon. Minister to enlighten the House whether there has been any follow-up action on the successful research projects that have been carried out and, if so, what are they. More importantly, what encouragement is being given to those who are interested in fish farming?

Mr Teh Cheang Wan: Sir, the Changi Fisheries Research Station has successfully carried out experimental breeding of the grouper fish. The station has also successfully demonstrated the feasibility of rearing marine fish in floating cage nets and intensive mussel culture in floating rafts. The Primary Production Department is finalizing a scheme for the private sector to undertake commercial marine fish farming projects. The Department has identified several areas off Pulau Ubin and the coastal waters off Serangoon as designated fish farming areas. Entrepreneurs who are interested in undertaking commercial fish farming projects may soon apply to the Primary Production Department for licences to rear fish in the designated areas. The annual fee for a licence shall be $500 for each 5,000 square metres of fishing farm area.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: Sir, I am grateful to the Hon. Minister for his reply, and I beg leave to withdrawn my amendment.

Amendment by leave, withdrawn. 5.45 p.m.

Encik Wan Hussin Zoohri (Kampong Ubi): Sir, I beg to move,

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

Sir, among the brick-bats and bouquets given to the Minister for National Development, allow me to add one small bouquet, and that is the completion of the dual carriageway along Jalan Eunos. The long overdue development of the Jalan Eunos dual carriageway has been finalized and I notice that traffic is flowing very smoothly. Related to that, the landscaping of this area is showing signs of beautiful surroundings. Being the last speaker, Mr Speaker, Sir, many of the points that I would like to raise have already been touched on by hon. Members. But allow me to make some observations.

The first one is with regard to the road-widening of Eunos Crescent in my Eunos Housing Estate. I must thank the Minister for the answers given me to my letter pertaining to this subject in question. However, I find it rather unusual why the HDB would want to expand the existing Eunos Crescent Road now when the physical structures, such as the buildings and roads, have been built according to the original plan. Moreover, the residents have settled down rather happily and comfortably. I appreciate the rationale behind the need for these improvements. But the present inconvenience could have been avoided had these improvements been included in the original plan of building the housing estate. Again, the cost would have been less then. Is this not an example of ad hoc or piecemeal planning? After all, when the residents chose this estate, it was on the original setting and layout of the estate - small size and comparatively peaceful.

Mr Speaker, Sir, in the HDB's Annual Report 1979-80, three main tasks have been identified for the future. One of them is "better environmental design."

I would now like to turn my attention to the children's playing area in housing estates. It is again commendable that the land space between the blocks has been turned into a play area for the benefit of children. See-saws, sand pits, concrete tunnels and other physical structures have been put up in this play area. It is further observed that to give an aesthetic appearance to these structures, the HDB has created a physical semblance of animals out of these concrete structures.

May I appeal, Sir, to the HDB that other forms of animal which have cultural connections with the different ethnic groups be created. For example, where space is available, it would be more in tune with the spirit of our multi-cultural society to have side by side the physical structure of the dragon, the Sang Kancil and the Hanuman, each having its own cultural roots - the dragon with Chinese mythology, the Sang Kancil with Malay folklore, the Hanuman with the Indian epic, Ramayana. Mr Speaker, Sir, what more could we ask when we see a mother playing with her child in this play area and telling her child the mythology and folklore as symbolized by these animals? Here, physical exercise could well be very educational too.

Mr Teh Cheang Wan: Mr Speaker, Sir, I wish to thank the hon. Member for Kampong Ubi for his kind words about the Public Works Department on the recently com- pleted Pan-island Expressway at Jalan Eunos. Quite often, the widening of roads causes inconvenience to the residents and quite often it is unavoidable because of the increase in traffic. In the case of Eunos Crescent raised by the hon. Member, it is because of the increase in traffic.

In the Housing and Development Board, there is always proper planning in the development of HDB new towns and estates. However, the HDB does not stop at the completion of an estate. If warranted, existing facilities will be upgraded. And as there is an increase in the volume of traffic in Eunos Crescent, the road has been widened to improve the flow of the increased traffic.

The hon. Member has also touched on the animal symbols adopted by the HDB in designing the play equipment for HDB children's playgrounds. The HDB has always tried to adopt universal symbols which are generally not connected with any specific culture. However, the hon. Member's suggestion to include symbols of the various cultural groups in Singapore in designing the play equipment is a good one, and I will ask the HDB to incorporate his suggestion in future.

Encik Wan Hussin Zoohri: Mr Speaker, Sir, it is amazing how the Minister for National Development has been answering all the barrage of questions with such dexterity and giving us an avalanche of answers. It seems to me that the Minister has given us very fatherly answers all the time, keeping all the older sons like me at ease.

On that note, I respectfully beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment by leave, withdrawn.

The sum of $215,033,670 for Head T ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates.

The sum of $1,905,469,200 for Head T ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.