PARKS AND TREES (AMENDMENT) BILL

Order for Second Reading read. 7.24 p.m.

The Minister for National Development (Mr Teh Cheang Wan): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time."

The Parks and Recreation Department has encountered some problems in the administration of the Parks and Trees Act, 1975. This Amendment Bill is intended to achieve a more effective implementation of the Act and its Rules.

One of the amendments will empower the Commissioner, Parks and Recreation, to take immediate measures to remove any tree or plant which is imminently dangerous to life or property. Under the existing Act, the Commissioner has to serve a written notice to the owner of the property requesting him to remove any plant which is likely to be a fire hazard or a source of danger to the public. If the owner failed to act immediately, the Commissioner could only proceed to remove the plant after the expiry of the notice. This delay is unacceptable in situations where any tree or plant is imminently dangerous to life or property and immediate measures have to be taken.

A further amendment is a provision prohibiting the parking of vehicles on turfed areas beside public streets or on other turfed open spaces which are maintained by the Commissioner. In the past, many motorists park their vehicles indiscriminately on the roadside green verges in areas such as the East Coast Park. This causes extensive damage to the turfed areas and the Parks and Recreation Department has to expend public funds to repair the turf. The amendment will allow the Commissioner to take enforcement action against the offending motorists.

To facilitate enforcement of the Act, the Amendment Bill will also empower the Commissioner to require the vehicle owner, who is suspected of an offence under the Act or Rules, to furnish the identity and address of the person who drove the vehicle at the material time.

The fine for such offence committed under the Act or Rules is increased from $1,000 to $2,000 and the Commissioner's power to compound any of the offences is also enhanced from $200 to $400.

Finally, the Bill also seeks to provide an additional mode of service of notices by the Commissioner, namely, by affixing such a notice conspicuously to some part of the premises or to some object on the premises.

Sir, I beg to move.

Question proposed.

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Education (Mr Ho Kah Leong): ( In Mandarin): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, credit must be given to the Parks and Recreation Department for its contributions towards making Singapore a garden city that is well-known throughout the world. Over the past 10 to 20 years we have planted trees in almost every place possible. As a result, on every Tree-planting Day, we have a problem looking for suitable sites to plant trees.

It is a good idea to cover our island Republic with trees but matching the trees with the environment is another problem we have to consider. Of course, we would like to plant as many types of tropical trees as possible so that there will be variety. However, I observe that some of the trees grow tall and slim. There is no beauty in them at all. As a matter of fact, they are rather horrifying to see at night.

The present Amendment Bill seeks to give the Commissioner of Parks and Recreation wider powers to remove trees. I hope the Parks and Recreation Department will seek the advice of landscape artists to get rid of ugly-looking trees. Clause 3 of this Bill gives the Commissioner wider powers to remove any tree or plant without having to obtain the prior consent of the occupier. Of course, trees which pose imminent danger to life or property should be removed immediately. However, will the Hon. Minister kindly enlighten this House as to what measures are available to prevent the Commissioner from removing trees and plants in a private garden at his whim and fancy? Furthermore, the cost incurred in the removal of such trees will be thrust upon the occupier. How can the Hon. Minister ensure that the Commissioner will not charge an exorbitant fee for the removal of a tree? We all know that the spirit of the law lies in the fact that any piece of legislation passed or amended will not subject any law-abiding citizen to undue penalty.

There is also a provision in the Bill to punish car owners for parking their vehicles on the road-side turfed areas. We all know that the Parks and Recreation Department has put in a lot of effort to construct the road-side grass verge. Car owners should therefore refrain from damaging the turf just for the sake of their own convenience. By damaging these turfed areas, these inconsiderate motorists are certainly committing an act no different from that of vandalism. Notwithstanding this, have we considered what measures there are to prevent motorists from committing such offence? Why can we not construct kerbs or low iron railings around the turfed areas?

Clause 5 of the Bill seeks to increase the composition fine from $200 to $400. This appears to be excessive. For an ordinary traffic offence, the composition fine ranges from $30 or $50 to $100. Will the Hon. Minister kindly enlighten us as to whether an offender will be fined $400 once he commits an offence?

However, I support this Amendment Bill, in principle.

Mr Teh Cheang Wan: Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I wish to thank the hon. Member for Jurong for supporting the Bill in principle.

The hon. Member has raised various points on the work of the Parks and Recreation Department. On the question of landscaping parks and beautifying our streets and various open spaces, the Parks and Recreation Department has the services of several landscape architects, and I would like to assure him that the staff of this Department have tried their very best to provide the best possible landscape architecture in the various areas.

On the question of landscape architecture and landscape gardening, of course, different people have different opinions. While one person may consider a certain landscape architecture to be beautiful, another person may have a different opinion.

On the question of cutting down trees, I would like to assure the hon. Member for Jurong and the House that the Commissioner of Parks and Recreation will definitely not indiscriminately cut down trees in private gardens. He will only cut down the trees which he considers are a danger to the public.

On the question of providing road-side kerbs to prevent motor vehicles from parking on the grass verge, I have, in fact, put this question to the Public Works Department: that if the expenditure is not too high, we should provide more road-side kerbs so that motor vehicles will not easily get on to the turfed areas and so damage the turf.

On the question of compounding the fines imposed on motorists who have committed offences, although the Bill provides that the Commissioner can compound a fine up to $400, he will not normally impose it except for serious offences, for example, when people give misleading information, such as the wrong name and address of the car owner - this sort of mischievous information. For this type of offence, the composition fine will be high. For simple offences, say, parking a car on the turf, I think most probably the composition fine is likely to be between $20 and $50 and not $400.

Question put, and agreed to.

Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House.

The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. - [Mr Teh Cheang Wan].

Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed.