HOUSING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD (Powers over Occupiers and Purchasers of HDB Apartments)

Mr Jeyaretnam: Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I have claimed this right to speak on the motion for the adjournment on the powers that have been granted to the Housing and Development Board under the Act and the manner of the exercise of those powers by the Board. Sir, in raising this question may I say that I am not in any way belinling what has been done by the Housing and Development Board under the Government in providing housing for the people. But may I perhaps in passing point out something which has been acknowledged by the Government that after 1981, particularly 31st October 1981, the construction of public housing has speeded up considerably. But I shall not, of course, claim any credit for that. I do wish to say that I am not belinling what has been done, but it is with the powers that have been granted to the Board and the exercise of these powers that I am concerned. As Members are well aware and all of us in Singapore are aware, about 60% or 70% of our population are now housed in apartments built by the Housing and Development Board. Therefore, the writ of the Housing and Development Board runs into all these families that are housed in the apartments and they, as I say, comprise about 60% to 70% of our population.

Sir, was it in the last century that a philosopher wrote about the State becoming a leviathan and the citizens being helpless against the monster that has risen. We have in the Housing and Development Board, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, a veritable leviathan, because if you will consider the powers that have been granted to the Board under this Act, the Board has now the power to exclude people from their homes, to throw people out of their homes and the residents are helpless against the exercise of these powers by the Board. I say helpless in spite of the provision provided in the Act for an appeal to the Minister. I propose, I hope in the time that is available to me, to show that this provision is really illusory and it is very limited.

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, may I illustrate what I am saying by a letter that was written to the papers on the 2nd of August this year, not very long ago, by the wife of an intending purchaser of a flat from the Housing and Development Board. She wrote saying that her husband had applied in July 1979 for a 5-room flat. And in completing his application form, she says he had inadvertently failed to complete a box in that application form which required the applicant to state whether he was living in a rented flat or in a purchase flat at the time he made the application. She says it was pure inadvertence. Well, that is her letter.

Then in 1984 the man was told he could get the flat for which he had applied way back in 1979. But when he went to collect his keys, apparently he was told, "Oh, in 1979 you left this little box uncompleted and therefore you now have to pay a fine, equivalent to 10% of the purchase price of the new flat that we are selling to you. Not only that, you will have to wait a month before you can get the keys of the new flat." I do not know what has happened to this particular case. I have not seen any reply from the Ministry or the Housing and Development Board to this letter, So I really do not know what has happened. That is the sort of situation I am speaking of. Here is a purchaser who, according to the writer, inadvertently leaves something blank in the form and he is told that, "either you pay $8,750 immediately and in addition to that you can only get the keys a month later or the sale of the flat to you will be withdrawn and you will have to reapply and go down to the bottom of the line and wait for another five years." As she says in her letter, the husband really had no choice. That is the sort of situation in which our people find themselves under the mandate that we have given to the Housing and Development Board.

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, if one looks through the Act and the sections in the Act which give the Board the various powers, you find that the Board can evict tenants who fall into arrears with their rent. And I am here, first of all, talking about monthly tenants, those who have not purchased their flats but are living purely as monthly tenants. I think mention was made when we were debating the Report of the Committee on the Problems of the Aged about people who are unable to pay the rents of HDB flats. What I would like to know from the Minister is: does the Board evict in every case a tenant who has fallen into arrears? Because there may well be situations where a tenant through no fault of his may be unable to pay the rent due to the Board. The simplest case is where the breadwinner in the family is taken ill and I know of one case in my own constituency where the man has had an accident, had his leg amputated, and he is out of employment, and has been out of employment for the last six months. It is in these situations where the family may find it very difficult to pay the rents. There are other situations. I could go on but I do not have the time.

What I would like to know is: does the Board grant any relief in the case of tenants who are unable to pay their rents? Or does it, regardless of the consequences to the family, throw them out because they are unable to pay their rents? The Act would give the Board the power and I have myself known of cases where the Board has thrown people out because they have been unable to pay the rents. Indeed, when I asked a question in August 1982 of the persons who are debarred from applying for HDB apartments, the Minister's answer showed that persons who had been thrown out of their flats for non-payment of their rents and who did not clear these arrears would be debarred forever from applying for HDB flats again. Well, that shows a complete heartless attitude and a lack of appreciation of the difficulties that may be encountered by families. I would like to know what is the policy of the Board as regards people who are unable to pay their rents. What about those people who are on public assistance? Does the Board still require them to pay he rents due to the Board every month or are they given any relief?

Moving from them to others, those whom we call owners of HDB apartments, but who are really not owners. They would appear to be pure occupiers of these flats at the pleasure of the HDB. Turning to them, one finds in the Act that the Board has powers for a variety of reasons to re-possess or to re-acquire the flats or the apartments from these owners. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I can well conceive that there may be situations where the right of public housing has been abused, that the Board should re-acquire the properties. But if one looks at the instances for which power is given to the Board to re-acquire, one finds that they are for trivial reasons and which can hardly be called an abuse of public housing. For example, Mr Deputy Speaker, you find in the Act a power given to the Board to re-acquire the property if the owner has someone staying in his house, not as a tenant, but as a guest for a few days or for a month, because the Act says that if a lessee has an unauthorized occupier, the Board may exercise the powers. Is it really necessary that we should control the lives of all these people to this extent? Do they have no rights? Should they be at the mercy of the Housing and Development Board?

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I think it is time we realized that even though these people are living in houses provided by public funds, they have some rights. We should not treat them merely as recipients of charity. After all, they are paying for these apartments and they are not cheap, whatever the Minister may say about it. I cannot see any reason why they should be treated as though they are recipients of charity and that the tenure of their occupation should be dependent completely on the decision of the Board which may be arbitrary.

Even on the death of the tenant or the lessee, the apartment may not devolve upon the next-of-kin or the personal representative because you find in the Act that the Board may refuse to grant permission. And if the Board r&uses to grant permission for the transmission on the death of the tenant or the lessee, then the property vests in the Board. To add insult to injury, the Act says that where the Board exercises these powers, the compensation to be paid shall be determined by the Board and that the compensation pays no regard whatsoever to the market value of the apartment at the time that the Board re-acquires the apartment.

I said there was a safeguard provided in the Act which was illusory and this is the right of appeal to the Minister. The tenant or the lessee is not given the evidence upon which the Board exercises these powers. He does not know how the Board got the evidence. He has got no power of challenging this evidence. He is merely told something and then he is asked to appeal against it. It is a hopeless situation for the tenant or the lessee.

I was talking to a Danish journalist sometime ago and he was surprised that the lessees have no representation on our Housing and Development Board. He said that in Denmark where there is such a board, the purchasers of flats are represented on the board. He thought that it was strange that they do not have representation whatsoever on the Housing and Development Board. I think it is high time we considered protecting our lessees. I call them lessees because they are not really owners of these flats. They do not have a freehold interest but only a term of years. I think it is high time that we set up a tribunal. This afternoon we proposed setting up a small claims tribunal to protect consumers. What about a tribunal?

Mr Deputy Speaker: Order. Mr Jeyaretnam, perhaps I should ask. Are you advocating a change in the law, a change in the legislation?

Mr Jeyaretnam: I am saying that it is time we gave them some rights by allowing them a proper appeal to a tribunal.

Mr Deputy Speaker: Would you say that it has to be done by means of a change in the legislation?

Mr Jeyaretnam: Well, it may have to be, yes.

Mr Deputy Speaker: If the answer is yes, I am afraid it is out of order. The Adjournment motion is not the time to talk of a change in the legislation. I would let you go on speaking so long as you are not advocating a change in the legislation.

Mr Jeyaretnam: All right, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir.

Mr Deputy Speaker: I would like you to go on talking but I have got to let you know the rule.

Mr Jeyaretnam: The suggestion may involve, but I am not proposing a change.

Mr Deputy Speaker: You are not.

Mr Jeyaretnam: It may involve, and I am asking the Minister to consider this.

Mr Deputy Speaker: Yes, all right.

Mr Jeyaretnam: I am saying that the Ministry should consider whether it is right that the Housing and Development Board should be, as it were, the prosecutor, the judge and the executioner in matters which, as I said, concern the lives of about 60-70% of our citizens. It is all wrong. I think it is only right that where the Board considers that it has a case for acquiring the property or turning the tenant out because he has abused the provision of public housing, that it should make an application to an independent body and that body should then determine whether there has been an abuse by the lessee of the provision of public housing.

It is important that our citizens should be encouraged to feel that they are not at the mercy of the Government or a statutory board.

Mr Deputy Speaker: I am sorry to interrupt, Mr Jeyaretnam. You have one minute left.

Mr Jeyaretnam: Thank you. This is no way of encouraging them to feel that they have a stake in Singapore because we keep telling our citizens that they have a stake. But what stake do they have in these apartments which are ostensibly sold to them and of which ostensibly they are owners? They stand in peril of losing them at any time if the Board thinks they have in any way abused the provisions or the terms and conditions under which the apartments have been leased to them. Thank you, Sir.

The Minister for National Development (Mr Teh Cheang Wan): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, the hon. Member has mentioned many times in this House that as a result of the by-election which he won in Anson in October 1981, the HDB building programme has increased considerably - a sort of magical power which the Member has. If indeed the Member has this sort of magical power, I think he will be greatly sought after all over the world, by all the countries which have a serious housing shortage, ie the whole of Africa and Latin America. If the hon. Member has that sort of power, I think there will be a long queue of Ambassadors and Ministers from various countries at his door to invite him to their countries so that their housing programme can be substantially increased and their housing problem can be solved. I would like to tell the Member for Anson that it is not because of him. It is because of the organizational ability of the PAP Government and even then, there is a big number of applications for houses as a result of improvement in income, that we are able to meet the demand.

The Prime Minister mentioned recently that more than half of the applicants for public housing are upgrading themselves. Tenants become home-owners. Those living in three-room flats are asking for four-room flats. Those living in four-room flats are asking for five-room flats. Why are they able to do so? Because their incomes have greatly improved and they are able to get better housing. Therefore, there is a big influx of applicants. And in spite of a building boom, in spite of a shortage of building materials and in spite of a shortage of construction workers, the PAP Government is able to organize the housing programme to meet the demands of these people. The number of applicants on the waiting list has come down. People are now getting their flats very quickly. And Members of Parliament know that during their meet-the-people sessions the number of people requesting for allocation of flats has dropped substantially.

The myth that the hon. Member for Anson tries to create that he has got this magical power is, in fact, totally untrue because I have not seen any foreign ambassador or any minister from other countries queuing up in his office to request him to go to their countries to solve their housing problem.

On the point raised by the Member whether the HDB will throw out tenants who are in arrears of rent, the answer is no. HDB will not throw anybody out because of their arrears in rent. HDB will investigate into the case to see in what way HDB can assist them, ie whether their circumstances justify these rental arrears. And HDB usually tries to help them in any way it can. For example, if the tenants are eligible for social welfare assistance, then HDB will refer them to the Social Welfare Department for assistance. For those who are in arrears of rent and who ask that they pay the arrears by instalment because they cannot settle their arrears immediately, HDB allows them to pay their arrears by instalment.

As regards the case which appeared in the newspapers that somebody has forgotten to fill a column in the application form and he has been asked to pay a very big sum of money, I do not know what exactly are the details of this particular case. But I can say that if anybody forgets to fill any part of his application form, he will not be penalized.

Mr Jeyaretnam: It is in the newspapers.

Mr Teh Cheang Wan: Yes, it is in the newspapers but I said I do not know the details of the case. The First Deputy Prime Minister mentioned earlier that you should not believe everything that is published in the newspapers. He said this to the Member for Whampoa just now. I would like to repeat to the Member for Anson that he should not believe everything that is published in the newspapers.

Mr Jeyaretnam: Why didn't you reply to this letter?

Mr Teh Cheang Wan: The HDB will give a reply. I would like to mention that at present, not 60-70%, which the Member has mentioned, but nearly 80% of Singaporeans are living in HDB flats. In the broader national context, the HDB has to look after the interests of the majority of our citizens and therefore it is essential for HDB to institute rules and regulations to govern these flats, to prevent people from abusing the flats. For example, like using the flat as a gambling den, drug distribution centre or as a brothel or, worse still, as a centre for housing illegal immigrants. So it is essential that HDB must have rules and regulations to prevent the abuse of the flats. The HDB will not acquire any flat for no reason whatsoever if the people have not been abusing the flat.

The Member talks about home-owners being at the mercy of HDB. This is entirely wrong. In fact, today, the lessees and tenants of HDB flats are strongly represented by their RCs, CCCs and by their Members of Parliament. In almost every case, whenever there is any compulsory acquisition of flats, the PAP Members of Parliament have appealed to the HDB, first, at the official level, to the Chairman of HDB. They have appealed to my Senior Parliamentary Secretary and they have appealed to me, fighting very strongly. I would only turn down the case when there is overwhelming evidence that the person has misused his flat or has been subletting his flat without authorization.

I would like to repeat that our lessees and tenants have the strongest protection under the PAP Members of Parliament. Both the lessees and tenants, in fact, are not helpless, as the Member for Anson is trying to present. Let me just mention that they can appeal to the Housing Board and they can appeal to the Minister. And any person who is not satisfied and who feels that he is aggrieved, he has recourse to the courts. We are ruled by law in Singapore. He can also appeal all the way to the Court of Appeal or even to the Privy Council, if he feels that he is aggrieved.

Mr Jeyaretnam: On a point of clarification, Sir. Is the Minister not aware that the Act says that the Minister's decision shall be final?

Mr Teh Cheang Wan: Yes, I am aware of that. Still, if people feel aggrieved that the HDB has acted against the law, there is redress for the people.

At this stage, I would like to say that because of the national interest and that 80% of our population are living in HDB estates, it is essential that the Government and HDB continue to study the needs of residents in this ever-changing social environment. Rules and regulations will continue to be made and implemented as a strong deterrent to those who act against the interests of the HDB flat-dwellers because they represent the majority. Those people who misuse their flats represent only a minority. We must prevent people from abusing the privilege of subsidized public housing.

Mr Deputy Speaker: For the record, I feel I should perhaps inform hon. Members that any grievance for which the sole remedy must be by way of legislation cannot be discussed and debated on a Motion for Adjournment. In such a case the hon. Member would have to resort to other means. I would like this to be in the Hansard.

Question put, and agreed to.

Resolved,

That Parliament do now adjourn.

Adjourned accordingly at Three Minutes past Seven o'clock p.m. to a date to be fixed.