FIRST SUPPLEMENTARY MAIN ESTIMATES OF EXPENDITURE (Paper Cmd. 3 of 1987) and FIRST SUPPLEMENTARY DEVELOPMENT ESTIMATES OF EXPENDITURE (Paper Cmd. 4 of 1987) FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR 1ST APRIL, 1986 TO 31ST MARCH, 1987

2.55 pm

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

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

The Chairman: Because of the amount of time that has been used this morning, I am suggesting that, in moving your amendments, I would urge Members to be brief in their speeches.

First Supplementary Main Estimates of Expenditure for the financial year 1st April, 1986 to 31st March, 1987 contained in Paper Cmd. 3 of 1987.

Head N -

Mr Tang See Chim: Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head N be reduced by $10 in rspect of Subhead NK-02-2611(03)*.

Sir, in moving this amendment, my purpose is to ask for information and clarification. In the note to the Supplementary Main Estimates, it is said that the payment is necessary because there were two loans in default in the current financial year, ie, loans which were reinsured by the Ministry of Finance. I should have thought, Sir, that the default would not be in the two loans but possibly default by the importer in the foreign country. I just want to know how this default comes about and why is it necessary that there should be a shortfall of something like $28 million, out of which we are now being asked to vote for a supplementary provision of $15 million.

Mr Chiam See Tong: I would like to pass, in respect of Head N and Head W.

The Minister for Finance (Dr Richard Hu Tsu Tau): Sir, the two loans referred to in Paper Cmd. 3 of 1987 were buyer credits extended by a syndicate of banks to overseas buyers to purchase goods and services from Singapore exporters. The banks paid to Singapore exporters immediately after the delivery of the goods and services and the overseas buyers will repay the banks over several years. To assure the banks of a repayment of the buyer credits, the Singapore exporters paid ECICS (Export Credit Insurance Corporation of Singapore) premium to get ECICS to issue buyer credit guarantees to the banks. By an arrangement with ECICS, called the Export Credit Reinsurance Scheme, the Ministry of Finance reinsured part of the risks borne by ECICS in insuring the two buyer credits and collected some premiums from ECICS. When the two buyer credits for the two oil rigs went into default, ECICS paid the banks its liability under the two buyer credit guarantees and the Ministry of Finance paid ECICS a share of the liability under the Export Credit Reinsurance Scheme. This is a technical explanation for the two loans but I think some background information may be useful for Members.

In 1980 Government entered into an arrangement to refinance or reinsure insurance risks undertaken by ECICS which is an export credit insurance company. This reinsurance procedure was necessary in order to finance the export of large capital goods from Singapore, primarily oil rigs and oil service-related equipment which were rather expensive. At that time Singapore, in fact, had developed into the second largest rig exporter in the world. And its rig exports were competing with rigs manufactured worldwide. The reinsurance and the insurance of such buyer credits is a common worldwide procedure adopted by most exporting countries who wanted to compete in this area of capital intensive exports. The arrangement was terminated in 1982 after two years because the Government found that the liability risk was excessive and it felt that the oil rig industry had matured sufficiently by that time to stand on its own.

The Chairman: Mr Tang, do you wish to withdraw your amendment?

Mr Tang See Chim: In view of the Minister's explanation, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The sum of $15,000,000 for Head N ordered to stand part of the First Supplementary Main Estimates of Expenditure for the financial year 1st April, 1986 to 31st March, 1987.

Head W -

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

That the sum to be allocated for Head W be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead WA-02-5111(07) of the Main Estimates.*

Mr Speaker, Sir, in moving this amendment, firstly, may I thank the Government in general, and the Hon. Minister for Finance in particular, for heeding the call for an upward revision of the 1982 Singapore Allowance. This $25 increase, as I stated last year, was equal to 33 1/3%, that is, from $75 to $100. I am quite sure that those Government pensioners who benefited from this increase were indeed grateful for it. In short, the Government was quick to respond to the request, and therefore this provision of $1.75 million is needed. Here, I would like to ask the Hon. Minister for Finance whether he would indicate the number of Government pensioners who stand to benefit from this upward revision. In this respect also, what is the percentage of the total number of Government pensioners as a whole?

No one can dispute the fact that the Government pensioners have contributed much to the progress and prosperity of our modern Singapore, particularly in the last 30 years or so, although some quarters have alleged that they are a forgotten lot and that the Government does not care for them. Sir, I do not agree with that view because this increase in the 1982 Singapore Allowance speaks for itself. However, if recognition of their contribution means that they should be invited to public functions in a representative manner, and I believe there is the Singapore Government Pensioners' Association, then I agree that consideration be given such as issuing invitations to them to attend some of the National Celebrations, for example, the National Day Parade or the National Day Reception hosted by the President. If this is the case, then I think it is not asking too much.

There is another area, Sir, where I think recognition can be given, and that is, Government should consider reviewing the medical benefits for Government pensioners, particularly hospitalization benefits and attendance at outdoor dispensaries or polyclinics. I am given to understand that older people, with due respect, Sir, tend to have more ailments and require more medical attention. If the range of medical benefits to the Government pensioners can be reviewed, then I think this is another positive way to reflect Government's concern and care for these Government pensioners.

Dr Richard Hu Tsu Tau: Sir, I thank the Member for Punggol for his kind words because he has been one of the leading proponents for suggesting this increase, and I can understand his concern for the pensioners.

In response to the question he has raised, the increase in the Singapore Allowance benefited 7,850 pensioners, or 91% of the 8,634 pensioners who are still resident in Singapore. So the majority have, in fact, benefited from this.

As to his question of invitations for pensioners to attend public functions, this indeed is something which we have already asked the various Ministries and other bodies to do. Invitations are, in fact, being considered and letters have gone out in the form of circulars requesting such invitations in July this year.

As to his final question on the possibility of reviewing medical benefits, I regret it is not possible at this time to do so because medical benefits are not reviewed independently of those for serving officers. Pensioners generally enjoy the same medical benefits as they had just prior to retirement.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: Mr Speaker, Sir, in view of the reply of the Hon. Minister for Finance, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The sum of $1,750,000 for Head W ordered to stand part of the First Supplementary Main Estimates of Expenditure for the financial year 1st April, 1986 to 31st March, 1987.

Question, "The sum of $16,750,000 shall be supplied to the Government under the heads of expenditure for the public services shown in the First Supplementary Main Estimates of Expenditure for the financial year 1st April, 1986 to 31st March, 1987, contained in Paper Cmd. 3 of 1987", put and agreed to.

Resolution to be reported.

The Chairman: First Supplementary Development Estimates of Expenditure for the financial year 1st April, 1986 to 31st March, 1987, contained in Paper Cmd. 4 of 1987.

Head L -

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

That the sum to be allocated for Head L be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead LD-01-8101.*

Mr Speaker, Sir, may I have your permission to range my remarks over Amendments (2) and (3)* so that I need not waste time in having to move them?

The Chairman: You can do that.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: Thank you. Sir, I welcome the provision necessary to supple- ment the expenditure incurred for accelerating our development programmes, particularly the primary and secondary schools as well as junior colleges. Therefore, Sir, I would like to know how many primary and secondary schools have been completed under such a programme; where are they located; what kind of facilities would be available? Sir, this question is asked particularly in anticipation of our secondary schools becoming single session schools in the very near future, as explained by the Minister for Education earlier on. What will be the enrolment in these schools?

As for the junior colleges, Sir, I would like to know how the sum of $924,000 could have helped to accelerate the development programme. I know that one junior college is supposed to be built in Hougang, as indicated by the then Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Education who is now Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Communications and Information, and this is contained in col. 1471 of Hansard, 26th March, 1985. But, indeed, I am unhappy to say that there is no sign of it being built as yet, let alone any activity that seems to indicate that the said junior college is being built. Hence, I have put in a Question for Oral Answer.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I am not trying to be impertinent in raising this matter but I merely wish to know what and where these junior colleges are. In the larger context of the building programme strategy for schools and junior colleges, I want to know if more funds will be needed and made available to increase the facilities and make for better amenities in the next few years. This, I believe, is necessary to give further impetus to a realization of the objective of a better qualitative education through conversion to single session schools, particularly the secondary schools. Sir, in making these observations, I take note of what the Hon. Minister for Education has mentioned earlier at this point.

Mr Chiam See Tong: Sir, I would like to speak very briefly on new secondary schools and on the independent schools. I suppose secondary schools will be related to the independent schools. I have just a short enquiry for the Minister. I heard that one of the schools that will shortly be converted into an independent school is the Anglo-Chinese School which I am proud to say is where I come from. Will the old boys of the school, which play a big role in the development of that school, have a say in the conversion from its present government aided school status to that of an independent school?

I also understand that the number of enrolment will be limited to 1,200. This school has an enrolment of something like 7,200 which, of course, also includes the primary school. But however you look at it, there will be a diminution of numbers. So what will happen to the other students who are not included in this 1,200? I would like to know that. This is a very brief point which I would like the Minister to clarify.

Dr Tony Tan Keng Yam: Mr Speaker, Sir, I will first take up the queries raised up by the Member for Punggol. Under the present school and junior college building programme, there are 23 primary schools, 14 secondary schools and two junior colleges under construction. The supplementary funds amounting to $13.4 million are required to meet the increased expenditure on progress payments owing to the acceleration of the building programmes. As a result of the accelerated pace of construction, the completion of three schools will be advanced from 1988 to 1987. The schools involved are, first, a secondary school at Bishan Site 1 which has been advanced from January 1988 to April 1987; a secondary school at Hougang Site 1, from February 1988 to November 1987; and a secondary school at Bukit Batok Site 7, from February 1988 to November 1987. During FY 86, there has also been better progress of building works on all other school building projects. Hence progress payments fell due earlier and additional funds are required to meet these payments.

Now I come to the schools in the Punggol/Hougang zone. In 1986, the demand for schools within the Punggol/Hougang zone was adequately met by the existing 20 primary and 15 secondary schools, including aided schools. Three new Government primary and four secondary schools were completed during 1986. Another four schools are due for completion in 1987. Two secondary schools are located at Serangoon; one primary and one secondary school at Hougang. All recently completed schools and the schools currently under construction are built to prevailing standards and specifications which, of course, are double sessions as at present. The planned enrolments at present for the standard schools are 2,330 pupils for each primary school and 1,890 pupils for each secondary school. These may be revised if the single session school concept is adopted.

The Hougang Junior College is earmarked for development in 1987 and scheduled for completion in 1989/90. The present planned student enrolment for a junior college is 1,200 students.

Sir, with regard to the query from the Member for Potong Pasir, as I have said, when a school wants to go independent, the initiative must come from the school itself. So in the case of ACS, not only will the old boys have a say, I would expect them to take the initiative in converting ACS from a Government-aided school to an independent school if they want this.

Regarding the school enrolment, it depends on the plan which is put up by the old boys. I have not seen the plan yet.

Mr Chiam See Tong: What would happen to the rest of the pupils?

Dr Tony Tan Keng Yam: I do not think we should anticipate the question. I said the plan must come from the school community. They have not presented me with a plan yet. I do not think we should prejudice their case at present.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: Sir, I thank the Hon. Minister for his kind replies and I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The sum of $50,733,000 for Head L ordered to stand part of the First Supplementary Development Estimates of Expenditure for the financial year 1st April, 1986 to 31st March, 1987.

Head R -

Mr Tang See Chim: Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head R be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead RL-01-8201.

Sir, I would like to know what is the rationale for the National Productivity Board to have its own building. It would seem to be the fashion nowadays for every Ministry and every statutory board to have its own building. I wonder to what extent this desire to have its own building has led to the present glut in office and commercial buildings.

The Minister for Trade and Industry (BG Lee Hsien Loong): Mr Speaker, Sir, I am answering this question on behalf of the Minister for Labour, because the National Productivity Board was transferred to the Ministry of Trade and Industry last year.

The National Productivity Board Building is not a new project. Funds were first allocated for it in FY 84. The project is taking four years to complete, at a total estimated cost of $55 million. We are within the budget. What has happened is that there has been a slippage of the building schedule. Money which was voted two years ago in FY 85 could not be spent because there was a delay in construction. Therefore the money has to be committed in FY 86, and that is the sum which you see.

As for the general rationale for the NPB Building, I should say that this is not an office building. It is a purpose-built building which is meant to provide a focal point for the training efforts of the National Productivity Board in the national productivity movement. It includes up-to-date facilities like training rooms, seminar rooms, language laboratory, auditorium, a studio to make audio-visual programmes and a library of productivity related materials. So the NPB Building has a well defined and justifiable purpose. It will allow the NPB to train about 15,000 people a year. By this year, utilization of the building will be approaching 75%. So I think it is a building justified on its own merit and not prejudiced by any possible over-supply of accommodation space in the commercial sector.

Mr Tang See Chim: Sir, I am not convinced by the Minister's argument. Why can't an existing building be bought and converted to suit the purposes of the National Productivity Board? Therefore, Sir, I am not withdrawing the amendment and I would like to put it to the vote.

BG Lee Hsien Loong: Mr Speaker, Sir, perhaps if I may offer further clarification. This is not a new project. Funds were voted in FY 84. Funds were voted in FY85. Funds were voted in FY 86. I do not believe on any of those occasions a question was raised as to the fundamental wisdom of constructing a special building for this purpose.

Mr Tang See Chim: The National Productivity Board should have better statistics on which to base its forecast. And if the NPB cannot look after its own building programme, I wonder how effective it would be in training personnel that would increase the productivity of the country.

BG Lee Hsien Loong: Mr Speaker, Sir, the project was approved by Parliament on all those three occasions.

The Chairman: Mr Tang, are you withdrawing your amendment?

Mr Tang See Chim: I am not withdrawing, Sir. I would like to put it to the vote.

Amendment negatived.

The sum of $10,050,000 for Head R ordered to stand part of the First Supplmentary Development Estimates of Expenditure for the financial year 1st April, 1986 to 31st March, 1987.

Question, "That the sum of $60,783,000 shall be supplied to the Government under the heads of expenditure for the public services shown in the First Supplementary Development Estimates of Expenditure for the financial year 1st April, 1986 to 31st March, 19878 contained in Paper Cmd. 4 of 1987", put and agreed to.

Resolution to be reported.

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

Dr Richard Hu Tsu Tau: Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to report that the Committee of Supply have come to certain resolutions.

Resolutions reported -

"The sum of $16,750,000 shall be supplied to the Government under the heads of expenditure for the public services shown in the First Supplementary Main Estimates of Expenditure for the financial year 1st April, 1986 to 31st March, 1987 contained in Paper Cmd. 3 of 1987."

"The sum of $60,783,000 shall be supplied to the Government under the heads of expenditure for the public services shown in the First Supplementary Development Estimates of Expenditure for the financial year 1st April, 1986 to 31st March, 1987 contained in Paper Cmd. 4 of 1987."

Dr Richard Hu Tsu Tau: Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move that Parliament doth agree with the Committee on the said resolutions.

Question put, and agreed to.

Resolutions accordingly agreed to.