MAIN AND DEVELOPMENT ESTIMATES OF SINGAPORE FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR 1ST APRIL, 1988 TO 31ST MARCH, 1989

Order read for consideration in Committee of Supply [3rd Allotted Day].

[Mr Deputy Speaker in the Chair]

11.30 am

Head T (cont.) -

Resumption of Debate on Question [17th March, 1988],

"That the sum to be allocated for Head T be reduced by $10 in respect of Code TH 5200 of the Development Estimates." - [Mr Ng Kah Ting.]

Question again proposed.

Dr Koh Lip Lin (Nee Soon): Sir, I would like to ask the Minister what does the HDB propose to do with the 3-room flats which are not taken up in Yishun New Town. We have been told of the reasons for the surplus of these 3-room flats. HDB had built the flats according to projected demand based on the waiting list. However, whoever did the projection failed to realize the changing expectations of the applicants. As Singaporeans become more affluent, they want bigger flats. Ten years ago, most people would be happy with their 3-room flats but today they would not settle for less than a 4-room A-type flat.

The Member for Geylang Serai has suggested a change in the method of application ensure that flats built will meet the demand. But the fact is that we are now left with too many 3-room flats. To encourage applicants to buy these flats, perhaps some of the HDB regulations can be relaxed. For example, waive the downpayment or relax the rules governing eligibility, eg, allow brothers and sisters from a large family to buy a flat, or perhaps the price of the flats can be reduced. I was also told that a great number of the vacant 3-room flats at Yishun New Town are reserved for renting out to employment pass holders. But many of these flats have been vacant for years. I would like to know if HDB will consider renting them to the general public.

Mr Philip Tan Tee Yong (Paya Lebar): Sir, two or three days ago, the Minister in his policy statement said that HDB will hand over the management of its industrial estates to the JTC. If I am not mistaken, such a statement was made some months ago in this House. I just want to seek assurance from the Minister that this transfer will be done quickly because this matter concerning Defu Estate has been on since 1984, before I became the MP for Paya Lebar. I think three to four years is definitely a very long time for a businessman to wait. In this respect, I would also urge the Minister to encourage the HDB officials to understand and try to appreciate the problems of local businessmen and to expedite things that will help them in their already trying conditions of earning a living in Singapore.

The second matter that I want to raise is with regard to Hougang Town Centre. On 26th March 1986, I wrote to the HDB that the shopkeepers in Hougang Street 21 claimed that they tendered for the shops believing that the location would be called Hougang Town Centre. Obviously, in a town centre the rentals are higher, so they claimed. They later discovered that the name "Hougang Town Centre" has been changed to "Hougang Neighbourhood II Centre". There is a world of difference between a town centre and a neighbourhood centre.

It took some 1r months later for the HDB to reply on 14th May 1986. HDB replied that the shops in Hougang Neighbourhood II Centre were completed in three phases commencing mid-1982. The second and third phases were completed in late 1983 and 1984 respectively. In the letter, HDB claims that the tender documents stated "Hougang Neighbourhood II" but the plan which was attached to the document was inadvertently, so they claimed, stated as "Hougang Town Centre".

To me, the shopkeepers have every reason to believe that the location was Hougang Town Centre and not Neighbourhood II Centre. First reason: the road sign showed "Hougang Town Centre" and this was changed to "Hougang Avenue 1" only in September 1986, which is after they have got their shops that is, I think, some two years after the third phase tender was called for.

Second reason: the Singapore Street Directory, which is the official directory for roads shows the name very clearly "Hougang Town Centre" in the location in question.

Third reason: there were a few metal-embossed signs with the name "Hougang Town Centre" nailed to some of the blocks in Neighbourhood II Centre itself now. Of course, after this matter was brought up, the HDB went around taking down the name plates but little did they realize that the shopkeepers were very smart. They had already taken photographs of the name plates, and I think I have submitted the photographs to the HDB. I have also photographs to show that the signs were there and that they were taken down after this matter was taken up.

Fourth reason: There is a bus interchange in that area and this bus interchange is quite a large one. I think the planners would not have planned an interchange of that size if it was not originally intended to be a town centre.

On 12th August 1987, the shopkeepers, a bit frustrated with no results, went to see the Feedback Unit and the Feedback Unit wrote to the HDB and supported the case. And one of the reasons they gave is:

'HDB has unwittingly misled the shop tenants at Hougang Street 21 into thinking that their shops are located at the town centre.'

Sir, I think it is very clear that the shopkeepers are misled by the HDB. To-date, the matter has not been resolved. I would suggest that the Minister seriously consider some form of compensation for the shopkeepers there and also for those who have gone out of business because of all these problems that have arisen.

Mr Chew Heng Ching: Sir, we are ahead of schedule. I have an amendment No. 23(i). Would you let me say a few words?

The Chairman: You have missed your turn. You can join in the debate after the Minister has replied, and if there is time. But I think there should be time.

The Minister for National Development (Mr S. Dhanabalan): Sir, first of all, the point brought up by the Member for Nee Soon. I have already explained why we have surplus 3-room and 4-room Simplified flats. I think the Member has commented on my explanation. We do have vacant flats in Yishun. The exact numbers as at the beginning of this year were 4,217 vacant 3-room flats. Of these, 221 have already been sold and the applicants are about to take their keys. Another 883 will be converted into bigger flats and the other 3,000-odd flats will be offered to applicants over the course of the next few months.

There is a reason why we have not been able to sell these flats as quickly as we would like to. The first reason, of course, is, as the Member pointed out, we over-estimated the demand for 3-room flats. But the more important reason is that there is a general reluctance to go to Yishun. In order to meet this reluctance, HDB will be advancing the construction of facilities and amenities in the town, to improve the infrastructure and improve the transportation network.

Moreover, the 3-room flats which are available in other new towns, like Ang Mo Kio and Hougang, are already being depleted very quickly and we expect that very soon there will be no more 3-room flats left in these areas. People will, if they want 3-room flats, have to go to Yishun. So it will take a little longer than we had anticipated but we expect these flats to be sold. For this reason, we are not in favour of relaxing or changing rules just to solve the immediate problem at Yishun. Every time you change the rules, you cannot just change it for one particular area or to meet a particular problem. Because once you do that, then the pressure will arise to change the rules generally for all. I think we have to be very careful in changing these rules. HDB has been accused often enough of changing rules too frequently.

While I would admit that the holding cost is high and we have over-estimated demand, we are confident that we will be able to sell these flats in the course of this year and next year. But the long-term solution to this problem, of course, is to change the method of booking or registering for HDB flats. I have already touched on this several times in the last two days.

On the question of Defu Estate, I think the Member for Paya Lebar should not give the impression as he did, that the question of the HDB handing over these estates to the JTC has been considered for the last 3-4 years. People may have had problems for the last 3-4 years but I think I announced only a few months ago that HDB will be handing over all industrial estates to JTC and the handover is being discussed. It is not a simple matter. There is the question of valuation and at what prices they should be handed over. These things are being worked out. I hope that within the next year all the industrial estates and various flatted factories will be transferred to JTC. I shall certainly ask JTC to expedite the matter.

On the shopkeepers in Hougang Neighbourhood Centre which was formerly supposed to have been a town centre, I have replied to the Member as well as to the Chairman of the Feedback Unit. It is true that the initial tenders - I think there were about 24 or 26 shops - did indicate on the plans that this was going to be a town centre but there was a change in the plan and it became a neighbourhood centre. All the subsequent tenders clearly indicated that this was going to be a neighbourhood centre. Out of the 100-odd shops in this area, about 24 of them have some grounds for complaint. Of course, the real complaint is that they are paying a rent which is higher than the market rate.

As Members know, we did give all those who had tendered for shops between 1980 and 1985 a 15% rebate which ended at the end of last year. This group in Hougang comes in that category and for this group when we sign the one, two or three-year term contract they will be given a 10% discount. If they sign a one-year term contract, then at the end of the one-year the rental will be adjusted to the prevailing market rental. If it is higher, they will have to pay higher. If it is lower, it will be reduced to a lower rental. I think the 10% rebate will give them some temporary relief.

I cannot explain how this change came about. There was a change in plan but as soon as the change was made, the new tender documents incorporated the change and I think if the shopkeepers had done all that the Member had said they did, which is to go round looking at signboards and look up the telephone directory and all that, I think the first thing they should have done of course was to look at the tender document. Apart from the Phase 1, all the other phases clearly indicated that it was a Neighbourhood Centre.

Mr Chew Heng Ching: Sir, more than 85% of our population live in HDB estates. The cleanliness of these estates is a matter of great concern to many of us in this House, especially to those of us whose constituencies consist largely of HDB flats. Presently, the cleaning work in HDB estates is done by HDB employees as well as by contract workers. From my experience in touring my constituency and in block visits, and I am sure many Members in the House will agree with me, I found that flats under the care and maintenance of HDB's own employees are always cleaner than those assigned to contract workers. It appears that HDB employees can do a better cleaning job than contract workers. Why is it so? Sir, it has got to do with HDB tender system for contract work for cleaning. I believe contracts were let out by public tender and the work is always given to the lowest tenderer. There is a saying that if you pay peanuts, you get monkeys. It makes one wonder whether awarding a tender to the lowest tenderer is the right thing to do. What about other criteria, their track records and so on?

May I ask the Minister how are tenders for cleaning work in HDB estates normally awarded, and how does the HDB monitor the performance of these cleaning contractors?

Encik Ibrahim Othman (Tanah Merah): Sir, I wish to bring up two matters with regard to HDB. Firstly, the problem of instant flooding whenever there is a heavy downpour. I am referring to the area beside the pathways at the void decks. This is due to the renovation work done by HDB where all drains in the HDB estates are covered with porous slabs. I think the problem arises because the porous slabs are covered with dirt and sand and, whenever there is a downpour, the water flows very slowly into the drains. This, as I have said just now, causes the instant flooding and it inconveniences many residents. I think the situation gets worse in areas where there are shops and markets.

The second problem is that the HDB is not kind enough towards requests for additional sports facilities, for example, in the open spaces in our neighbourhood. Normally the open space is planted with trees with, of course, a few benches here and there. Whenever there is a request from grassroots organizations for an additional facility over and above the basketball courts or multi-purpose courts, say, a netball court or even a place for senior citizens to play gateball, I am very disappointed to get replies from HDB saying that the open space cannot be used for such additional facilities because it is not a standard facility for HDB estates. I wish to seek the understanding of the HDB that whenever there is a request for such facilities, or even afootball field for our boys to play soccer, certain sites which are available in HDB estates should be looked into.

Dr Koh Lam Son: Sir, one of the common problems faced by old HDB estates is the shortage of space, as the Member for Bukit Merah has mentioned, and also the shortage of amenities. And so in the Telok Blangah estate, which was built about 10 years ago, in terms of amenities it is quite bare compared to the newer, modern HDB estates. We need very badly an open space for sports activities or open air recreation. It is true that there is a field in the neighbouring constituency of Radin Mas and I suppose our residents can take a 15 minute-walk to use the field. But as the Member for Radin Mas will testify, that field is very well utilized by the residents of his constituency. We have the extension of the Mount Faber into our constituency, but that is a bit too hilly for any sports activities to be organized there. Although we have three school fields, unfortunately, the school principals are very reluctant to open their doors to residents because of maintenance and repair problems they face.

So we only have one piece of vacant land left in the Telok Blangah Estate. I think the Minister is well aware of it. I have made a similar request a year ago. This is a lovely piece of land, very open, very accessible to residents and the Minister has plans to build flats on this piece of land. And the last thing we need in Telok Blangah Estate is more flats. It is already very congested. So I would like to again request the Minister to defer his housing plan on this plot of land and perhaps lease it to us at a nominal fee so that we can develop it into a centre for sports activities like football, tennis and even build squash courts.

As the Minister is well aware, the Telok Blangah Estate is made up of mainly middle-income group and we can even afford to build a modern recreation club running on the lines of a country club. If the Minister is unable to say yes to this humble request of mine, may I suggest that he defer his decision to the Town Council in Telok Blangah, if a Town Council is to be formed in Telok Blangah. I suppose he is the best person to know this.

Mr Leong Horn Kee (Thomson): Sir, I would like to raise a couple of points with the Minister on the design and improvements to HDB flats.

During the block visits by MPs to the HDB estates, we find that the few most common matters that are being raised with us are the problems that residents encounter with HDB flats. Often when we go on these house visits, we are invited into the toilets and the kitchens of the flats, not because they want to show us anything they are proud of, but to show us the leaks from the roofs of their flats. It is a very common problem that residents encounter after residing there for only a few months or sometimes after a few years - the problem of leaks in both the toilet and the kitchen.

A second problem that is always raised with us is the breakdown of lifts in HDB flats. A third problem which is also a common one is that they get free hot water through the water system. This means that the insulation of the pipes and water tanks on the roof is probably not well done so that the water gets heated up in the hot sun. Hence, hot water is fed to the households.

These problems are not only encountered by residents in the old flats but also those in the new flats. We know that the policy of the Government is to build low cost housing. But I believe Singapore has reached a stage of progress, where there has been a dramatic rise in affluence, and HDB should consider building better designed flats in future - at least flats that are able to overcome these age-old problems of HDB estates. We are asking that the HDB should at least spend more time, effort and perhaps money in looking into how these very common problems can be resolved. A benefit is that the future maintenance cost of HDB estates can be lowered.

Finally, I would like to ask the Minister whether he has any plans in terms of maintenance and upgrading of old estates to address all these nagging problems in HDB estates.

The Chairman: Mr Dhanabalan, do you want to reply now?

Mr Dhanabalan: Yes, Sir. Regarding the standard of maintenance, it is true that the directly employed HDB labourers do provide a higher standard of service. But, of course, there is a cost. Just to give an idea, the cost of direct workforce is $7.30 per unit per month per flat. The comparative cost of contractors is just $5.06. So there is a substantial difference. Of course, HDB usually awards contracts to the lowest tenderer. But if the lowest tenderer has a past record of poor workmanship, he would not be awarded the contract. That is the normal approach.

Generally, we are trying to get away from employing direct workforce in all these public cleansing operations. But at the same time we need to maintain standards. So HDB is working with the contractors to teach them how to mechanize their operations and how to schedule their operations so that they do a better job. But this requires also the cooperation of the residents. I think Members must have seen television advertisements put up by the HDB and the Ministry of the Environment teaching people how to put their rubbish in plastic bags instead of just throwing them down the chute. If only residents would learn to take a little bit of care when they dispose of their rubbish, I think it would help a lot to maintain cleanliness in the area.

Though I have said that we will be resorting more and more to contract labour, of course, HDB will continue to have direct labour for some time to come and every effort is being made to reduce the cost of this direct labour. HDB is quite confident that, with some of the schemes they have in mind, they should be able to reduce the cost from $7.30 per unit to something like $6.70 per unit, but it would still be higher than using contract labour.

It is true you get what you pay for but we have to strike a balance somewhere. There is a very substantial difference between direct labour and contract labour. At the end of the day, of course, the residents have to pay. The present service and conservancy charge does not cover all the costs required to maintain an estate. So we will make every effort to get contractors to do a better job. I think Members of Parliament can help by giving frequent feedback to the Area Office on the standards of work of the contractors, and that will help the HDB to get better work out of them.

On the plea for more facilities and amenities in HDB. HDB cannot just provide amenities on the basis of demands of Members of Parliament. It must have a policy that can apply to all estates and all these amenities do cost money. Every town centre has certain sports and other recreational facilities and constituencies will have to learn to share them. If we put a special corner for senior citizens in one constituency, we will have to provide it for other constituencies. Otherwise it will not just be fair because everybody pays the same rate of conservancy fees. People pay taxes, and they expect the same service. So HDB cannot just respond to an MP who says, "Look, I've got a piece of land here, can you put up something for me?" The next thing, another constituency will ask, "Well, I've got no piece of land. What about knocking down this old block which you are clearing and put in that facility there." So we have to have a uniform policy. Differences will be put in place when town councils take over. Then they will have the latitude. They collect the money, they can decide. Having spent on the essentials, if they have surpluses or if residents want to pay more, they can have different facilities. That is one of the purposes of the town councils so that the residents in each area can decide for themselves what their own priorities and preferences are and act accordingly. But as far as the HDB is concerned, I think the only tenable approach is to provide the same type of facilities for all neighbourhood centres, constituencies or new towns. They cannot really discriminate between areas. It would not be fair.

On the plea by the Member for Telok Blangah, I am afraid the answer has got to be the same - that 240 units are going to be built there. This really brings me back to the problem. Telok Blangah, as the Member himself said, has got a lovely piece of land. The question is, what do you do with this lovely piece of land? Of course, if wegive it away at a nominal fee, you can put up a country club. But can you put up a country club paying market rates for the land? If the residents are prepared to pay market rates for the land and build the country club, I will ask HDB to consider. These are all valuable assets and we must put them to maximum use. I do not want to repeat this point. But I think the request made by the Member just illustrates what I am saying: that if you do not value land, then you just give in to pressures and requests, and at the end of day you have a complete hotch potch of policies and poor usage of land. The area is very valuable. People want flats there. There is a long waiting list of applicants for flats in Telok Blangah and I think the 240 flats will be very welcome. But if the Member can persuade me with an offer that will put the land to as valuable a use as 240 units, I am prepared to look at it but not at a nominal charge. That is out of the question.

On the question of quality of HDB flats, yes, there is a constant effort to improve quality. The quality in the past, as I have already mentioned, suffered because we were concentrating on numbers. And when we concentrated on numbers, we used foreign labour, very frequently, unskilled labour, and as a result, the quality was below what we expected.

The HDB has a very elaborate scheme of zero defect quality control and other schemes. Perhaps if Members are interested, we should take them to some of the new blocks that are being built in Yishun where the result of all these efforts can be clearly seen, not just in new types of materials used but actually better quality workmanship. Apart from just extracting better workmanship, HDB itself has improved the standards that it incorporates in the flats. For example, the type of tiles, the type of fittings, bathroom tiles, wall tiles from floor to ceiling and so on. These are being constantly done. Of course, these cost money but I think people are prepared to pay nowadays for these improvements. So this is a continuing process and HDB will from now onwards, since they will be building only 15,000 flats or so every year, be able to build much better flats.

Mr Chng Hee Kok: Sir, I was going to bring up the subject of dogs in general yesterday. But when I rushed back from my lunch to this Chamber, I missed the amendment by just a few minutes. I was caught up in the traffic along Orchard Road, Sir.

I shall now confine my short query on dogs in the HDB estates. I respect the right of owners who keep dogs as pets in the estates, but I do have many complaints. We are a multi-racial society and everyone leads a different way of life. Some residents therefore find that dogs are quite a nuisance in the estates. Owners do not keep their dogs on a leash. They let them run loose and the dogs go sniffing at passer-bys. They allow their dogs to run along the corridors and get into their, neighbours homes. Sometimes this can be very offensive.

Sir, there are really many other problems with dogs. In the lifts some owners hold their dogs in their arms. At arms' height, this can be offensive to the personwho is standing next to him. Like I said earlier, I do respect the rights of these dog owners. But they must also exercise more care and equally respect the rights of other people who do not find it very amusing or very pleasing when dogs sniff at them and run into their homes. So I will like the HDB to look into the possibility of further tightening this matter of allowing dogs in the homes, perhaps by way of a free registration. If you want to keep a dog, you have to register with the HDB Area Office, sign a list of do's and don'ts so that you know exactly what you can and what you cannot do. For example, the HDB can even specify the size of the dog to make sure that you do not have a large ferocious dog at home which can frighten the neighbours' kids and so on. In this way, there will be less misunderstanding.

Sir, I hope the Minister will direct the HDB to look into this.

Dr Ang Kok Peng (Buona Vista): Sir, earlier this morning, the House was informed that HDB has an ongoing project to detect urine in lifts by installing urine sensors inside the lifts. Will the Minister inform us whether the purpose is to expedite the cleansing of the lifts after somebody has urinated or is it to catch culprits urinating? If it is to expedite the cleansing, I think this is a most welcome thing. But if it is to catch culprits, I wonder how the device can enable the HDB to do so.

Dr Lee Boon Yang: Sir, the Member for Radin Mas wants the HDB to have more regulations on the do's and don'ts on pet ownership. I think there are already existing regulations about the kind of pets that people can have in the HDB flats. Perhaps many pet owners are not sufficiently responsible. When they have a pet, some of them do not take into consideration, as the Member for Radin Mas has pointed out, that their neighbours may not share their interest and love for these pets. Some of them may have let their pets stray around the corridors and on the void decks. I would just like to remind Members that, in fact, under the existing Dog Licensing and Control Rules, any person who permits a dog to be at large or in a public place without a leash is guilty of an offence. And on conviction, he can be fined up to a maximum of $200.

Whether HDB should have more do's and don'ts, this can be considered. One alternative approach is that when town councils take over the management or running of the housing estates, residents who want to keep dogs should also seek the approval of the town council before they proceed to get a licence from the Primary Production Department so that town councils can also exercise some discretion or some control over on the type of pets and on people who keep pets in HDB flats. And, of course, if they also want to draw up a list of do's and don'ts, by all means and I think it will help towards a more responsible pet ownership.

The other point raised by the Member for Buona Vista is whether the purpose of urine detection device in the lifts is to expedite cleaning or to catch the culprit. I think it is both. Firstly, we catch the culprit. Having caught him, then you also would like to clean up the lift as soon as possible. You do not want to leave the mess behind to inconvenience other users.

How will it work? I have explained earlier that there is a sensor device which is installed in the lift. If somebody should urinate in the lift, then the sensor device is triggered off and it will in turn send a message to the central monitoring system. And the lift will automatically move to the next landing and stop there. So the person will have to wait to be rescued, which means that you can catch hold of the culprit redhanded. I hope I have made myself clear on this.

Dr Ang Kok Peng: Point of clarification, Sir. If I remember correctly, the Minister of State said that the sensor would also trigger off the mechanism should some liquid other than urine be spilled in the lift. Would that not trap innocent people?

Dr Lee Boon Yang: That is possible because it is a device, I understand, which works on detecting the presence of liquid, particularly conducting liquid. So if somebody were to spill some similar conducting liquid, it could trigger off the device. As I said earlier, HDB is refining this sensor device and if we can get it to a stage where it will only be triggered off by urine, then of course it will be much better. But at the moment I beleive it may still be triggered off by other liquids, particularly conducting liquids.

Mr Philip Tan Tee Yong: Sir, yesterday I was discussing the word "subsidy" and referred to the definition of the Minister, and today the press reported as "subsidy" and not "discount". I want to make a correction here - that I was referring to the Minister's definition. If his definition stays unchanged, it must be discount. It cannot be subsidy. From the economic point of view or the accounting point of view, if you sell a flat below the market price and if it is still above cost price, then it is a discount and not a subsidy. I was referring actually to his definition. Then again, he repeated that his definition stays. Assuming his definition stays, then I think he did not answer my question when I referred him to the question that I put forward.

Some months ago or maybe a few years ago in this House on the question of subsidy on HUDC houses, I remember the Minister said that HUDC houses were subsidized. If that is the case, then I take it that all HUDC houses, like those in Pine Grove, Gillman Heights, are constructed at a very much higher cost. But I have a simple arithmetic. I was judging the price of private houses in those days and the HUDC houses people could buy in Pine Grove. You had to pay almost $300,000 for a flat in Pine Grove against what you could get a private condominium flat around that area for $200,000-odd. I think private developers will not sell their flats at a loss. I believe the private developer makes less profit instead of a loss. If that is the case, I find it very difficult to accept the fact that the HUDC houses are subsidized.

Sir, on the question of subsidy again, this morning the Minister of State said that there are still many people in the rental flats who for some reason or other are not able to buy a flat for themselves. I believe finance is the deterring factor. And I still have not heard the answer from the Minister as to how the Government is going to achieve 100% home ownership if these people were to continue to live in rental flats. Is there not a case when I said yesterday that we should look into the possibility of increasing the subsidy for maybe the 3-room flat which is the best fit for the lower income group? Increase the subsidy for this flat so that these people can buy it at much lower prices and thereby you can achieve the 100% home ownership.

Mr Dhanabalan: It is only 12.15 pm, Sir. So I hope the Member for Paya Lebar will listen carefully to me. It is still early in the day.

HDB sells its flats below its cost. It buys land from the Government at market value. It constructs flats on that land. I have showed a table which clearly illustrates that about 40% of the flats were, in fact, sold below construction cost, let alone covering the cost of land, whatever the definition you want to use for land. So at least, whatever definition you want to use, those 40% of the flats were subsidized. But I said as far as HDB's accounts are concerned, and I think the Member for Paya Lebar has studied the accounts, what it gets from the sale of the flats is less than what it costs HDB. Even by your definition it is subsidized, although I do not accept your definition. That is quite clear.

As for HUDC houses, I do not have the details here. But I certainly would say that HUDC houses would fall within the definition of the word "subsidy" that I used because if it were not so, people would not have bought HUDC houses with all the various restrictive conditions that HUDC houses had, ie, HUDC sold those flats below what equivalent flats could fetch on the market. Otherwise why should people buy HUDC flats? They could have bought flats from any private developer at the time that they were sold. What the situation is today, of course, is different. The market has changed. Some of the flats have fallen in price but that is a different story. At the time they were sold, they certainly were subsidized, in the definition that I used. I was not the one who made the statement but I think it still fits the definition.

As far as HDB rental flats are concerned, how do you bring about 100% home ownership? First of all, we always use the term "full home ownership society." There will always be some people who will be occupying rental flats because they are going through a transition. They rent first and later they buy. Some, as I said, may never be able to buy. By any definition which covers the whole of the economy of a society, if you can reach about 95%, you can more or less consider that you have reached the maximum or full ownership.

I do not think that the present terms of HDB are onerous. I think the Member can do the calculations for himself. If somebody earns $500 which is at the lower end of what many who work in factories earn, such a person should easily be able to afford a 3-room flat where the monthly payment, depending on where it is and what kind of 3-room flat, would vary from something like $110 to $130 per month on a 25-year loan. He can easily meet that from his CPF deductions. If he falls within the category of people who earn between $500 and $800 per month, he has to pay only 5% downpayment which is about $1,300 to $1,800. If he works for about two years, he will have that much in his CPF. So I think the terms that we have and the prices that we have fixed should enable almost anybody who holds a steady job to be able to afford a flat. Even those who cannot manage their finances will still be able to afford because they can pay it out of their CPF. This is one of the advantages. The money is not with them. It is with the CPF so they can use it. There is an automatic deduction every month.

I think the present terms - 25 year loan, 5% downpayment and the pricing of the 3-room flat - are such that it will be very difficult for any reasonable person in Singapore to say that these are terms that will not put a flat within the reach of our workers. In fact, I think there is no country in the world where somebody who starts work after leaving school can expect to buy a home for himself within two years. People in other countries think in terms of buying a home when they are about 30 or 40 years old. Here, they can buy a home two years after they start work, and most HDB purchasers do not pay off their loan over 25 years. They pay off their loan in 10, 12, 15 years though they may start with a 25-year loan. Because of the annual increments and so on, they pay off very quickly. I think by any measure, our present terms are more than adequate to meet our objective of a full home-ownership society.

Mr Philip Tan Tee Yong: Sir, the Minister always says that I am not listening. I think he is also not listening. I was actually referring to the definition of the word "subsidy" in his speech. When he said that as long as you sell below market price, that is subsidy. I think not. It is still a discount. You may disagree, but I hope that some lecturers will intervene. Apparently, he says that the word "subsidy" means that HDB has subsidized the flats because they are sold below cost. I do not quarrel with it. But if this definition is applied to HDB flats, that they are sold below cost, then it must follow (because the definition must be consistent) that, when you apply it to HUDC flats, they are also sold below cost. The question is: is it real that HUDC houses are sold below cost?

The other point is he said why should the people still want to buy HUDC houses and not private houses at that time? I think time has elapsed and we have forgotten a lot of things. We all remember that at that time CPF was allowed for HUDC houses only but was not for private houses. Subsequently, when CPF relaxed its rules, people started shifting from HUDC houses to private houses.

Mr Dhanabalan: Sir, as far as the HUDC is concerned, I think the Member will remember that HUDC was a separate company and the first phases of HUDC developments were carried out by the company. HDB only took them over, I think, when it came to Phase 2 or Phase 3. I cannot recollect offhand.

Mr Philip Tan Tee Yong: Phase 3.

Mr Dhanabalan: Phase 3, I think. Of course, now HDB has stopped building HUDC type of houses. I cannot tell you offhand. I think that in the first phase certainly HUDC covered its cost at that time. But by the definition that I have used, it is still a subsidized price.

Encik Othman bin Haron Eusofe (Geylang Serai): Sir, I would like to take the Minister back to the 3-room purchase flats. I agree with him to some extent that perhaps those who are working would be able to afford to pay their downpayment for the purchase of the 3-room flats. But I think we also have people who are not working or are self-employed. They may not have got sufficient savings in their CPF to pay their downpayment, and asking for a 100% loan is not something that is new. There is precedent. You have allowed the sitting tenants and those who are affected by relocation scheme to take a 100% loan. I hope the Minister will look at this again and consider ways to help the lower-income to purchase at least a 3-room flat.

Mr Dhanabalan: Sir, I am prepared to look at it.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: Sir, I must thank the Minister and his Minister of State for being so patient for the whole of yesterday afternoon and this morning with their replies. Some might not get satisfaction out of the replies but some are satisfied. On that note, Sir, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The Chairman: Amendment (24), Mr Ng Kah Ting.

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

The Chairman: Encik Othman.

Encik Othman bin Haron Eusofe: Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head T be reduced by $10 in respect of Code TH 5210 of the Development Estimates.

Sir, in moving this amendment I would like to get the Minister to ask the HDB to allocate more resources for the provision of better amenities in the older HDB estates. The Minister has spoken earlier of the facilities and the quality of finish of flats in the Yishun New Town. In fact, during a recent visit made by the GPC on National Development and Housing and its resource panel members to Yishun New Town, we were very impressed by the quality of the housing units in the New Town and the many amenities and facilities for the residents there. There is a variety of block designs, the attractive colour schemes of the blocks and new amenities like covered walkways linking blocks of flats.

Taking this as a model, I hope that the Minister will ask the HDB to look into providing such facilities in the older estates. For instance, HDB could introduce new colour schemes in the repainting of the blocks, upgrading as well as providing for new facilities like children's playgrounds, sprucing up and landscaping the open areas, turning them into landscaped gardens, brightening up food centres and markets and so on. I would like to know how much funds have been budgeted for such improvement works in older estates in the financial year 1988 budget. If there are funds, could the Minister provide details of such programmes as well as the new amenities which will be provided in these estates.

Coming to the HDB estate in the Geylang Serai constituency, I could think of many areas which could be improved and upgraded. These will include the children's playground between Block 97 and Block 98 Aljunied Crescent which is in a rather dreary state. The playground is cemented. I think it is perhaps better to turf it. In addition, new facilities for children could be provided in the playground. Again, the open space adjacent to Block 110, Aljunied Crescent, could be turned into a garden, properly landscaped and facilities provided for residents to spend their evenings and leisure with their children and also to interact with one another. The other areas like the food centres in Haig Road and Aljunied Crescent could be made brighter and more comfortable. My appeal here is just to get the Minister to ensure that there are adequate funds in the HDB budget not only for periodic maintenance and repainting of blocks but also for upgrading and provision of new facilities in the older HDB estates.

Mr Dhanabalan: Sir, the upgrading of amenities in the older HDB estates, in fact, began sometime ago. Older estates which are close together, especially those near the City, have been integrated into a single town and facilities provided on a town basis. For example, there is now a Geylang New Town which is a result of amalgamating Kampong Ubi, Geylang West, MacPherson, Eunos and Mountbatten estates. When such amalgamation takes place, of course on a new town basis, certain facilities can be provided. Where the tenants are relocated and blocks are demolished, the use of the land so freed is constantly under review. Where possible, better facilities will be introduced. But I must repeat the point I made yesterday that, for estates and new towns near the City, it is not possible to provide the same kind of facilities as in Ang Mo Kio or Yishun or Woodlands. Land is too expen- sive for a start. Secondly, of course, these places are already built up and there is no way we can provide a neighbourhood park or a sports complex or a town centre, even if we want to. Land is just not available. Where land is available, we have to consider seriously what is the best way of using the land. People who live near the city have the advantage of enjoying the amenities of the City. So they must forgo other advantages, such as big parks and big open space between blocks and so on. This basic approach of putting the land to best use according to the value of the land will have to apply from now onwards.

But in the cyclical upgrading programme of the HDB, HDB will try, wherever possible, to upgrade children's playgrounds, hard courts for volley ball, sepak takraw or whatever and provide these in the upgrading programmes. Colour schemes, of course, that can be easily done and certainly I will ask HDB, whenever they undertake cyclical upgrading programmes, to brighten the whole estate. I do not know what the budget is for this purpose but I do know that whenever HDB does its cyclical upgrading they do take advantage of the works to improve the estate as a whole and not just paint the blocks. So this will carry on.

Encik Othman bin Haron Eusofe: I would like to thank the Minister for his encouraging answer and 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 Code TH 5310 of the Development Estimates.

Sir, I just wish to touch on this question of loans to the HDB and I hope I will not be giving some quarters a wrong impression that we are talking at cross purposes.

May I refer to page 668 of the Main and Development Estimates? Under this subhead, there are four items and amounts. The actual money loaned to HDB in FY 86 was $5,865 million; for FY 87 the provision was $4,595 million. It was revised in FY 87 to $1,850 million, and so forth. In FY 88 it is estimated to be $1,317 million, which is $533 million less, or -28.8%.

Sir, I would just like to pose the question to the Minister: could he explain the reason for the decrease in the loan provision? As I understand it, a loan will be needed to help in the building and purchase of lands to build some 23,000 units, as opposed to 32,000 units last year. How does this relate to the needs of the public housing programme of HDB vis-a-vis the targetted number of flats to be built in the fiscal year of 1988?

The Chairman: Mr Ng, would you like to go on to your second amendment?

Mr Ng Kah Ting: No, Sir. I have indicated that I would just speak on this point.

Mr Dhanabalan: Sir, if Members have the Estimates in front of them, on the page that the Member for Punggol referred to, page 668, there is a simple explanation for these differences. The first estimate for FY 87 of $4.5 billion was provided as loans to be made from the Government to HDB. Apart from the loans that HDB receives from the Government, HDB of course also repays every year to the Government loans that it received in the past. That is not shown here. This figure here shows what the HDB takes from the Government. What the Government receives as repayment from the HDB is not shown in this particular account.

Every time HDB sells a flat, it receives full payment from the buyer out of the loan that he receives from CPF, or a downpayment from the CPF and a loan from the CPF. Every year HDB used to receive something like $1r billion by way of sales proceeds. HDB used to apply these sales proceeds to pre-pay or make advance repayment of the loans that it had received from the Government previously. It is not shown here at all. In other words, it takes loans from the Government, and that is shown here, but the pre-payments that the HDB makes on loans taken previously are not shown here.

From the year 1987, Government decided that instead of doing it this way, whatever payments HDB receives from the CPF, should be used by HDB first and not used to repay the old loans. Having used the proceeds of the sales, if HDB still needs money, then HDB will borrow from the Government. So the accounting procedure was changed, and as a result the estimated figure for FY 87 is very much higher than the revised figure for FY 87. That is the reason for the difference. You don't follow?

Mr Ng Kah Ting: I follow.

Mr Dhanabalan: That is the main difference. There is another reason for the difference. The main difference is that this is now a net figure whereas the old $4.5 billion was a gross figure, if I can use the words in that sense. In other words, you use whatever you get from the CPF for your own purposes and if you still need money, then you borrow from the Government. In addition to that reason , the original estimated number of flats the HDB was going to construct was I think about 25,000 to 30,000. It is now being reduced to 15,000. So the anticipated need for loans has also gone down. These are the two reasons for the difference.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: Sir, I anticipated that. I take the Minister's point. He might not have it, but I would just easily give him a copy of the Main Estimates where there is this Loan Repayments spelt out there, which I could follow. But I think he would have no objection to that and I take the point of his explanation. I merely want to show to him that there is that indication down there, in the book. He might not have a copy of the Main Estimates.

Mr Dhanabalan: In fact, what I said is confirmed by this figure. The original estimated Loan Repayment was about $2 billion. Now the revised estimate is only half a billion or $490 million.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: $593 million.

Mr Dhanabalan: $490 million for Revised FY87. Estimated FY88 is different. The difference between Estimated and Revised figures is because of this change in accounting procedures. FY88 is the estimated amount of the net requirement of HDB.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: Then, Sir, I come to the second part of my question. How does he relate this to the need to build some 23,000 units of flats, among others the infrastructure facilities and amenities, in this fiscal year of 1988? He has not explained that.

Mr Dhanabalan: Sir, I must confess I am a bit lost. What actually is the question?

Mr Ng Kah Ting: The question is that for FY88 the building programme will be reduced somewhat down to 23,000 units, and this is the amount that will be required. I think what is missed is that, again, we come to the question of the need for HDB to borrow this sum of money, and so these 23,000 units will need so much money in order to achieve your building programme.

Mr Dhanabalan: Is the Member saying that the amount provided is insufficient?

Mr Ng Kah Ting: More or less, yes.

Mr Dhanabalan: Well, I do not know whether it is sufficient or insufficient. But according to the revised building programme of HDB, this is the estimated loan that HDB will require after it has set off other incomes that the HDB receives as well as loan repayments from purchasers of HDB flats. So what is provided here is sufficient for the programme that HDB has in mind.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: Sir, since the Minister says that that is sufficient, I take his answer, and I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The Chairman: Amendment No. (26). Mr Ng.

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 Code TI 3000 of the Main Estimates.

Sir, in asking this question, I merely wish to find this out. Since the establishment of the Construction Industry Development Board, they must have conducted some training courses. I would like to know what sort of training courses have been conducted, what is the number, and the level of skills that has been taught. Because we see a provision of $4.5 million to be used as Grant in aid, which is an increase of 54.6% over FY87.

Encik Othman bin Haron Eusofe: Sir, in raising this amendment together with the Member for Punggol, I would just like to ask the Minister to inform this House of steps which the Board has taken to facilitate and promote the use of new technology in the construction industry. For instance, what steps have been taken by the Board to promote the development of prefabrication? I also want details on the various training programmes but the Member for Punggol has already asked this question.

The Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for National Development (Mr Lee Yiok Seng): Mr Chairman, Sir, on behalf of my Minister. On the question raised regarding the training programmes conducted by CIDB, I think training and upgrading of the construction workers is important to us. The CIDB training courses cover most of the basic skills required in all the major construction trades. The training centre focuses its training efforts on the important trades that are critical to the structural integrity and quality of finishing. We also conduct some supervisor courses to upgrade the skills of clerks-of-works and foremen of the construction firms. These efforts will help the construction industry to have sufficient personnel in all the important levels of the construction trades.

The training courses which we have conducted in the training centre are grouped into two major categories. One is the full-time course, the other one is part-time courses. The full-time courses cover the following major trades:

(a) Structural trades which include carpentry, bar-bending and metal scaffolding;

(b) Finishing trades which include plastering and tiling;

(c) Plumbing and pipe fitting; and

(d) Electrical wiring and installation.

For these full-time courses we have conducted 16 batches of trainees in the last four years. Training courses are conducted at the Builder Certificate and Advanced Builder Certificate levels which are equivalent to VITB's NTC-3 and NTC-2 certificates respectively.

Currently, we also organize eight part-time courses covering the following trades:

(a) Metal scaffolding:

(b) Safety Orientation Course for Construction Workers;

(c) Tower Crane Operators Course;

(d) Suspended Scaffold Operators Course;

(e) Plumbing and Pipe Fitting (Advanced Building Certificate);

(f) Plumbing and Pipe Fitting (Builder Certificate); and

(g) Trade Test preparatory programmes for the four major construction trades.

The total number of trainees who have undergone these courses is 10,000. They include 6,000 in the full-time training programmes and 4,000 in the various part-time courses.

Sir, regarding the new prefabrication technology, the Government started promoting prefabrication in 1981 with the award of a few major public housing contracts using prefabricated methods. Since then, the total contract value awarded using prefabricated and system construction is $2.73 billion. 64,000 out of 180,000 housing units completed during this period have used prefabricated components. Currently, full prefabrication is being used for refuse chutes and staircases, and 30% prefabrication for parapets and facades.

Prefabrication has also found its way into other buildings such as schools, police stations and other institutional buildings. Since the third phase of the school building programme started in 1983, 10 out of the 55 schools completed have been constructed using full prefabrication. In the other buildings, about 20% of floor slabs and 10% of architectural panels and claddings are prefabricated. Generally, in the large buildings, advantage is being taken of the benefits of prefabrication such as the second airport terminal building which is more than 70% prefabricated.

In the private sector, prefabricated components are mainly used for floor slabs and architectural claddings. Recently, a number of office buildings constructed using structural steel have a high percentage of prefabrication.

The overall effect of all these efforts is that prefabrication technology is much more familiar and acceptable in the industry. Recently, some small private sector residential development used prefabricated components for their construction of the units.

Regarding the training of this new technology of prefabricated construction, most of the basic skills required in prefabricated construction are already taught as part of the existing training courses for construction workers conducted by the Construction Industry Training Centre. For instance, in the training of tower crane operators, the worker is trained to transport prefabricated components as part of his training. A module on prefabricated construction is also incorporated in the course for structural trades worker. In addition, orientation courses are normally conducted by the construction companies or contractors for their new workers at the prefabrication worksites or factories to help them adapt to the new working environment.

Sir, I think I have answered most of the questions.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: Sir, can I ask the Senior Parliamentary Secretary how these courses conducted by the CIDB will help reduce our reliance on foreign workers in the construction industry?

Encik Othman bin Haron Eusofe: Sir, I just want to know whether this new technology has brought down building costs?

Mr Lee Yiok Seng: Sir, using the prefabrication method in the construction industry definitely will cut down costs. The reduced cost may not directly incur in the construction but in the time. Because time is money. Especially in the large buildings, they take a longer time to build. Using this prefabrication system or method, has become more and more popular in Singapore and in other countries.

In answer to the other question regarding foreign workers, I think the shortage of workers in Singapore, either in the construction industry or in the other industries, is a problem to Singapore. In the construction industry specially, we are facing more problems because we find it difficult to get young Singaporeans to enter into the construction workforce. Therefore, it would not be feasible to have a 100% local construction workforce.

We estimate in the long-term that the workforce in the construction industry will stabilize at around 80,000 workers, half of which are local and half comprising of a revolving pool of foreign workers. The step has been taken to achieve this. Since the Construction Industry Training Centres started training the workers, we now have 10,000 trainees. The training centre is working towards the following training and certification target by 1995 in which 8,000 to 9,000 new entrants will be trained to enter the workforce. This is mainly to replace attrition of existing workers. 15,000 existing workers will undergo upgrading through part-time training courses. One-third of the entire workforce will be tested and certified. So these programmes will ensure a sufficient supply of skilled workers for all the important trades in the construction industry.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: Sir, in view of the assurance given by the Senior Parliamentary Secretary, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The Chairman: Amendment No. (27), Mr Ng.

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

The Chairman: Amendment No. (28), Mr Ng.

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

The Chairman: Dr Vasoo.

Dr S. Vasoo (Bo Wen): Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head T be reduced by $10 in respect of Code TJ 5100 of the Development Estimates.

Sir, it is encouraging to note that the Ministry through the URA is paying more attention to conservation projects. It pains us each time to see old parts of Singapore going. It pains us because we are giving away the old parts in terms of progress. And I feel that progress without meaning attached to places is, in fact, like a tree without leaves, a house without a roof. I think it is essential therefore to make sure that we try and preserve as many old parts of Singapore as possible with in the context of our urban renewal programme.

I note that very few old parts of Singapore will be preserved in any case. I hope that the few that we have shall be preserved in the interest of providing a historical linkage for our young. I think this is very crucial because, more often than not, we tend to think that these projects are irrelevant. It must give way to projects. But nevertheless I think it must provide reference for our young to have this historical linkage, to have a history and a sense of meaning and attachment to these places.

With that in mind, Sir, I must say that we will have to rethink and see that the very few old parts of Singapore that we have can be retained and conserved. And greater efforts must be placed to ensure that these places will not be taken away.

Sir, URA, in fact, have has taken very slow progress. It has taken a longer time than anticipated to implement conservation projects in a number of areas. Conservation projects have, in fact, not started in Little India. Kampong Glam which has been designated as another area has taken time to be conserved. Other areas like Chinatown is in progress but the progress is slower than anticipated. I think the URA has a plan for conservation but this plan is taking a much longer time than expected. By the time they get to carry out their conservation projects, this place would have degenerated and there is nothing more to conserve. I think this is essentially true if you go through Little India, many of these places have gone and degenerated and these places are, in fact, to some extent destroyed.

Sir, I feel that the earlier we engage and go into this process of conservation the better because less resources will have to be redeployed. I feel that in order to encourage conservation projects, it may be relevant to set up a heritage development fund. And such a fund could be made available for private individuals to apply for loans from this heritage development fund so that they can undertake private projects of their own, through private participation and private initiative. I think if such a fund is available, it will be able to help both individuals and family groups to partici- pate in the conservation of places that belong to the community. I feel that through loans, this will be made possible and they can pay low interest rates for such borrowings and they may participate with great interest to enhance such projects. Such loans would also provide interest of people to engage in creative activities. Innovations can come about. And I hope that the Ministry will consider such a fund to be made available for private participations by individuals and families.

On that note, I would like to thank you, Sir.

Mr Dhanabalan: Sir, the Government is very conscious of the need to conserve certain parts of Singapore to give us a link with our past and to remind us of our heritage. But conservation is somewhat new and untried in Singapore. Therefore, we have to do it slowly. The most important thing is that the Government has to show its commitment. I think the Tanjong Pagar scheme is a clear demonstration of Government's commitment to conservation. When the first phase is completed by the end of this year, Singaporeans will be able to see for themselves how conservation is carried out and the impact that it can make on the environment.

Regarding Little India and other places that are earmarked for conservation, I think the main problem is not finance. The main problem is that many of these areas are occupied by tenants who are in rent-controlled properties and the owners have no incentive to do any improvements. We are looking into this area and in due course I will be making a statement to deal with this aspect of the problem.

Government will also show its commitment in these areas by doing general works which will improve the environment like building pedestrian walkways, little parks, planting and so on, so that when the private owners begin to restore and renovate their premises, they will be able to do in an area which will improve as a whole. There will be a lot of incentives for them to take advantage of the general improvements that the Government will be putting into these areas.

If after all this is done, a special heritage fund is still needed, maybe we can look into that. But I am quite confident that once Government demonstrates its commitment and puts in the infrastructural investments in these areas, the owners will be able to find banks and others who will be prepared to finance them, if they can deal with the problem of the tenants. As I said, that will be dealt with in due course.

Dr Vasoo: Sir, I hope the Minister will look seriously into this heritage fund. I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The sum of $220,297,600 for Head T ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates.

The sum of $3,081,818,100 for Head T ordered to stand part of the Develoment Estimates.

The Chairman: Order.

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

Mr Deputy Speaker: I suspend the Sitting and will take the Chair again at 2.00 pm.

Sitting accordingly suspended at l.04 pm until 2.00 pm. Sitting resumed at 2.00 pm

[Mr Deputy Speaker in the Chair]

Debate in Committee of Supply resumed.

[Mr Deputy Speaker in the Chair]

Head I -

Dr Arthur Beng Kian Lam (Fengshan): Sir, I beg to move,

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

Sir, I will first speak on the topic of integration of the land transport systems. May I first congratulate the Minister on the successful launching of Phase I of the MRT. The price of fares has been realistic. Except for minor initial teething problems, the MRT was smoothly introduced. It is indeed the pride of our nation. Sir, with the investment of $5 billion in the MRT, one can perceive the MRT as the centre or the hub around which the other modes of land transport would supplement. Due to technical problems, through-ticketing will be postponed for about three years till the equipment is ready. Thus, the inconvenience of having two tickets will still be present. This is somewhat alleviated by the stored-value tickets sold by the MRT.

Sir, the main problem now is to make it convenient and economical for the train user to get to the MRT station. The main choices available to him are: bus, taxi, private motor vehicle and, of course, walking for the fortunate ones staying close to the station. First, the buses. Since the introduction of the MRT, SBS has withdrawn five services and amended two services. This was done in stages as the demand for service fell. SBS has also started two shuttle services to convey passengers from Bukit Batok and Jurong East to the Clementi MRT station. TIBS has also since December started a shuttle service specially for Yishun residents to convey them to the Yio Chu Kang MRT station. Both bus companies, I must emphasize, are running the shuttle services at discounted fares.

The Yishun shuttle service has enjoyed good patronage over the last three months. The Bukit Batok and Jurong East shuttle services have just started about a week ago but the initial response has been good. The success of the shuttle service reinforces my point for integration and is further evidence that the question now is: how do the passengers get to the MRT station? What has the impact on the MRT been to the bus services so far? I am told that the success of the bus shuttle services is a double-edged sword. While they may make up for discounted fares, it is actually depriving its own services, ie, the buses, of passengers as they are transferred to the MRT. I would say that this speaks well for the social and civic-mindedness of the bus operators in this transition stage but presses home the point that integration is the final answer. I am also glad to note, both from TIBS and SBS, that there is no imminent problem of retrenchment of bus drivers.

Next, I come to taxis. We are all glad to know that to-date taxis have not been adversely affected. The increase in short trips is an indication that they are also complementing the MRT. I asked a taxi driver regarding this. His answer was that they should be all right as long as, I quote, "Government does not play dirty." I was surprised and asked him what he meant. He reminded me of the diesel tax on taxis.

Sir, a diesel tax of six times the annual road tax was levied on diesel-powered private motor cars in 1971. The reason for this was to restrain the growth of the motor car population, especially that of diesel-operated vehicles. In 1971 no similar diesel tax was imposed on taxis. What is the number of diesel private motor cars today? According to the ROV Annual Report, 1986, there were only two diesel private motor cars. Thus, the aim of the diesel tax in 1971 has been achieved. The Ministry must be congratulated, but why now pass on this tax to taxis? The taxi population can be controlled through the number of licences issued and the taxi fares will adjust according to market forces. The Minister should seriously consider scrapping the taxi diesel tax as taxis at affordable rates are still part and parcel of the land transport system.

Finally, Sir, I turn to the private motor cars. I am disappointed that no park and ride scheme has been introduced in any MRT station. Land cost is cheaper in the suburban areas than in the central business district. Would it not be better to allow motorists to park outside town and travel by MRT to town? There are successful models of this in other countries. Why do we not give this a try?

Traffic circulation should also be looked into so that private motor vehicles can be used to drop off MRT passengers without causing traffic congestion at MRT stations. It would be a major achievement if through these measures the private motorist decides to give up his car or for a start even his second car.

Sir, I next turn to the subject of future plans for SBC. The GPC on Communications and Information and some members of the resource panel visited SBC on 16th November 1987. We noted at first hand the very crammed premises in Caldecott Hill. We noted how every inch of available space was used. We are glad to note that for FY 88, $56.6 million has been set aside as development expenditure for SBC as compared with that of $4.6 million for 1987. Will the Minister enlighten us as to how this new allocation will be used?

Sir, the success of the Chinese Drama Unit is something that the SBC can truly be proud of. What is the outcome of talks to link up SBC with other TV stations in some of its productions? What are the plans to market these productions more aggressively overseas?

SBC has also done well in its coverage of current affairs and local news. The SBC staff work hard to provide interesting coverage of the ministerial visits to constituencies to discuss the National Agenda. What are the plans to further upgrade news presentation and to train TV and broadcasting journalists?

Dr Wang Kai Yuen (Bukit Timah): Sir, my topic this afternoon is on radio and television licences. The operation of a radio or a television set in Singapore requires a licence under the existing regulations. With almost universal ownership of these radio and television sets in Singapore homes today, I think this piece of legislation is showing its age. The more I think of it the more I would contend that a radio and television licence is not a licence in the normal usage of this term.

When is a licence not a licence? To answer the question, let us look at some examples. One can think of a driver's licence. In this case, a motor vehicle can be a dangerous thing in the hands of an untrained or unsound individual. So a driver must be certified to have acquired certain skills in order to be allowed on the road. A driver's licence is therefore a licence of competency. It is used to control who can and who cannot operate a motor vehicle. Similarly, a pilot's licence is to ensure that a person flying a plane has the skills to do so. One can also think of a hawker licence. In this case, a person with a hawker licence is one who has been given permission by the Government to participate in a certain trade to make a living. In this case, the number of hawkers in Singapore can be controlled via the issue of a licence.

Similarly, one can think of a whole host of other licences, like liquor licence, etc. In this usage, the term "licence" is a permission given by the Government to an individual or company to operate a certain trade. Are radio and television licences being used to control the number of radio and television sets in Singapore? Other than during the Japanese Occupation, I believe the need for such control, especially today, is not evident. The licence is also not meant to grant permission to someone to engage in money-making occupations. When a person turns on a radio or TV set, he is not engaged in any trade nor does turning on a radio or TV require special skills. So a licence here is not meant to certify that the person is fit to operate one. So why a licence?

The only reason I can think of is that it is used to collect revenue. It is used to collect revenue for the broadcast of radio and television programmes in Singapore, in this case, SBC. Indeed, if one looks at the Annual Report of SBC, licence fee collection forms a major item of its revenue in the range of 29-30%. Thus, I believe the term "licence" here is a misnomer. I think we should call a rose a rose. The licence in this case is just a receipt for the money we have paid to help SBC to put programmes into the air waves, like Today in Parliament.

The rationale for acquiring licences for operating a radio or television set might be appropriate during the time of the enactment of this legislation. When it was first implemented, there were very few radio receivers and indeed no TV set. From a subsidy point of view, it is and it would be unfair for radio and later television to be subsidized by the public at large while the audience were mainly the elite of the society. However, Sir, times have changed. Now ownership of TVs and radios is universal in Singapore. There is also no attempt to control who can own and operate a radio and TV set. In fact, SBC should be and is actually encouraging an ever-increasing number of people to tune in to their programmes. Indeed, if the number of people who tune in to SBC programmes declines, that would be bad news to SBC.

So clearly whatever the rationale requiring a licence to operate a TV or radio receiver was, the current regulation has become mainly a means of collecting revenue to fund the SBC. Under current regulations, every television or radio set outside the home requires a separate licence, for example, a radio in a car or boat or the one a person carries with him, like the Walkman set. Technology has also thrown a monkey-wrench into the enforcement of this legislation since there are now radio sets as small as a credit card. TV sets are also getting smaller. When a person walks down Orchard Road merrily listening to his credit card radio, he is indeed violating the rules if he does not carry a licence. In terms of cars, for every 10 cars in Singapore, I would say probably more than half would have a radio in them. I would also imagine that many motorists are indeed violating the rules daily.

Sir, I would say that SBC shall be funded and will be funded one way or the other. However, since the ownership of radio and television is already universal, would it not be simpler if the revenue collection is done via some other means? I would say that let's be done with licences. One possibility would be to collect the SBC due together with property tax. In this case, the rationale will be that every household in Singapore should contribute to SBC.

The other way to collect the revenue will be via income tax on the rationale that every working adult should contribute since he is likely to listen to radio or watch TV in the course of the financial year. Doing so shall result in a better utilization of our resources and in savings of manpower since the duplicate revenue collecting agency is thereby removed. On top of that, by doing so, we will also be rid of the unpleasant situation that we find ourselves today. Every so often people will be fined and made an example of for not having a licence when they operate a receiver. Every so often one will hear messages over the radio and television reminding us that an inspector will be visiting your home or is in the vicinity of your home very soon and please have your licence handy for inspection.

All this, Sir, I say will contribute to a sense of a big brother government which I think is unnecessary in the first place. I would like to ask the Minister to look into this legislation as it has obviously become outdated. It has also become difficult as well as counter-productive to enforce.

I urge the Minister to consider doing away with the current radio and television licences requirement and to compensate for SBC's loss in revenue Government could collect the equivalent amount through another existing revenue channel such as property tax or income tax. I hope the Minister will consider this proposal.

The Minister for Communications and Information (Dr Yeo Ning Hong): Sir, I thank the Chairman of the GPC for his kind words on the MRT. I have no doubt that the large numbers of our workers on the MRT system as well as the large numbers of Singaporeans who have given their cooperation and support welcome the praise that is given by the GPC Chairman on behalf of GPC.

We are very conscious of the importance of integrating the MRT system with other public transport systems. This is why way back during the planning stages, the integration of physical infrastructure has been very carefully looked into. As a result of that, we have many of the MRT stations built either close to or adjacent to bus interchanges, making it convenient for commuters to change from a bus to the MRT. We have also included taxi stands, wherever possible, at or near the MRT stations for exactly the same reason - encouraging easier transfers.

The other aspect of integration the integration of bus routes with the MRT system, has been going on and I expect will continue, because it is really a continuous process when the MRT extends itself beyond the central areas to the outlying areas.

Sir, integration has three components. The integration of physical infrastructure has already taken place. The integration of bus routes with the MRT system is a continuous process. The third component, fare integration, was originally planned for an earlier implementation in time for the opening of the MRT system. As it turned out, the equipment that was to be available to read the magnetic card, so that through-ticketing using one single ticket on both the MRT train as well on the buses is possible, that piece of equipment is not available. So short of making it relatively inconvenient for people to have fare integration without a common through-ticket, the operators decided to hold it back until the equipment is available. The operators are currently working with the manufacturers to ensure that the equipment that will be available eventually, when installed on buses, will be able to take the very severe rattling, the very severe vibration on buses. We expect to be able to go into some kind of a pilot programme sometime at the end of next year, with the possibility that, if the pilot programme is successful, sometime two or three years from now the equipment should be widely available for integration of fares for all passengers.

Sir, the Member for Fengshan also rightly pointed out that in 1971 when the diesel tax was introduced for cars, that same tax was not applied to taxis. Sir, that is the anomaly that has been responsible for diesel cars coming all the way down and for the number of diesel taxis going all the way up until at the moment practically all taxis operate on diesel. That is the reason why it is necessary now to correct the anomaly to move towards parity between taxis and cars.

Sir, this policy is a sound policy. It is a consistent policy and it is a policy that the Government will apply in due course. What I can assure the House at the moment is that this diesel tax will not be applied until we have assessed fully the impact of the MRT on taxi ridership.

Sir, Members will recall that way back in April 1985 when diesel tax was originally initiated, there was a certain amount of unhappiness. Conventional wisdom at that time had it that the taxi drivers would be worse off and that taxi commuters would be worse off. Sir, in spite of the recession that was not planned for, a recession that was probably the worst we ever had in two decades, after some modifications to the original figures, we have now arrived at a position where today taxi drivers are a lot better off than they were in April 1985. Taxi commuters also are a lot better off than they were in 1985. Then they were unable to get a taxi, now less difficult. We would have done taxi commuters and taxi drivers a disservice if we had not introduced a fare increase, as well as the diesel tax, albeit moderated to a level that was acceptable by all.

Sir, I expect in due course when the diesel tax is fully implemented, similar benefits will also prevail - benefits for taxi drivers, benefits for taxi commuters and benefits for all other road users, because we will not have excessively large number of taxis cluttering our roads.

Sir, the Member for Fengshan also raised a third point which is the possibility of construction of car parks in some MRT stations. We have said on many occasions that in Singapore land is scarce. Where do we build our MRT stations? We build them right in the City centre, we build them in areas of very high density. To try then to build a car park adjacent to an MRT station means that you would have to tie up land, land which is already scarce. It means also that we will be attracting large numbers of cars coming in during peak hours. Of those who have got a car and who intend to use the MRT, Sir, I do not think that will be a practical idea because it means that we will bring in traffic congestion from beyond into the housing estate. Take for example, Ang Mo Kio. The MRT is right in the City centre. If we have got a car park next to it, then we can expect traffic to come from the vicinity, from the surrounding private housing estates, from Jalan Kayu, from Seletar Hills, areas of that sort. And that is going to create traffic congestion for the residents in Ang Mo Kio. Sir, I do not think it would be a practical idea, and hence I think we should be very cautious before we move into something of this sort.

Sir, the GPC Chairman asked about the upgrading in SBC and how the funds allocated would be expended. The amount of money available would help SBC to ugprade in a number of different ways. I will mention two general areas. Firstly, there would be the acquisition of better technical equipment, equipment that would permit greater creativity in the programmes that we have. This will include facilities such as digitalized equipment that will enable very rapid and very flexible transformation of pictures into different formations. I think some of you have already seen some of these features on television where a picture can be twisted into different shapes - inverted or transposed. Other equipment will also include electronic news gathering equipment, lighting systems, cameras and sound systems that are extremely portable, enabling our SBC to go all over Singapore to cover events live, if necessary. In similar vein, we would also be purchasing more equipment that will enable SBC to cover concerts, variety shows such as those at City Hall or in Victoria Memorial Concert Hall. These are the sort of equipment that are essential if we want to upgrade the standard of SBC.

The conditions in SBC are indeed crammed. This is because SBC inherited from Radio and Television Singapore all the old facilities, the old buildings. In spite of that, the people at SBC have done their utmost to perform under those extremely difficult conditions. We hope to be able sometime later this year, to begin the construction of a new permanent location, some place in Tuas. We would be acquiring about 6.6 hectares where we will set up permanent scenes such as an Imperial Palace with lakes, with the appropriate street scenes capturing the mood of a bygone era for local dramas that has become so popular nowadays in Singapore. We will also be creating scenes of old Singapore, old street scenes in pre-war Singapore. We will be creating bungalows that are now no longer in existence. We will be creating kampongs. These will provide the backdrop for us to provideour population with a feel for what Singapore was 40, 50, 60 years ago. It will also be a means of transmitting to our children the lessons that we have learnt over these years and help them understand the progress that we have made and the things that need to be done in order to ensure that that progress continues.

Sir, I turn now to the question about cooperation with other broadcasting stations in other countries. This is being actively pursued all the time. Where opportunities are available, where the objectives of the two organizations coincide, cooperation is always welcome. In this context, I want to mention that SBC has, for many years already, been cooperating with Radio Television Malaysia (RTM). Regular variety programmes have been put out over the past years. We are also currently negotiating with a broadcasting station in Taiwan, on the possibility of a joint production of a serial, probably a drama.

There are many advantages in working together with another organization. Firstly, we will be able to have a very much wider pool of talent to select actors and actresses from. There will also be a larger pool of scriptwriters. We can share with one another our expertise and our experience. Cost, obviously, will also be shared. Viewership will also be very much larger. So there are a number of advantages.

We have also worked with other countries. During the Miss Universe Pageant in Singapore, we worked with companies in the United States. There was also a Christmas programme where SBC worked together with BBC in putting out a programme that was aired in Singapore, Australia, New Zealand as well as Britain.

Sir, I turn now to the Member for Bukit Timah. He asked about the purpose of the licence. The licence is a revenue generating mechanism to help SBC finance its production and broadcast of programmes. A very sizable proportion of revenue for SBC comes from the radio and TV licences. If this source of revenue is not available, then it means that we will have to cut down drastically on the number of programmes that we have. It means that we will have to cut down on the quality. It means that we will have to cut down on local production because local production is extremely expensive. It means also that we have to increase, maybe double, the number of advertisements carried on television in order to ensure that there is sufficient revenue to meet the expenditure. So it is not practical to suggest that revenue be channelled elsewhere.

As for the means of collection, I think the present system is fairly satisfactory and fairly straightforward. At the moment, it is possible for individuals or households to pay their licences by way of the Giro. You just make one trip to the POSB settle it once and for all, and after that it is no longer a problem. We will also be introducing very shortly a scheme where people can pay for a number of years, say, for three years at a time rather than having to pay annually, if that it is too much of a problem.

Sir, the present method of collection is satisfactory. But if the Member has any other ideas beyond that of collecting it by way of income tax or by way of property tax, in which case the money will probably go to the Finance Ministry and not to SBC, I will be quite happy to consider other alternatives.

Dr Arthur Beng Kian Lam: Sir, I thank the Minister for his very comprehensive reply although I still disagree with him about the point on road tax. I however welcome his assurances that the diesel tax will not be implemented till the full impact of the MRT on taxi drivers has been assessed and that, when diesel tax is implemented, this time in stages, all will benefit.

Sir, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The Chairman: Amendment No. (2), you can have 20 minutes. Dr Arthur Beng.

Dr Arthur Beng Kian Lam: Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head I be reduced by $10 in respect of Code IA 1000 of the Main Estimates.

Sir, I wish to speak here, first, on the topic of Teleview and then on the use of telecommunications equipment. First, Teleview. Telecoms has reached an advanced stage in the development of Teleview. In its publicity brochure, Teleview is described in this way:

'Teleview is unique. It is a revolutionary, new, two-way, videotext system that is unlike any other available in Singapore or elsewhere in the world.'

My questions to the Minister are: (1) how much, to date, has it cost Telecoms to develop Teleview? (2) when will it be introduced? (3) Will SBC Text run by SBC be outmoded or become redundant when Teleview is introduced?

Next, I come to the topic of the regulations on the use of telecommunications equipment. This is the era of telecommunications. Telecoms has introduced and will be introducing many new equipment to the public. With privatization, the public can also buy TAS approved models from private sources. My fear here, Sir, is that of maintenance of these equipments. As new models come on line so quickly, many of the agents and TAS may not keep much spares for repairs. Thus after buying, say, a new telephone system, one may find that due to the inability to repair it because no spare parts are available, say, after two years, the system has to be changed and this will be a waste. Will Telecoms consider this point when approving equipment for sale to the public. The agent should be made responsible for maintenance and providing for spares for a reasonable period, eg, five years.

Dr Yeo Ning Hong: Sir, if I could, first of all, explain what Teleview is all about very briefly and in layman's language. Telecoms has been working on a research project over the last seven or eight years and has now developed a new system which will enable Singaporeans to move quickly into the information era with for this piece of equipment available to a very wide spread of households in Singapore.

The system itself is very simple in layman's terms, of course, not technically. Every home now has got a telephone and a television. If they were to buy this little black box which will be made available when the project is implemented, then they will be able to use the telephone to connect it to the black box and the television to call a central computer. The central computer will cause information to be broadcast, to be beamed, like a television picture and that picture will be received on your television. And then the individual can interact with the central computer. It is a very simple, very cheap way for households to have access to the central computer.

What sort of facilities can be offered with a system like that? The potential is limitless. Systems similar although not identical with the Teleview system ourselves are now available in Britain and in France. Facilities available include things like buying and selling of goods and services via your telephone and television. If you want to purchase something, you can call up the central computer. If a vendor or seller is available selling a particular item, you can have the wares displayed on your television. You can decide whether you want to buy it or not and proceed accordingly. If you want to buy it, you can just indicate by way of your telephone and a transaction can be made. You have stocks and shares transacted that way. You can buy airline tickets and so forth. The potential, is limited only by the imagination of vendors, suppliers and the private sector.

You can also use such a system, the Teleview system, to transmit messages to your friends who can similarly access by way of his telephone, his black box and his television. So you can have your own private telebox system. Right now, telebox is available to companies which subscribe to certain nets but in due course every family via Teleview can have a telebox. Or your can use it in another common mode as a fax machine. You can send documents from your place, given appropriate adaptors, to your friend, again via this sytem.

If there are providers of this service for children and if there are sufficient programmes available, children can have educational assistance via this Teleview system that we are talking about.

Sir, we have been doing R&D on this project for some seven or eight years. So far, we have committed a total of $14 million. When the project is fully completed, with the purchase of the central computers and assorted other hardwares, we would expect the project to cost us about $50 million. This is a relatively small amount of money considering that the annual revenue of Telecoms is about $1,000 million a year. It is a good investment for the future, an investment in the greater productivity of Singaporeans in enabling them to access information and to transact services in a relatively short time.

The Member for Fengshan asked when this will be introduced. We are now working towards the final stages of the project. I expect a field trial of a few hundred of these black boxes sometime towards the end of this year. Depending on the results of the field trial, if all is successful we expect the scheme to be available for wider participation sometime at the end of 1989 or early 1990.

Will SBC Text be redundant, be obsolete, as a result of Teleview? I hope not. In countries which operate these systems referred to as interactive videotext systems, both systems have been able to compete side by side. Not just to compete, but also in certain instances to complement. Maybe, Sir, I ought to describe also very briefly what SBC Text is and explain why it is different from Teleview. SBC Text is like a man addressing an audience. It is one way. The television station broadcasts information. At the moment SBC is broadcasting something like 500 pages and you select from the 500 pages what information you want.

Teleview is different. Teleview is like two persons having a dialogue. The person at home can talk, can have a dialogue with the central computer and ask for different information and transact business. So the roles of the two schemes are different. We hope that both systems will find its own market niche and continue serving the people in slightly different way.

I now move on to the question about the liberalization of sales, supply and maintenance of telecommunications equipment to the private sector. We started moving in the direction of greater liberalization way back in 1986 when we started promoting the sale of telecommunications equipment by the private sector. Then last year in 1987 we liberalized the maintenance of telecommunications equipment by the private sector. This has been well received by the private sector of course and, As far as Telecoms is concerned, it is consistent with our policy of encouraging greater participation in high technology products and services. So far, there has been no significant increase in complaints to Telecoms. The liberalization has gone very well.

As for spare parts, as a general rule, Telecoms keep spare parts for equipment for three to five years. We need to remember that in the field of tele- communications, particularly in the field of electronic equipment, the rate at which a piece of equipment becomes obsolete is extremely fast. So we are already being very, very generous in the provision of spares.

Dr Arthur Beng Kian Lam: Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, may I ask the Minister whether he will be willing to ask the private companies also to do this.

Dr Yeo Ning Yong: Sir, I think it is not a practical suggestion for Telecoms to ask private companies to keep spare parts for a specific duration. Once you move into the private sector, the consumer has the opportunity of deciding for himself whether he wants to buy something from Telecoms; or to buy something from an outside vendor, in which case he must take the conditions of sale as a package. Some providers, especially the bigger organizations, will probably carry a higher stock of spares and will probably have better trained technicians to look after the piece of equipment. Other smaller companies will probably have less of such stock and therefore less likely also to have well-trained technicians.

Dr Arthur Beng Kian Lam: Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I find that Telecoms holds the key to it all. Telecoms approves or disapproves the equipment. So you can make this part of the package when you approve or disapprove the equipment - that they must maintain it for a certain or reasonable length of time.

Dr Yeo Ning Yong: Sir, approval for sale of equipment, as far as Telecoms is concerned, is to ensure that the piece of equipment is compatible with the overall telecommunications network. In other words, nobody should buy a piece of equipment, attach it to the overall national telecommunications network and in the process damage or degrade the network. That is what the approval from Telecoms is about. We should not try to stifle the private sector by putting additional conditions, making it difficult for some of these smaller companies to operate. I think what we need to remember is that the day has already arrived when the repair of sophisticated electronic equipment is no longer viable. It is much more practical to buy, to use and when it breaks down, to replace with a new item.

Members here must be well aware that if you want to repair an old video-cassette recorder, it will cost you a lot of money. You are not quite sure whether it is going to be well repaired. It may be a lot cheaper and a lot easier for you to buy a brand new model that has got a lot more functions than the old one and not have to worry about the quality of repair or the availability of parts. I think we should leave the private sector to do its own business. What we want to ensure is that the national telephone network is not degraded by these equipment.

Dr Tan Cheng Bock (Ayer Rajah): Sir, I did not file in a cut but I would just like to seek the Minister's clarification on Teleview. I remember about two years ago a group of private supplies of telecommunications equipment came to see the Feedback Unit regarding the fax machines. Actually they were too slow in trying to promote the sale of fax machines, and when TAS decided to move in so that it would give some impetus to the private suppliers and encourage the use of these fax machines, there was a lot of hue and cry. With the introduction of Teleview, I can see there is an implication here because the fax machine is going to be affected. Again you must give them time because I can imagine that they could be encouraged to import all the fax machines now. Then with the introduction of Teleview, what is going to happen to them?

Dr Yeo Ning Hong: Sir, I cannot recall all the details of the incident that the Member for Ayer Rajah has raised but the general case goes something like this. Fax machines were originally sold by private sector companies and because they were relatively small companies, importing small number of units of these machines, the prices were kept relatively high. We are told, although it is difficult to provide evidence for such matters, that certain suppliers in other countries deliberately held prices up in order to capitalize on a market that was growing. What happened was that Telecoms came in, imported the machines in large numbers so that economies of scale made it possible for the fax machines to be much more cheaply available and therefore accessible to a much larger number of Singaporeans and companies in Singapore. That resulted in unhappiness in the private sector because the prices from the private sector were very much higher than those from Telecoms, because Telecoms, as a result of the economies of scale, passed on the savings to the consumer. It is something that we want to encourage more of rather than to discourage.

As for the possibility of Teleview affecting fax machines, I do not think we should hold progress in order to protect those who may be affected because their businesses are such that they are not sufficiently long-term in their planning and do not make allowance for the arrival of new technology. We should not hold back technology in order that a small group will benefit and in the process the nation, the public at large are deprived of a new service. I have already indicated the rough time-table of this new project. This is an R&D project. Those who are familiar with R&D projects will know that it is almost impossible to tie R&D down to fixed time-tables. But we are talking about something like 18 months to two years before Teleview becomes available to the general public. People working in this area of telecommunications equipment, office equipment, should bear this in mind when they plan for the years ahead.

Dr Arthur Beng Kian Lam: Sir, in view of the enlightening reply, I beg to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The Chairman: Amendment No. (3), Dr Koh is not here. Mr Chai.

Mr Chai Chong Yii (Bukit Batok): Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head I be reduced by $10 in respect of Code IC 1000 of the Main Estimates.

I move this cut with a view to seeking more information on the improvement of public transport within the Bukit Batok New Town. Bukit Batok New Town, on the whole, is very well planned and the bus services to the City and from the City are also quite acceptable. But the shuttle service within the New Town is facing some problems, perhaps on the routing. There are complaints,especially during the morning peak hours. Luckily, with the introduction of MRT on 12th March, 1988, SBS immediately introduced a shuttle service (SS 3) from Bukit Batok New Town to Clementi MRT station. This has helped very much to relieve the problem. I would like to thank SBS for the immediate introduction of this service.

In view of the complaints, I have asked the various Residents' Committees within the Bukit Batok New Town to help find a solution by putting their heads together to try and see, within the constraints of the number of buses available provided by the SBS, whether they can help to find a better routing. I do not really expect them to have more expertise than the bus company, but this suggestion is merely to bring the bus company and the grassroots organizations closer together to see each other's problems so that, with a closer rapport, solutions can be found to improve the shuttle services within the Bukit Batok New Town. I wonder whether the Minister will liaise with the bus company or get his officers to liaise with the bus company to work together with the grassroots organizations so that, within the constraints of their resources, a better routing can be arranged.

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Education (Mr Tang Guan Seng): ( In Mandarin): Sir, I would like to talk about the integration of land transport systems. Since the setting up of MRT, the next most important task is to make optimum use of the MRT. In other words, private car owners should reduce the use of their cars on weekdays and use the MRT more. Just now, the Minister when answering a question by the Member for Fengshan about constructing car parks around the MRT stations said that he was not quite in favour of such a suggestion. I think another alternative is to improve the feeder or shuttle bus services in various new towns and integrate them with the MRT. Amongst the new towns, Ang Mo Kio and Toa Payoh have good feeder bus services. However, since the MRT has been put to use, there are still a lot of people in these two new towns who drive their cars to work. This shows that we should educate the car-owning population to make fuller use of MRT. The MRT has also done a lot in educating the people on how to make use of the MRT. I wonder how far this has gone down with the owners of private cars and how successful it has been in educating them to integrate the use of cars with the MRT.

On the other hand, there are housing estates where shuttle bus servies are inadequate. For example, between Outram MRT station and Bukit Merah, there is no shuttle service. Residents living in areas with insufficient feeder or shuttle service will not be able to utilize fully the MRT.

With regard to the insufficiency of feeder services, I think the question of bus fares should be looked into. A feeder bus service is about 15 cents a trip. It has been for some time. If it is practical, of course, it is beneficial and convenient to the commuters. But if it is too cheap, then the bus companies may consider whether they would like to provide such services or not. These are contradictory interests. They need a solution. Therefore, if 15 cents bus fare has affected the profits of the bus companies, then it would not be able to achieve the objective of the integration of land transport systems. So I hope that the Public Transport Council would take this into consideration when they process applications by bus companies to provide feeder or shuttle services.

Earlier, the Minister mentioned about the full use of the MRT by introducing a through-ticket system. The Minister expressed the hope that within three years, it would be able to introduce the system. It will be about 1991, while full MRT services will be ready by 1990. There will be a lag of one year. I think if there is not through fare, it will hinder the full use of the MRT. I hope the Minister will give active consideration to this and try to speed up the time when the through-ticket system will be used in conjunction with MRT services when the latter is fully in operation by 1990.

Although the bus companies and the MRT are complementing each other in services, being competitors, they also have certain conflicts of interest. If the bus companies want to be viable in the face of convenient and comfortable services pro- vided by the MRT, they should try harder to upgrade their services; one way is to use more air-conditioned buses.

I would also like to point out that under competition, certain routes would be affected. In fact, some routes have been abolished, and in others, the frequency of service reduced. I think there will arise two problems. Firstly, some buses will be laid off. They are very expensive and it will be a waste if they are not used.

The other problem is that manpower will not be fully utilised due to the reduction of routes or frequency. Now, the MRT is only running at about half of its full capacity. When fully completed and all the routes are fully used, it will affect the manpower even more. If excess vehicles and redundant manpower were to be fully made used of, then I think new bus services should be provided between new towns such as from Toa Payoh to Tampines New Town or from Hougang to Marine Parade.

I hope the Minister will consider these suggestions.

Mr Tang See Chim (Chua Chu Kang): Sir, may I join in the debate?

The Chairman: After the Minister has spoken.

Dr Yeo Ning Hong: Sir, I will be happy to ask the bus companies, in particular SBS, to liaise with the Member for Bukit Batok and his grassroots organizations to ensure that we work out a scheme of services satisfactory to the vast majority of members of Bukit Batok.

Sir, the Member for Khe Bong raised a number of points. I will take them in order. The Member suggested having more feeder services in the new towns in order to make it possible for residents to get to the MRT as quickly as possible. I support this suggestion. I will ask the bus companies to look into it and also, in order that it will satisfy the needs of the residents, to encourage the grassroots organizations to participate. There is not much point in having bus services if they are not the routes that people want. Our experience in past years has been that whenever we gets the bus companies to work closely with grassroots organizations, the route that eventually gets implemented is almost always found to be a lot more acceptable than otherwise.

The Member asked about the possibility of fare change because he thinks that the feeder service is too cheap at 15 cts. The bus companies will be reviewing fares when they get round to the overall fare integration with the MRT some two to three years from now. So for the time being, there is no necessity for the feeder service to increase the fares at all.

Yes, it is true that without the through-ticket for commuters to use the same ticket for both a bus ride as well as a train ride, there will be some inconvenience. But the operators are working very closely, as I mentioned a moment ago, with the equipment supplier to get them as soon as possible. In the meantime, I hope Singaporeans who are using both the bus and the MRT will bear with the fact that they have got to buy two tickets instead of one. But they can, of course, make it more convenient for themselves if they get a stored value ticket for the MRT. Then they would not have to buy a ticket every time they take a ride.

Sir, the integration of routes is already taking place. It will be a continuous process. I would welcome suggestions from members in constituencies where they consider the services of the bus routes to be significantly affected by the MRT system and who want some modifications or some new routes to be added to get in touch with the bus companies so that they can bear in mind suggestions from the Members of the Parliament in their overall reorganization of the routes in order to give the people of Singapore the best possible public service, both by bus as well as the MRT.

Sir, I believe the Member also touched on the question of the possibility of retrenchment of workers by bus companies. The bus companies have been aware of the construction of the MRT over the last few years. So they have already built into their long-term plans that factor. As a result of that, there has been no massive recruitment of employees over the past two years, so much so that at the moment they are not expecting any pro- blems at all as far as retrenchment is concerned. There will be the gradual phasing out of numbers as a result of natural attrition. Others will then be redeployed in new areas of activity. New routes will also be created as a result of demand by residents in certain constituencies for easy access to the MRT. So all in all, the bus companies have assured my Ministry that they do not expect any massive retrenchment in the coming months.

The Chairman: Yes, Mr Tang.

Mr Tang See Chim: Thank you, Sir. I want to take up a point with the Minister regarding bus service in the Teck Whye Estate. Teck Whye Estate was first opened in 1979 but for a long period of time there was no bus service inside the estate. The estate is about 2 km away from the main road. In spite of representations made to the bus companies, they thought that it was not profitable to run a service there. So for something like eight years, the residents in the estate had to endure the hardship of braving the rain when it was wet and the hot sun when it was fine, to walk out to the main road to catch the bus. However, after much representation and with the help of the Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Communications, we managed to persuade the private bus owners to undertake the job. So the private bus owners were allowed to run a bus service from the estate to Bukit Batok. But to everybody's surprise, the termination of the bus route is not at the Bukit Batok bus interchange but about a mile from the bus interchange, at a place which leads to nowhere. And if anybody wants to catch a connecting bus, he would have to walk a fairly long distance to do so.

In spite of that, the private bus company was generous and kind enough to provide the service, and here I would like to record my thanks to them. This service has been operating for some time now. What they have done now is to apply for extension of the bus route to the Bukit Batok bus interchange, and I would appeal to the Minister to look into this matter and, if necessary, issue instructions to the SBS to allow the bus routes to terminate at the interchange so that an efficient bus service could be provided to the residents in the Teck Whye Estate. This is especially necessary because the Teck Whye Estate is being expanded. So I would sincerely ask the Minister to look into the matter urgently.

Dr Yeo Ning Hong: I shall look into the matter urgently. Sir, as a general rule, when Members of Parliament work together with the Ministry and liaise with the bus services, by and large they have been able to come together and provide a service that is satisfactory both to the residents as well as to the bus companies. Where there is a demand, there is no doubt at all that the bus companies would only be too happy to provide a service. The problem occurs occasionally when the demand is extremely low, and then you will have to try to persuade the smaller bus operators, those with small buses and therefore a smaller capacity, to operate those routes with very low demand. I will ask the operators to look into this in detail.

Mr Chai Chong Yii: Sir, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The Chairman: Amendment No. (4). Dr Arthur Beng.

Dr Arthur Beng Kian Lam: Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head I be reduced by $10 in respect of Code IE 1000 of the Main Estimates.

Sir, I would like to speak here on the topic of enhancing the effectiveness of Government media relations. In this context, I will confine my remarks to only the local media.

Sir, good government media relations is something which we now enjoy and is something which we need not make any apology for. But it is something which we should never take for granted. Each must know and understand the other's point of view. This is especially important when we come to discussing sensitive issues and issues of national importance. To this end, I am glad to note that it is the Information Division's desire to staff every Ministry with a well-trained Public Relations Officer and each Minister with a Press Secretary. Has the Ministry been able to achieve these objectives?

Sir, to make the system work, journalists must also be well trained and well informed. In Singapore the Times Press Foundation School of Journalism was founded in 1977 and it is licensed by the Ministry of Education. I believe that this is the only school of its kind in Singapore. The emphasis is on practical training and so the School of Journalism is a vocational rather than an academic operation. The initial objective of only training journalists has been enlarged over the years. As the public and private sector realize the importance of media communication skills, the School of Journalism is now catering for private sector companies, statutory boards and even government agencies. To quote from the School of Journalism, "There has been an explosion of demand." One area of demand that has been identified is that of getting trained personnel to run in-house newsletters. If I may quote from a senior journalist, "Explosion is no exaggeration. The staff of this newsletter are plucked from personnel of somewhere and told, "From Monday, you are an editor."

Sir, the training of middle level and senior journalists also needs looking into besides providing only basic training. Here, the University could help by conducting extramural courses on specific subjects of interest. Even our Ministers, politicians and senior civil servants, together with specialists in the private sector could be tapped for their specialized knowledge and experience. This could complement the vocational type of training provided by the School of Journalism by providing the academic or philosophical realities of journalism in Singapore.

Sir, in view of the importance of the media communications, it is now timely to consider the setting up of an institution to meet our national needs. This could be set up along the lines of Shatec which receives Government assistance through VITB. Or it could be a department in one of the institutions of higher learning. Combining the resources of the private and public sectors would be in our national interest. With time, this institute could develop into a regional centre for the training of journalists. Will the Minister please comment?

Dr Yeo Ning Hong: Sir, I am happy to report to the House that all Ministries now have got a Public Relations Officer (PRO). The Ministries are appreciative of the fact that it would be useful to have a Public Relations Officer who would then be able to establish rapport with the public. And whenever there are issues of concern to members of the public, there is a simple route, a simple line, for them to get in touch with somebody in the Ministry and convey their concerns or complaints. The Ministers have also got a press secretary. Some Members of this House would probably have seen the writings of some of the press secretaries over the last few months.

Sir, the Ministry is strongly supportive of the point mentioned by the Chairman of the GPC for Communications and Information that the Government should establish close rapport with the media. I think that is useful because in Singapore we are still in the process of building a nation, of trying to bring together people from diverse cultures, people from different backgrounds, to attain the ultimate objective of one nation, one people. To that end, Government officials are available in a number of different ways to interact with the people from the media. For example, Ministers, senior officials, PROs, press secretaries, wherever possible, make themselves available when important issues are being discussed at the national level. Where the media find that there is insufficient background information for them to fully understand the issues at stake, background briefings are often given. Other means of assisting the media include also interviews given by Ministers and senior officials or press conferences when issues are being discussed or when certain Government policies are announced.

The GPC Chairman asked whether it is possible for extramural courses to be conducted for the journalists. Sir, I believe the newspapers themselves are doing an excellent job training their own staff. The media is a private sector activity. They should look after the vocational development and training of their staff. I will be happy to convey to the Minister in charge, the Minister for Education, the Member's point regarding the possibility of our starting an institution in one of our institutes of higher learning. My own personal reaction would be that I do not think there are sufficient numbers of such personnel required on an annual basis, year after year after year, for such an institution to be started. But I am quite happy to pass that suggestion on to the Minister in charge.

Dr Arthur Beng Kian Lam: Sir, could I ask the Minister that if we could convince him that there is a need, will he give us his support?

Dr Yeo Ning Hong: Sir, if a need is demonstrated that large numbers of people with such skills are necessary for the economy, I am quite sure the support will be available, will be forthcoming, not only from me but also from the Minister for Education.

Dr Arthur Beng Kian Lam: Sir, I thank the Minister for his reply and I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The Chairman: Amendment No. 5, Encik Wan Hussin.

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

That the sum to be allocated for Head I be reduced by $10 in respect of Code IE 2000 of the Main Estimates.

Sir, I would like to congratulate the Ministry for its efforts in compiling a repertoire of what it calls "Popular Songs of Singapore." It has managed to assemble about 48 songs - 19 in English, 11 in Malay, 13 in Chinese and 5 in Tamil.

As Singapore's society matures, it needs a balanced development. The non-material aspects of the society's development need constant nurturing. We were once told that we are not a reading society. However, now indications are that the reading habit of Singaporeans as seen by the enrolment in public libraries is improving. Now we want Singaporeans to be a singing society. This is because we do not want Singaporeans to be devoid of its own songs. The First Deputy Prime Minister once related an incident of how his friends had to resort to singing "He is a Jolly Good Fellow" and "Majulah Singapura" when called upon to sing by their foreign hosts.

However, one thing that strikes me in this is the approach that is being adopted in popularizing the Singapore songs. It has taken a materialistic approach. No sooner than the First Deputy Prime Minister lamented at this problem, the Community Relations Division of the MCD, I assume with the concurrence of the MCI, immediately set in motion the competition element to the singing of these songs. Now all constituencies are expected to produce a singing group and in April they are to compete in the preliminary rounds. My question is: why the need for this rush? Has there been any coordination between the two Ministries in this effort at popularizing the Singapore songs?

Sir, we certainly need time to let the public just listen to these songs, appreciate them and to sing them in their own time. If we rush them into competing, we might lose sight of its original intention of making Singaporeans sing for pleasure and enjoyment and instead we will make them sing for money.

We must remember that community songs, like folk songs, live in oral tradition. It is learnt through hearing and singing and not through competition.

The other point is in regard to preserving the original flavour of some of these traditional songs with particular reference to the Malay songs. One song in question is "Chan Mali Chan". It seems to me that the present musical arrangement of this song reminds me of an opening number in a Broadway muscial show. It has lost its indigenous flavour. I am afraid that if this is perpetuated over the years and in the nature of the transmission of oral tradition, some day somebody may say that this song originates from the American pop song. Then we will not be surprised if the song "Chan Mali Chan" will be baptized to become "Charlie come Charlie".

Sir, I would also like the Minister to confirm the origin of one other Malay song, ie, "Dayung Sampan". It is stated in the book that this is a folk song of Chinese origin. Perhaps it would be beneficial to trace the original Chinese version of it and to include it in the present repertoire.

Lastly, could the Minister also elaborate on the various steps to be taken to sustain the effort to popularize these Singapore songs. We do not want this iniitial burst of enthusiasm to fade away after the singing competition.

Dr Yeo Ning Hong: Sir, I thank the Member for Kampong Ubi for his interest in this subject of "Sing Singapore".

I have no doubt that Members in this House will be aware that whenever groups of people gather together to sing, one of the biggest problems is finding a sufficient number of songs that a large number of participants are familiar with. And since many people have participated in years past in uniformed groups or other mass organizations like the Scouts and the Cadets, what inevitably follow will be songs like Clementine, My Bonnie Lies Over the Ocean or He's a Jolly Good Fellow, John Brown's Baby, songs of this sort, totally irrelevant to Singapore today, reminiscent obviously of colonial times.

Sir, it is with this in mind that the Ministry has, jointly with the Ministry of Community Development, got together a group of people who are familiar with music and with songs, from the Ministry of Education, from the Ministry of Community Development, SBC and a number of other organizations, to put together what they consider to be songs that are already reasonably popular and yet at the same time reflective of Singapore, what they term "national songs or community songs". And the songbook "Sing Singapore" is a result of that effort.

Why rush into this, the Member asked. There is no rush at all. We are doing this in our typical Singaporean efficient way. Having decided that it is a good thing to have songs that Singaporeans will enjoy singing, that Singaporeans will be familiar with, we decided to encourage the grassroots organizations to participate. And there is nothing better than a competition to get that participative juice moving. We are not really trying to get people to vie for the prize. The objective of the competition is to get widespread participation and we are trying to get them together in large numbers. So groups can be as large as 200 from each of the grassroots organizations that will be participating. With this competition, straightaway we will have thousands of people in the constituencies, in the civil service, in the schools, familiar with the songs. With that common base it will be a lot easier to try to get the programme off the ground.

The Member also asked whether it would be just a flash in the pan - competition, and nothing else. No. There is a long-term programme to ensure that we help promote these songs that we believe Singaporeans will find themselves happy to sing. So far, we have distributed 5,000 complimentary copies of the cassettes and song book to the various organizations and schools. I am aware that many organizations have already started doing some kind of singing before they begin other social activities. I think this is a good sign. The public has also got on to this and my understanding is more than 9,000 copies of the cassette have already been sold over the last two weeks and more than 8,000 of the song books have also been taken up by private groups.

SBC will obviously be supportive of this programme. They will be playing the popular songs over radio and TV as fillers whenever there are some spare minutes available. The more popular songs will then be used for choreography, for some mass display during the National Day and we will also be getting the choir to sing some of these songs. By then the public would have been very familiar with some of these songs, and will be encouraged to join in the mass singing.

Specifically on the song "Dayung Sampan", our source comes from an earlier song book entitled "36 Best Songs of Malaysia and Singapore" compiled by a lady Aisha Akbar. In her song book, it is recorded that this is a folk song of Chinese origin. We had not taken the time to explore the origin. This is a subject probably best left to historians. What we are interested is finding songs that are representative, and reflective of Singapore. And if they are popular, if it has got a good tune, we will encourage Singaporeans to take it as their own and to sing them.

Encik Wan Hussin bin Hj Zoohri: Sir, my interest in asking the Minister to locate the origin is to see whether we can include another good popular song in this repertoire. The other thing is: would the Minister also, after a lapse of time, make some kind of survey to see, in this range of 48 songs, which songs are more popular than the others because each person has a different reception to all these songs? So after some kind of survey is taken, after a period, we can tell the public that, among these songs, which are the most popular and which are less popular, so that over time we can have another revision. We need not stop at this first book only. Perhaps we could add and subtract a few more songs.

Thirdly, I am encouraged to hear the Minister say that we are doing this in a very efficient Singaporean way. But in terms of aesthetic development, I am not sure whether speed is the only element. Perhaps we should need some time for them to enjoy the songs first. Perhaps here there is a difference of opinion.

Dr Yeo Ning Hong: Sir, the Member suggested that we are doing this with haste. I said a moment ago that it is not really with haste. We started the programme earlier on this year. We are talking about August, in time for National Day. So we are talking about a period of some seven to eight months to get people to be familiar with some of the songs so that they can participate in the mass singing on National Day. I think seven to eight months to get people familiar with some of the songs is really not too much of a rush.

The Member suggested the possibility of a survey. We have indeed started such a survey. We are already keeping records in the Ministry of the sort of songs that people in the various organizations find themselves more drawn to. Songs are, to a large extent, subjective. Those songs that are less popular need not be included in new editions. Some sort of updating will be necessary. So if there are new songs that the Member for Kampong Ubi is aware of that he believes to be reasonably popular, we will be happy to look at them and if they prove to be popular, we will be quite happy to incorporate them in future editions of the song book.

Dr Tan Cheng Bock: Sir, can I just join in? I love singing. I hope that the Minister will take this point. I remember that just before last year's National Day we had this song "Count on me Singapore". I think we are overdoing it a bit too much. Every- where you go, you hear it - on the radio, in shopping centres and even when I enter a lift I hear this song. I think there must be a limit. Let us not overdo it. That is all I want to request.

Dr Yeo Ning Hong: Sir, if the supermarkets and department stores find that playing the song "Count on me Singapore" attracts more customers, it is a good reason to play the song. If you find that the grassroots organizations under no compulsion from anybody, definitely not from the MPs, I am sure, like to sing the song "Count on me Singapore", I think it is a positive thing. It is a good thing. Sir, I would rather have them singing "Count on me Singapore" than "My Way".

Dr Tan Cheng Bock: I think the Minister must understand -

Mr Chandra Das: Don't be personal and get carried away.

Dr Tan Cheng Bock: He got carried away, not me. I was not carried away. But what I am trying to say is that if you overdo it too much, it turns off the person from liking it. I like the song "Count on me Singapore". I think it is a very good song and we all should sing it. I really think we must be very careful about popularizing not only songs but even our campaigns also. Let us not overdo it. They are good. Let us keep it to the minimum and also allow the Singaporeans to digest it in small doses.

Dr Yeo Ning Hong: Sir, if I could just wrap up very quickly this particular item. I am very conscious of the fact that it is possible, as the Member has rightly pointed out, to overdo certain things and get it to a point where it becomes counter-productive. This is why SBC has not pushed songs of this sort beyond a certain stage. But honestly, if the public likes singing that song, I find that positive rather than negative. If we force them to sing, I think that is a different story altogether. But if our grassroots leaders, the various mass organizations really find that it touches a chord in their hearts, I would say, "Well done. That is a good thing."

Encik Wan Hussin bin Hj Zoohri: I thank the Minister for the encouraging reply. I beg to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Dr Arthur Beng Kian Lam: Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head I be reduced by $10 in respect of Code IG 3000 of the Main Estimates.

Sir, I would like to speak briefly on the Public Transport Council. Since the setting up of the Public Transport Council, we have not heard much of the activities of the Council in the media. The GPC on Communications and Information understands that the Council has been very active and diligent in carrying out its duties. Could the Minister please update the House as to (1) the activities of the Council; (2) the issues of public interest discussed by the Council; (3) the controversial issues of public interest discussed by the Council; and (4) whether the Council has commissioned any studies of the public transport system in Singapore, especially with the MRT coming into operation.

Dr Yeo Ning Hong: Sir, since the formation of the Public Transport Council as a result of the suggestion of the GPC on Communications and Information, the Council has been working very actively over the last nine months. The results of their deliberations have been made public except that the public is not made aware of this. Instead of the conventional process of issuing a press release, the Public Transport Council has gone for a more effective way of communication.

The Public Transport council meets regularly, every month, and more frequently if there is any necessity for such a meeting. It decides on the issues, have them fully resolved and then allow the results of their deliberations to be announced by the operators themselves, namely, the bus companies and SMRT. So fares of the SMRT were announced by SMRT and they were announced well ahead of time in order to enable people to read about it and to digest it. So too with frequency changes of buses, with new bus services being introduced, with old services being deleted, with some services being modified. All these were carried in the various media as advertisements. The objective is to get the people to know what changes are going to be made, and these have been done relatively effectively and the number of complaints has been negligible.

Have there been any controversial issues? I think controversial issues result only when there is serious disagreement or when certain parties are unhappy with it. So far, all the issues, although difficult and complex, have been resolved amicably. The public has been very satisfied. An example is the fares of the MRT system. That has worked out reasonably well.

Has the PTC conducted studies on transportation? Sir, the answer is no. PTC should not duplicate the activities of a number of different Ministries concerned with transportation in Singapore. Under the coordination of the Ministry for Communications and Information, there are already engineers, experts and specialists in the three Ministries, namely, Communications and Information, Home Affairs (Traffic Police) and the Ministry for National Development (PWD). ROV is in MCI. There is already built up over the past decades large pools of expertise. It would be counter-productive to want to duplicate all these, yet again, under PTC. What is important is that information that is required, that is appropriate to the deliberations of the PTC, is made available to them in order that they can get a broad overview of issues before they settle on to the details of fares and routes.

Dr Arthur Beng Kian Lam: I thank the Minister for his reply and beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The Chairman: Amendment No. (7). Dr Arthur Beng.

Dr Arthur Beng Kian Lam: Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head I be reduced by $10 in respect of Code IH 5200 of the Main Estimates.

Sir, I would like here to speak on the operational problems and future extensions of the MRT.

Sir, as I mentioned earlier, the MRT has had a successful launch. Most of the teeth- ing problems have been corrected. I only wish to highlight the noise problem. The MRT has responded very quickly to the complaints from residents. For this they must be commended. A $3 million grinder was brought in to smoothen the track and reduce noise levels. Has this been effective in reducing noise levels? What further steps can be initiated to reduce this problem?

Sir, next I move to the extension of the MRT. My GPC has discussed with the Minister and officials of MCI on future plans of MRTC. We have impressed upon them the importance of extending the MRT system in order to best service our entire population. An obvious example is the extension to Woodlands. This can be either by way of Yishun or Choa Chu Kang station. The distance between Yishun station and Woodlands is about 7 km whilst that between Choa Chu Kang station and Woodlands is about 11 km. The terrain along both the routes appears to indicate that an elevated line or even grated level system is possible. The former is considerably cheaper than an underground system. If the majority of residents in Woodlands want to go to Orchard Road or to the City, then it would appear that an extension via Yishun is preferable. The time taken to travel by MRT to Orchard Road via Yishun would be shorter than via Choa Chu Yang. However, the extension to Choa Chu Kang is more appropriate for workers going to Jurong industrial estate. The time taken to get to Boon Lay station via Choa Chu Kang station would be a lot shorter than via Yishun.

May we respectfully suggest that the MRTC carefully ascertain the travel demand of the residents of Woodlands and provide the appropriate link. Consider also land available in Choa Chu Kang and Sembawang and HDB's plans in the future so that the MRT can be made good use of. Furthermore, as we continue our development of Tuas, both our factories and HDB flats, can we also consider extending the MRT beyond Boon Lay to serve future workers and residents in the western sector of our population?

Dr Yeo Ning Hong: Sir, the noise abatement procedure that has been taken by the MRTC has been effective. In particu- lar, responding to the question by the Member, the grinding machine has been effective in reducing the level of noise and inconvenience to residents who live close to the viaducts.

Sir, the approach taken by MRTC in its overall planning has been to go for noise abatement systems that are built into the system so that we keep the noise to the lowest possible level in the first place. Measures taken include constructing the viaducts or high mass concrete that will absorb the noise so that the noise is kept to a minimum in the first place. Other systems introduced include the thermic welding of the rails so that you do not get a gap between two rails. The gap is what is responsible for the clickety-click that is so familiar on our old railway systems. Here the joints are sealed so that it is completely smooth, and hence very much quieter. The wheels have automatic lubrication so that theydo not squeak. The rails are regularly grounded in order that they are smooth. And since they do not have any corrugations they do not give additional noise. These are the systems built into the rails that we have. We are also very pleased that the public has been very supportive and the level of complaints has been extremely low.

On the possibility of extension of the MRT, Sir, it is the intention of the Government to build the MRT and extend it to all parts of Singapore eventually in order that we can best serve the entire population. The objective is to do that so that people can move about easily. Then we will have higher productivity, with less time wasted on travelling. The end result of this, the bonus, is that it would also be possible to develop much more intensively land all over Singapore. So the idea is really to build the MRT all over Singapore. That objective is consistent with our Vision of 1999 - making the MRT available to the largest possible number of Singaporeans. Having said that, Sir, I need to caution that we can do this only after very careful study of demand. If we were to build an extension to a place where there is no demand, what would happen? Running a train to a place where the demand is extremely low will have got to be paid for, and it will have to be paid for by all commuters, whether they go to that out-of-the-way place or not. So it is very important that while we want to build the MRT all over Singapore, we should proceed only when we have established that there is indeed a demand that justifies the extension to that location.

Sir, a couple of months ago I authorized the MRTC to commence study for an extension to Woodlands. The current indications are that the population there is small. But we want to work closely with the Ministry of National Development to understand their plans for the development of that general vicinity, the possibility of development on the Eastern side in the vicinity of Sembawang, Khatib and beyond; and the possibility of development on the other side, the Western side, going up from Bukit Batok, Bukit Panjang, Choa Chu Kang and Jalan Teck Whye, in that general vicinity. We want to have a good look at what the Ministry of National Development has in mind, what is the rate of building as far as flats are concerned in these two possible areas. If the demand in those areas suggests that a MRT to Woodlands would be operationally viable, that it would be able to pay for itself by way of operating cost, then we can look forward to an extension to Woodlands.

The same argument, Sir, applies also to extensions to Tuas and other areas. I need to caution Members of the House to remember that a study is a fact-finding exercise. It is not a conclusion. Members will probably recall that we carried out a fairly comprehensive study of Changi some two years back. The end result of that study was to confirm our initial belief that there was indeed not sufficient traffic in Changi to warrant an MRT extension to Changi.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: Point of clarification, Sir. Is the Hon. Minister aware that there is a MRT viaduct that is being built into Pasir Ris New Town, and the New Town is not yet completed?

Dr Yeo Ning Hong: Sir, we are aware that there is a viaduct going into Pasir Ris because that is part of Phase 2B of the present MRT system.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: In that case, Sir, how is it that Pasir Ris, which is not yet completed, has an MRT line viaduct already in considerable progress of development?

Dr Yeo Ning Hong: Sir, the viaduct is for Phase 2B which is already under progress. It is under construction. If all things proceed smoothly, if the public continues to give us their full cooperation and if there is a minimum amount of delay, we hope to be able to go to Pasir Ris when it is populated by the middle of 1990.

Mr Ng Kah Ting: In that case, Sir, can I ask whether Hougang can also have that kind of enjoyment?

Dr Yeo Ning Hong: Sir, a study has already been commissioned some two years back to consider the possibility of a new route all the way from the City up to Punggol. This is generally referred to as the North-East line. This matter is now coming close to conclusion. A decision will be taken over the next few months, bearing in mind Ministry of National Development's plans. The line will go all the way through to Hougang and on to Punggol as part of Phase 3 of the MRT system.

Dr Arthur Beng Kian Lam: Sir, I thank the Minister for all his replies and beg leave to withdraw the motion.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The Chairman: Amendment No. (8). Mr Leong.

Mr Leong Horn Kee (Thomson): Sir, do you want me to speak today or leave it to next Monday?

The Chairman: I think you can start now.

Mr Leong Horn Kee: Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head I be reduced by $10 in respect of Code IJ 5200 of the Development Estimates.

Sir, in moving this amendment, I would like to suggest some improvements to the SBC programmes. First, I would like to congratulate the SBC for having done some very good local serials in the last few years. These serials have become very popular and have gained very high viewership. I wonder whether the Minister would like to consider introducing serials in the English language whereby the SBC can use more local actors of different race groups and these local serials can depict more of the Singapore culture in in English language.

The second point, Sir, is in terms of the SBC programmes from 5 to 7 pm. Now very often there are many children's programmes, eg cartoons, or similar shows that interest children. Could we not also introduce an educational programme during this period whereby you can use it to teach languages or computer training.

The third point, Sir, is on the use of Channel 12. At the moment Channel 12 is commonly used to show Shakespearean films of the Canterbury Tales genre and the like, as well as wrestling. Could the Minister consider expanding the coverage in Channel 12 to other cultural events from the region, eg, shows depicting regional culture in Malaysia, Indonesia or Thailand? Through more exposure to such programmes, we can have a better understanding of the cultural heritage of our neighbours.

The Chairman: Order. Moment of interruption.

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

Mr Wong Kan Seng: I think the Member has spoken too fast. He may have to repeat what he has said on Monday.

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I beg to report that the Committee of Supply has made further progress on the Main and Development Estimates for the financial year 1988/89, and ask leave to sit again on Monday, 21st March, 1988.

Mr Deputy Speaker: So be it.