TOWN COUNCILS BILL

Order for Second Reading read.

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

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, 20 months ago, we started a pilot Town Council project in Ang Mo Kio New Town. We wanted to see how residents can participate in the management of public housing estates. As the national housing authority, the Housing and Development Board has to provide the same amenities and have the same rules and regulations in all estates. This is the only equitable approach when one housing authority is responsible for the management of all public housing estates. There is little room for the HDB to vary what it provides to suit individual estates and neighbourhoods. Such flexibility is possible with the setting up of Town Councils, under which residents can decide for themselves the kind of living environment that they want. Each Town can then develop a distinctive character of its own according to local conditions and the desires of its residents. Town residents can participate in the day-to-day running of their estates. This will help to enhance their sense of belonging and instil responsibility and pride in them for their immediate surroundings.

The Ang Mo Kio pilot projects have shown that self-management is a workable concept for public housing estates. In the Ang Mo Kio Town Councils, residents have participated with enthusiasm in the running of their own estates - making suggestions and proposals to shape their living environment to give it a distinctive character. Various committees have been formed, such as a Business Liaison Committee and an Environmental Committee. These involve more people in making decisions on maintenance or improvement over and above existing standard facilities.

In Ang Mo Kio West Council, for example, the residents and Councillors embarked on a project costing $62,000 to paint large wall murals at void decks to liven up the surroundings. This has given a distinctive feature to the neighbourhood. They also constructed additional staircase access to the Ang Mo Kio Town Garden West and improved estate landscaping by providing a small Japanese Garden and a mini-garden with benches and colourful shrubs. This may be considered small projects but they do show what residents would like to do if they are given the responsibility to decide things for themselves. Other projects undertaken by residents in the pilot Town Councils include the provision of additional carpark facilities to accommodate residents patronizing shops and markets in Ang Mo Kio West and the installation of new play equipment in selected playgrounds in Ang Mo Kio East.

In carrying out these projects, residents had to make their own decisions on how to allocate limited funds available to the Councils for projects that bring benefits to all residents living in the estate. As another example, the Ang Mo Kio South Council agreed to allocate a sum of $20,000 to improve the Town Garden in their area. It is conceivable that for more ambitious projects and more ambitious improvement works, the residents may be willing to make a small contribution in addition to whatever charges they are paying now with a small additional contribution going to meet the new improvement work of special project.

There is scope for more such cooperation among residents. The experience of Ang Mo Kio residents shows conclusively that the concept of Town Council can be applied successfully to other HDB estates to allow residents to participate more in such decision-making on local estate management matters.

The Government has, therefore, in the light of the experience in the pilot projects in Ang Mo Kio, decided to extend the concept of Town Councils to all constituencies with HDB estates. Thus we have this Bill before the House.

An important feature of the pilot project, and which is incorporated in the Bill, is for Members of Parliament to be Chairmen of Town Councils and to select or nominate the other Town Councillors. There are very important reasons for this - reasons that have to do with our survival under the system of representative government. It is crucial to understand the philosophy and arguments for this approach and the First Deputy Prime Minister, who will speak after me, will explain and elaborate on this aspect.

The Bill before the House provides for the incorporation of Town Councils, their constitution and their functions.

The main provisions in the Bill follow recommendations by a Working Committee which was chaired by the Minister of State for National Development. This Committee which met between May 1987 and Feburary 1988 was in turn guided by a Ministerial Steering Committee chaired by the First Deputy Prime Minister. The three Chairmen of the pilot Town Councils in Ang Mo Kio sat on both Committees and provided valuable feedback based on their experience in running the pilot Town Councils. This Bill, therefore, has been very thoroughly considered and it is not just something drafted by legal draftsmen. It has the benefit of very high level consideration and the actual experience that we have had so far in Ang Mo Kio.

Under the Bill, the Minister is empowered to designate as a Town an area comprising any single constituency or a combination of two or three constituencies where the Members of Parliament have agreed to their constituencies being combined. The advantages of combination or grouping are obvious - it facilitates amenity sharing and more economical use of resources resulting in cost savings. It is also obvious that where Members of Parliament have different ideas, it will be counter- productive to force them to group themselves together into one Town Council.

A Town Council will consist of all Members of Parliament for the constituencies comprised within the Town. In addition, the Chairman of the Town Council can appoint not less than six or more than 30 members and these members have to be nominated by the Members of Parliament within the Town. At least two-thirds of the appointed members must be residents of the Town. This is to ensure that Council decisions reflect the views of the residents. At the same time provision is made for those not living within the Town to be also on a Town Council because Town Councils may be able to benefit from the expertise and experience of people living outside the Town. But in order to make sure that the views and interests of the residents within the Town are well reflected and protected, at least two-thirds of the appointed members must be residents.

The Chairman is appointed by the Members of Parliament of the Town Council from among their number. In the case of a single-constituency Council, the Member of Parliament for that constituency is the Chairman.

The functions of a Town Council are to control, manage, maintain and improve the common areas of the residential and commercial property in the housing estates of the HDB within the Town. A Town Council shall have the powers to:

(a) establish and maintain places and facilities for recreation, relaxation and other educational and cultural purposes;

(b) provide and maintain additional facilities or make improvements to existing facilities;

(c) acquire and hold property of any description provided this is necessary for the performance of its functions; and

(d) impose charges for the use of facilities or services.

A Town Council may also by agreement with the HDB maintain the common areas in an industrial property and manage the operations of car parks, markets and hawker centres located within the Town. These are additional responsibilities which a Town Council can opt to take on when it is ready to do so.

The Bill provides Town Councils with the necessary authority to carry out these functions. It can make by-laws for the purpose of carrying out such functions and duties. It is empowered to appoint a Secretary, agents and other staff to assist it in carrying out its functions and duties.

The Bill also provides the following financial provisions:

(a) The Government may make grants-in-aid to Town Councils;

(b) Town Councils are required to set up and maintain sinking funds to enable the carrying out of cyclical repair works. Contributions to the funds must not be lower than the prescribed rates;

(c) Town Councils may borrow money for such purposes as meeting expenses incurred in respect of cyclical repair works; and

(d) Town Councils can invest their surplus funds that are not immediately required in trustee stocks.

For estate management, the Government will provide the Town Councils with the same financing as that now provided to the Housing and Development Board. The grants-in-aid to be provided will be worked out based on the HDB's current rate of service and conservancy expenditure. In other words, households in estates managed by Town Councils will be subsidized at levels no less than that of households in estates which come directly under HDB management. The quantum of grants will vary with flat-types and with the age of the flats. To start off Town Councils on a sound footing, the Government will, in the initial years, provide additional financial assistance in the form of grants and soft loans for capital projects. Details of the financial package which will be given to Town Councils are being finalized and will be released in due course.

The Bill provides certain powers to Town Councils to enable the recovery of unpaid service and conservancy charges. This is to ensure that Town Council operations are not hampered by cashflow problems arising from non-payment of these charges. Specifically, the Town Councils are empowered to:

(a) recover the arrears due in a Small Claims Tribunal;

(b) go to Court for a writ of seizure and sale of movable property belonging to the owner; and

(c) impose a charge and, upon expiry of the notice of intention to sell, dispose of the flat.

The Members of Parliament and their appointed councillors will be fully accountable to the residents for their actions and decisions. From the point of view of HDB residents, the formation of Town Councils will give greater opportunities to the people for direct participation in the management of their housing blocks and their surroundings. As I have said, residents will be more directly involved than now in decision-making on matters that affect their immediate living and social environment. The Town Councils Bill will provide the framework for individual HDB estates to reflect the aspirations and creativity of the residents. In the long run, we should find that different estates and different towns will take on a different character and people will not complain that every HDB town or estate looks the same. It is up to the people to determine for themselves how they want to shape the environment, what kind of additional facilities they want to put in and how well they want to maintain their surroundings.

This Bill represents the result of nine months of intensive work by officers of 10 Government Ministries and Departments and the Chairmen of the three Ang Mo Kio Town Councils. They have come up with this framework which incorporates the necessary powers and latitudes for the effective functioning of Town Councils with sufficient in-built safeguards to protect the interest of the residents.

Sir, I beg to move,

Question proposed.

11.52 am

The First Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Defence (Mr Goh Chok Tong): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, the Minister for National Development has already explained the reasons for the Town Council Bill. I want to elaborate on the philosophy behind the Bill.

In 1984 and early 1985, before and after the General Elections, we pledged to seek the participation of our people, both young and old, in building an even better Singapore. We also emphasized the need to provide stabilizers to our democratic political system. This Bill will contribute to the attainment of the two philosophical objectives.

First, it transfers some power from the HDB to the MPs and grassroots leaders. It gives them, and the residents, greater power and responsibility to manage their own affairs and to participate in their estate's development.

Second, because MPs will have increased authority and responsibility, voters will be more likely to vote carefully and sincerely, and to choose honest and effective MPs.

Town Councils will make it harder for weaker candidates to win, whichever political party they come from. But it will not prevent the stronger ones from winning. They will, in fact, help opposition parties if they are able to assemble strong candidates. By getting voters to vote according to their true preferences, Town Councils will add ballast and stability to our political system.

This Bill gives more power and responsibility to MPs, and also to the grassroots leaders who become Town Councillors. After the Bill is passed, they, and not the HDB, will be responsible for managing the social and physical environment of their constituencies.

I know that some MPs are apprehensive about this responsibility. So also are many grassroots leaders. They are used to the job being done for them by the HDB. And I believe, of late, many have started saying that HDB has done a good job. It is an indication of their apprehension over having to assume new responsibility. But it is right to change, and to devolve some of HDB's power into the hands of local constituency leaders and the elected MP.

It was never the original intention that HDB should become the management corporation for 80% of our population. This situation has evolved by itself, as HDB built more and more housing estates every year, and just continued to manage and look after the flats which they have sold off to the people. Bear in mind that the HDB makes housing rules for 2 million people. That is over-centralization and such over-centralization is undesirable. While the HDB has discharged its responsibilities admirably, it has done this at a price. The price is uniformity and a rather inflexible set of rules.

A central agency must be strict and must be uniform in its decisions. It cannot exercise flexibility nor make quick decisions at the constituency level. If it is generous in one constituency, other constituencies will demand equal treatment. When some constituencies have PAP MPs and others Opposition MPs, it is even harder to be flexible without being accused of bias. Even being fair can lead to complaints of bias. Take, for example, the Member for Potong Pasir. When he was not allowed to plant a tree in Potong Pasir where he wanted, he complained loudly that HDB was biased, even though no other MP has been allowed to plant a tree wherever he wants to.

Furthermore, as things stand, decisions are not made by people who are affected by them. The grassroots leaders, most of whom live in the constituency and know it well, and the MPs, who have been elected by the people to represent and look after them, can recommend to HDB what they want, but do not have the final say as to what goes in into the constituency. They must pass every request to HDB, even trivial matters like installing benches in void decks for old folks or putting up poles for bird singing. They have neither the power to decide nor the responsibility for making things work.

HDB, on the other hand, has all the power to decide, but not the speed of decision-making, especially if a request is the first of its kind, say, a covered walkway between a market and a block of flats. This is not a criticism of HDB or HDB staff, but a recognition of the problem arising from centralization of decision-making.

Requests from constituencies have to be carefully considered because once approval is given, it has to be applied uniformly throughout the country. So we can understand why HDB has to exercise extreme caution. In doing so, they take longer to decide even small municipal matters, and sometimes must say "no" to projects which are worthy but which may set expensive precedent.

There is another problem with centralized decisions. In the long run, it must lead to a dependent mentality among our people. The more HDB decides for the people, the less the people know how to do things for themselves. This is not conducive to developing self-reliant communities and community leaders. It certainly does not foster the development of a vibrant and creative society.

Ideally, people should decide things for themselves. They should make their own decisions. If they make a good decision, they benefit from it. If they make a wrong decision, hopefully they learn from it.

If they run their Town Councils efficiently, their constituencies will be safe, clean and green. If they do not, they only have themselves to blame. We should let them decide on the types and levels of services which they want for their constituents or how they want their estates landscaped.

It should be up to the Member for Potong Pasir to decide where he wants to plant that "very rare, exotic tree". I do not know whether he still remembers the name of the tree. What was that? I think it is called Sterculia Nobilis. Am I right? But seriously, it is up to him to decide which tree he wants to plant in Potong Pasir and where he wants to plant it. Or even to rear chickens if he likes in Potong Pasir, and not to waste the time of MPs in Parliament debating over such matters. Short of any hazards to public health, public safety, and public order, why should the HDB be involved?

Mr Chiam See Tong: Right.

Mr Goh Chok Tong: So the Member for Potong Pasir supports this point.

Mr Chiam See Tong: Does Potong Pasir have Town Councils?

Mr Goh Chok Tong: Town councils not only give power to the MP in his constituency but also strengthen the position of the many grassroots leaders who become Town Councillors. They will now have the authority to decide on how they want their constituencies to be managed. When grassroots leaders must weigh the consequences of their decisions and not just the attractiveness of their requests, their perspective changes very quickly. They consider trade-offs between one project and another. They worry about where to find the funds to pay for their ideas. They are concerned about how to present their decisions to the residents so that they can get the residents to cooperate with them. They defend decisions made with more conviction, because these were their own decisions and they know why they were taken.

Today's Singaporeans want to be involved in decision-making, especially decisions which affect them directly. They want room to express their views and to participate. It is a good thing that they want to do so. We encourage them.

Town Councils will be the mechanism to provide a new generation of Singaporeans with the opportunity to participate in the social and physical management of their own housing estates.

Three Town Councils have been running in Ang Mo Kio for nearly two years. The acid test is this. Would any one of them, any one of the three, prefer to hand back their power to the HDB and go back to the status quo ante? I have asked the three Chairmen and the MPs concerned. None of them want to give it up.

Now I shall move on to discuss how Town Councils enhance the stability of our political system.

Every democratic political system needs ballast to prevent it from being overturned by temporary swings in popular opinion. Let me give you examples from Britain, Japan and the United States.

In Britain, although there are more than two political parties, political stability comes essentially from the presence of two major parties, which can take over from one another to form the government. Also, the country is divided into richer and poorer constituencies, and many of the constituencies are safe seats for either the Labour Party or the Conservative Party. They return MPs from the same party, election after election, for decades. Cities like Glasgow or Liverpool are permanently Labour. Well-off rural areas like those in Cambridgeshire are permanently Tory.

British elections are therefore really fought in a relatively small number of seats, the marginal seats, or marginal wards, and not throughout the whole country, because certain areas will vote Labour or Tory traditionally. In these wards, the balance of strength of the parties is almost even, and a small shift in the percentage of votes can change the MP, or the government. But while the government may change because of this shift in loyalty in the marginal wards, the British Parliament itself retains a certain degree of political stability.

In Japan, the farm vote provides the stability. Farmers vote solidly for the LDP because the LDP looks after their interests. The Japanese keep their rural constituencies much smaller than urban ones, in terms of voters, about one-third the size of the urban constituencies. The farmers therefore have political influence out of proportion to their numbers. One urban constituency is roughly equal to three rural constituencies. And it is in the rural constituencies where the votes are for the LDP.

Because of these arrangements, although the opposition Japan Socialist Party, Komeito, and others, often do well in the cities, they have no hope of forming the government. The Japanese pay a cost though for this arrangement. This cost is high food prices as a result of price supports for farm products. But the benefit is more than 30 years of stable government, and many more years of such stability to come.

In the United States, the Senate was explicitly constituted to balance the short term interest and concerns of the House of Representatives. Representatives must get elected every two years, senators only once in every six years. So two years election in the House of Representatives, six years in the Senate. Representatives are highly susceptible to popular pressure, the senators much less so. Senators do not have to worry so closely about their day-to-day popularity. So they can take a longer viewpoint of issues of national interest and support correct but unpopular policies, if necessary.

Furthermore, Senators' re-elections are staggered. Every two years, only one-third of the Senate is up for re-election. As a result, it is impossible for a sudden, temporary change in popular mood to overwhelm both the House and the Senate simultaneously, and cause political chaos.

Singapore's political system enjoys none of these sources of stability. In Britain, stability comes from the traditional support for either the Labour or Conservative Party. In Japan, it comes from the farm votes. In the US, it comes from the different timing in electing Congressmen. In Singapore, it is the PAP which provides the political stability. There is no other party at present which can effectively govern Singapore. But this political stability can be threatened by sudden temporary swings in national mood. If there are such swings, the PAP can be out of power. If that happens, political instability will result because no alternative leadership has emerged which can effectively govern Singapore.

In Singapore, except for a few constituencies like Tanglin, Chua Chu Kang and Joo Chiat, all our constituencies are microcosms of Singapore. They are all HDB estates, and every estate has about the same racial and socio-economic composition. That is because we have taken care to have a mix of flat types and of different races in all our new towns, and are upgrading the older ones to do likewise and to be likewise. There are no slums or pockets of despair anywhere in Singapore. We have no farm vote, which supports the status quo. We have no Upper House, no Senators to absorb the backlash of unpopular policies. There are no inherently safe seats for one party or other. Any temporary swing in national mood will affect all constituencies simultaneously.

Town Councils should provide this missing stabilizer to trim sudden, temporary drastic swings. With Town Councils, it will matter more to the voter who his MP is. His MP will head the Town Council which looks after his living environment. Because of this, voters will have a stronger incentive to vote carefully and sincerely, ie, for the person and the party who they think they can depend on to manage their constituency and look after the country as well, whether it is the PAP, the SDP or the Workers' Party.

If they have confidence that the candidate can look after their constituency, they are more likely to have confidence that the candidate's party can form the next government of Singapore. Certainly, if the voters cannot even trust a party to run their constituency, they will surely not want that party to form the government. They may be right or wrong in their choice, but at least they will vote in accordance with their belief that their constituency and national interests are better served with a particular candidate or a particular party.

At present, MPs have no direct responsibility for their constituencies. They are not directly responsible for the welfare of the voters in their constituencies. The Government is. It is, therefore, quite safe for voters to cast their votes for a candidate they would never pick to manage their constituency. For example, some voters who want a PAP Government also want to see some Opposition MPs. They may vote for an Opposition candidate and depend on the PAP to look after their constituency because they expect other constituencies to return PAP candidates in sufficient numbers to form the government. This phenomenon is sometimes called "the free-rider" problem, or the have-your-cake-and-eat-it syndrome.

If everyone free-rides, Singaporeans may end up with a government nobody really wanted. This free-riding problem is serious because not everyone need to think the same way for the unwanted result to happen. At any one time, some 25% to 30% of the electorate will vote against the Government, any government for that matter. These are the anti-estab- lishment, disaffected votes. They will vote against any government. All it takes to upset the status quo is for an additional 20% to 25% of the electorate to free-ride, ie, voting opposition and hoping other constituencies will vote for the PAP for the government.

If we use the 1984 general elections as the benchmark, the status quo will be upset when only 13% of the electorate free-ride.

I do not know the views of the Member for Potong Pasir on Town Councils. But he should welcome this Bill. It adds stability to the political system, but more important for him, it also benefits Opposition parties. The more power and responsibility MPs are given at the constituency level, the more the Opposition parties can demonstrate to voters that they are worthy of trust and are ready to take on greater responsibilities.

Mr Chiam's authority is now limited in Potong Pasir. With Town Councils he will have more authority plus the opportunity to demonstrate his ability. That was how the PAP came to power - contesting the City Councils in December 1957 and going on to win the general elections in 1959. This is also how many French politicians make their way to Parliament, by getting themselves elected as Town Councillors.

Town Councils provide a stepping stone for political parties without any track record to demonstrate to voters that it can manage the country. If a party can manage Town Councils well, it will prove its competence in at least one area - good administration which is the prerequisite of any government.

In Britain, one of the problems which the Labour Party now faces in winning elections is that its Front Bench contains few members with ministerial experience. The British Labour Party has been in power many times before this. Even then, their present lack of experienced men, men who have been in government before, causes voters to hesitate. How much bigger the problem must be for a new party in Singapore. If a new party finds itself unexpectedly in government, it would be like an aspiring pilot taking over an SIA jumbo jet in mid-air before he has flown solo in a Cessna. This cannot be in the interest of passengers in the jumbo. If any party aspires to displace the PAP government, its first step must be to try and acquire some experience in running Town Councils. Town Councils are the Cessnas of our political system. In the interest of Singapore, any party which wants to form the government should prove itself first in Town Councils.

On election night in 1984, when the Member for Potong Pasir was elected, he said that he would make Potong Pasir a model constituency. I have not read that he has succeeded.

Mr Chiam See Tong: I need some time.

Mr Goh Chok Tong: He will doubtless blame that his hands are tied, and put the blame on the Government. He will blame his lack of success on the Government.

Mr Chiam See Tong: I can't plant a tree.

Mr Goh Chok Tong: He could not plant a tree. With Town Councils, he will have his chance to plant his tree, to prove himself, provided he wins the next elections. And if he proves himself, his party may be able to convince other constituencies to vote for it at subsequent elections.

In fact, this was what some PAP MPs feared. They were concerned with the possibility that Opposition parties will win some seats, prove themselves, and from there fan out to other constituencies in subsequent elections. They will be able to do so if they can prove to the constituents that they can run the Town Councils as well as the PAP Town Councils.

Mr Chiam See Tong: Better.

Mr Goh Chok Tong: I concede this possibility. My response is: if this happens in the future, is it necessarily a loss for Singapore? If Opposition parties can grow and threaten the PAP in this way, it must be because they have proven themselves to be as good as the PAP.

Many PAP MPs have come and gone. We all should come and go. And if the PAP itself should one day become infirm and incompetent, the whole PAP Government should go. Our primary responsibility is to ensure that there are always dedicated, honourable men and women in Parliament to look after the interests of Singapore. We are not interested in being here just for the sake of being here. We owe our people the responsibility to ensure that there will always be good men and women in Parliament to look after their interests. If we succeed in this, it does not really matter which party is in charge.

Town councils will encourage the voters to look at their candidates more critically, more carefully. They will favour competent, dedicated and trustworthy men and women. This alone is sufficient reason to support the Bill.

Political parties are supposed to put up such dedicated and honourable men and women for election by the voters. If they do, the voters have a choice. It will be a choice between two or three good candidates for Parliament. Then parliamentary democracy will work. If they do not, voters are given a Hobson's choice, then parliamentary democracy must fail. We believe that the Town Councils Bill will get voters to demand better quality candidates of the political parties. If Opposition parties begin to field good candidates, they will have as good a chance of winning elections as the PAP. Then we may have the beginning of a two-party system in Singapore.

To sum up, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, Town Councils will allow Singaporeans to participate actively in the management of their own affairs. They decentralize and speed up decision-making. They devolve authority from the HDB to the Member of Parliament and the Town Councillors. They remove uniformity and introduce individuality into each constituency. In addition, Town Councils will encourage voters to vote carefully and to examine and to assess their candidates critically. This will provide a ballast to our political system. MPs will now have a direct impact on their lives, at the constituency level, and not just through their performance in Parliament. These candidates must have at least the ability to chair Town Council meetings, to run Town Councils, to manage people, and the competence to manage the living environment of the constituents.

If the objectives of the Town Councils Bill are realized, the Bill will be a major contribution to our system of parliamentary democracy. Like the GRCs, the Town Councils Bill is another significant step forward in evolving a political system that will work for Singapore. I commend this Bill to you. [Applause.] 12.27 pm

Mr S. Chandra Das (Chong Boon): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I rise to support the Town Councils Bill that is before this House.

Sir, I have had the privilege to participate in a pilot Town Council project as Chairman of the Ang Mo Kio East Town Council. I am taking this opportunity to present to this House a report entitled "Overview of Ang Mo Kio East Town Council (1 September 1986 to 25 June 1988)." With your permission, Sir, may I ask the Clerk to distribute the report. [Copies of report distributed to hon. Members.] In presenting this report, I am of the opinion that this report would be of assistance to hon. Members of this House to understand what really happened in the 22-month pilot project.

Sir, this report basically covers the operations and reviews achievements, grey areas and problems encountered. The report also touches on reactions from residents, industrial tenants, market stallholders and shopkeepers. It also looks into the impact it has had on grassroots leaders in Ang Mo Kio East Town Council. Finally, Sir, it also looks at some of the shortcomings, difficulties and concerns as well as the future outlook of Town Councils in Singapore. What I want to do now is really to highlight some of these items contained in the report and respectfully hope that the Minister will clarify some of the concerns.

Sir, I am concerned about the role of Town Council vis-a-vis community relations and other developments. My question to the Minister is: should community relations not be part of Town Council responsibility rather than remain a responsibility of the Ministry of Community Development? Another concern which I would like to pose to the Minister is in relation to agency work undertaken by Town Councils. The offer for Town Councils to manage car parks, hawker centres, must be made in a meaningful way. Why, Sir, should Town Councils take on existing activity if there are no prospects of getting into even a breakeven situation? The present offer by HDB to manage car parks, hawker centres is definitely unacceptable as it would mean that Town Councils would have to raise parking charges if they are to take over the management of car parks.

Sir, it is important from the point of view of Town Councils for the Minister to categorically state that any service or function taken over by Town Councils should in no way be less favourable than the present terms given to HDB estates.

Sir, we have another problem in Town Councils. This refers to arrears of conservancy and service charges. I am sure this is a problem not only in Town Council estates but also in other HDB estates. As for Ang Mo Kio East Town Council, the arrears stood at $378,881. This problem has to be solved and the responsibility for collection must be clearly defined.

Sir, my Town Councillors and I are also worried about inherent building defects, for example, water seepage through external walls and also the question of spalling concrete. I would like to ask the Minister whether HDB would continue to undertake such major repairs at its cost. It would be extremely difficult for Town Councils to meet cost of repairs which are inherent in the building and taken over by Town Councils.

Sir, I have also addressed some other problems, on grey areas in the report. But I shall not go into detail.

Sir, I am pleased to say that reaction from residents, industrial tenants, market stallholders and shopkeepers, as far as the pilot project in Ang Mo Kio East is concerned, has been an extremely positive one. My Council conducted a survey and the survey results are contained in the report. As for me, Sir, having been involved for 22 months, I must say it has been a very gratifying experience. Even more gratifying is the change that has brought about upon grassroots leaders. They have become more pragmatic and cost conscious in discharging their responsibilities, balancing expectations against limited resources available at their disposal. Previously, I believe they used to consider things or issues in isolation. Now when considering and examining requests for facilities, they view from a broader view or broader perspective of the Town Council.

Sir, in conclusion, may I say that the Town Council concept in our experience has been a good one and it helps to instil on residents a new sense of responsibility. In our opinion, it also allows the development of a distinctive style and character of the estate through fostering a sense of community belonging.

We believe, for the Town Council to be successful, there must be three ingredients. Firstly, Sir, it must have the positive support of all residents. This is the major ingredient. Secondly, the quality of both elected and appointed members of the Town Council is important. Here, quality includes ability, commitment, dedication, integrity and also pragmatism, and lastly, but not the least, the competence of the professional staff engaged in the daily running of the estate. We in our Council have been privileged to have an extremely competent staff.

Sir, with these remarks, I would urge this House to accept this Bill.

Mr Heng Chiang Meng (Jalan Kayu): Thank you, Sir, for giving me a chance to speak in support of this Bill.

Sir, I agree with the objectives of the Bill and the views and comments that have been expressed so far and therefore I would not want to touch on the macro issues touched by the First Deputy Prime Minister. However, Sir, as an MP involved in Ang Mo Kio Town Council project, may I bring up some details of the Bill which I think will help to make Town Councils a success.

Sir, we all know that the main objective of the Town Councils Bill is to shift the responsibility of estate management to the Town Councils, and we all want Town Councils to be a success. However, Sir, responsibility has to come with authority and in that respect the Bill provides for sufficient authority. However, authority is only but one of the twin pillars that is necessary to support responsibility.

Sir, the other pillar is money. The Town Council unfortunately needs money besides authority to carry out its responsibilities. And so therefore it seems very strange that the function generating the greatest amount of revenue or net income is specifically taken away from a Town Council. In this respect, the Member for Chong Boon (my Town Council Chairman) has already brought up the question of car parks. If you look at definitions in the Bill, car parks are specifically excluded from "common property". Sir, this means that the income from the car park fees collected is also not accrued to the Town Councils but to HDB. My question, of course, is why? But if you look under clause 19(2), Sir, a Town Council may manage any parking place upon such terms and conditions as may be agreed between the Town Council and the Board. That is the key phrase because the Board can make these terms and conditions so onerous that very little income, or in fact no income at all, may accrue to a Town Council. Is it a question of the Board unwilling to surrender this lucrative source of income? Because, after all, the facilities and the land belong to the Board. Since, the Town Council and the servants of a Town Council are public servants, I see no reason why the carparks cannot be transferred to the Town Council free of charge.

Sir, clause 21(1)(d) confers the responsibility of lift rescue and other essential maintenance services to the Town Council. There are two points that I would like to bring up under this particular clause. One is, I think, the Bill needs to define what exactly are essential maintenance services other than lift rescue services. This is important because the word "essential" is a very subjective word. What may be essential to a Town Council may not be so to the residents or vice-versa. And what may be essential to the Government may not be so to the Town Council.

Sir, in any event, I feel that lift rescue services at this point in time should not be given to the Town Council, which means that the responsibility of maintaining these services should not be given to the Town Council because I feel that the Town Coun- cils are not equipped to maintain this very important essential service. Of course, the HDB can always say that it can provide a company or a department to provide these services to the Town Councils. But it is different from the HDB being responsible for it. I feel that the responsibility for the maintenance of lift rescue services should remain with HDB. And, of course, the HDB can charge a fee to whichever Town Council that uses the services.

Sir, under clause 33(4), the Bill establishes a Town Council Fund and sinking funds. The Town Council Fund will be for normal expenditure and the sinking funds will be for specific expenditure. Clause 33(6) details the very specific expenditure that can be disbursed from the sinking funds and at the same time it gives a very general cover for the disbursement from the Town Council Fund so long as the expenditure is "for he purpose of exercising its powers or carrying out its duties and functions under this or any other Act." There is really nothing wrong with this particular definition. But we must transpose this with the fact that the responsibility of the HDB as an owner and a landlord of various buildings and properties is silent. Sir, then my question is, what responsibility has the HDB got towards maintenance of some of the common property which I think should be the HDB's? Because it will be very easy for the HDB in subsequent years to say that the Town Council should be responsible and the Town Council can use its Town Council Fund for those responsibilities.

Sir, I think my Chairman has brought up this issue. But let us say, for example, some building defects are discovered, say, after three years. Then the question is, who will be responsible? Should it be the responsibility of the Town Council to repair these defects? Or should it be the responsibility of the HDB to ensure that its own property remains in good order?

Sir, again we look at clause 36. This particular clause requires the Town Council to display annually for public view detailed estimates of revenue and expenditure for every financial year. There is nothing wrong with that. But what is wrong is that it also includes a list of works to be undertaken, its estimated cost, expected date of completion, amount to be expended within the financial year or the next financial year. Under this definition, every small work undertaken by a Town Council needs to be displayed. My question of course is; is the HDB presently doing this? Because this will entail a lot of work, I believe, on the staff of the Town Councils.

I would suggest that instead of this very difficult task of fulfilling the requirements of the Bill, the Bill should be amended to say that the annual audited accounts should be displayed for public view and that the estimates for the following year be made; in the same format as the annual audited accounts. And perhaps for the list of works that need to be displayed, such supplementary information need only include major works and not all types of works. For these major works, for example, there can be a cut-off, maybe on a quantum basis, say, if it exceeds an expenditure of $100,000 or if it exceeds 1% of the total expenditure of a Town Council.

Sir, I would now like to come to this question of conservancy and service charges in clause 38. Clause 38 makes it the responsibility of Town Councils to collect these charges from the owners if they own the flats or the stalls or from the tenants if it is rented out from the HDB. Here, I think the HDB being the owner of those rental flats or stalls should be responsible for the charges. In fact they are because if these stalls are empty, during the period when the stalls are empty the HDB actually pays for the charges. So while it is being rented out, I think it should be the responsibility of the Town Council to collect it from the HDB and not collect it from the tenants. Because after all the Town Council is not involved in the letting out or the termination of any lease. It will be very difficult for a Town Council to collect the fees or the charges from a tenant when it is rented out or from the HDB when it is vacant because the Town Council would not know at which point or when these properties are vacant or rented out. So it will be easier for a Town Council to just collect the fees from the owner, that is, the HDB. Just like in any other normal case in Singapore, the owner, that is, HDB, should collect it from the tenants themselves. They can do so when they collect the rental payments.

Sir, the other point is under clause 38(3). It is not clear who should be responsible to the Town Council for past unpaid conservancy and service charges. I said "responsible to the Town Council" because whoever is in occupation of the particular property during that period will be responsible. But here it appears that the responsibility of collecting these charges rests on the Town Council to collect from the past tenant. Sir, I do not think this is correct. In standard practice regarding property, such past due charges are collected from the prevailing owner. And it is up to the prevailing owner to collect from the past owner. Legally, there are a lot of procedures for such legal documentation in property transactions. These procedures are already well established. Here we should simply follow market practices that are currently observed. We should not impose this responsibility of collecting these unpaid past fees from previous owners but from the present owners.

Mr Lau Ping Sum (Yio Chu Kang): ( In Mandarin): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, in the last 20 years, our housing achievement has attained considerable reputation and attracted the attention of many countries. In the housing estates, we find high-rise buildings and greenery everywhere. There is an air of freshness and vigour, a beautiful garden city. Some people might ask: under the circumstances, why should we set up Town Councils? Compared with the old system under HDB, what advantages or disadvantages are there? Is the Government introducing Town Councils to fix the opposition? From the national point of view, of course, we can see that the HDB has, without a doubt, been efficient and effective. But, as we all know the HDB is a massive statutory board. In its administration and implementation of policies, there is a tendency to be rigid. There is little flexibility to cater for requirements in different locations. The Minister mentioned this earlier on. In the housing estates, all sorts of facilities have been provided. But, it is inevitable that bureaucratic practices would surface in large organizations. The Minister pointed out that, after the Town Council was set up, additional steps and railings were provided for the Ang Mo Kio Town Garden West. Before the Town Council was set up, this particular request had been raised several times by the CCC and RCs but it had always been turned down by the HDB. The reason given was that the earth on the slope was soft and there were technical difficulties. Time was required for further study. But this type of bureaucratic reply was not convincing to the residents. Later, they said they agreed, in principle, but there was no provision of funds for such a project to be carried out for the time being. It was only after the Town Council was set up, in a matter of two or three months, that the project was carried out. This goes to show that even with an efficient organisation, there are instances which bring about dissatisfaction and unnecessary complaints.

Some say that the Town Council is a political device to fix the Opposition MPs. It is not so. Earlier, the First Deputy Prime Minister explained clearly that the objective was to enable our residents together with the MPs to have greater opportunities of participation in improving the constituencies. If the Member of Parliament involved is from an opposition party and if he manages the estate well, carefully controlling the budget, avoiding unnecessary expenses, and the performance turns out to be better than Town Councils under the PAP Members, then he will stand a very good chance of winning future elections, which is only fair. Moreover, it is good for the stability of our political system. The Town Council scheme is, therefore, fair to the opposition member in spite of what some critics might think.

Under a Town Council, the requests by the various RCs could not be approved in all cases because there are competing demands. The Town Council would have certain guidelines to follow. In some cases, an RC representative in favour of a request might have to reject it at a meeting of the Town Council which has to view such requests from the perspective of the whole Town. When the Town Councillor returns to his RC, he might be the target of criticism of his RC. On this point, I hope that all those concerned would realize that Town Councils have to deal with all requests or problems equitably taking into consideration the special needs of any zone in order to arrive at optimum solutions. As in the case of governing a country, while we look after the general and long term interest of the majority we should not neglect the special needs of the minority. We have to balance the various interests and demands fairly, wisely and objectively, in keeping with accepted principles. Therefore, the deliberations of the Town Council will bring about a better understanding of the principles and practice of government. With the setting up of Town Councils, there will be a sense of pride and identity when Town Councillors and residents see the fruition of their own decisions.

I have two questions for the Minister to clarify. The first question is on the definition of residents. There are residents of private houses or estates in Town Council constituencies. I would like the Minister to clarify whether these residents are considered to be residents of the Town concerned.

Secondly, when there are surplus funds, a Town Council is allowed by clause 40 to invest in trustee stocks. As we know, there are great risks involved in the stock market. Perhaps the Town Council should appoint fund managers to give advice on such transactions to reduce the risk of wrong decisions. From the experience of AMK West Town Council in the last 20 months, we can see clearly that there are more advantages than disadvantages in the participation of residents in Town Councils. I hope Town Councils will be set up in other constituencies. In the last 30 years, we have overcome many problems and difficulties. We have been able to meet changing situations. Time and tide have changed. Our population has also changed. With changing times and situations, the expectations and aspirations of our people have heightened. The Town Council is the best means through which the residents can render their services, participating in the management of the affairs of their own constituency.

The Leader of the House (Mr Wong Kan Seng): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

That this Debate be now adjourned.

Question put, and agreed to.

Resolved,

That this Debate be now adjourned.

Mr Deputy Speaker: Resumption of debate on what day, Mr Dhanabalan?

Mr Dhanabalan: Tomorrow, Sir.

Mr Deputy Speaker: So be it.