NATIONAL PARKS BILL

Order for Second Reading read. 3.02 pm

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

The proposed National Parks Bill seeks to establish the National Parks Board and provides for the Board to manage the Singapore Botanic Gardens, Fort Canning Park and the Nature Reserves. The Bill also seeks to repeal the Nature Reserves Act.

The Singapore Botanic Gardens, Fort Canning Park and the Nature Reserves have distinct historical backgrounds and great potential for development as educational, cultural and recreational amenities. They are part of our heritage and can contribute towards enhancing the quality of life in Singapore.

Development programmes have been approved for the improvement of the Singapore Botanic Gardens and Fort Canning Park. Action is being taken to make the Nature Reserves more accessible.

Sir, the Bill is to provide for the formation of the National Parks Board to manage these national parks and Nature Reserves effectively so that we realise their full potential.

The Bill provides for the following:

(a) the Nature Reserves to be held in trust and managed by the National Parks Board;

(b) the Singapore Botanic Gardens and Fort Canning Park, designated as national parks, to be owned and managed by the Board; and

(c) the National Parks Board to be empowered to make regulations, compound offences and be given powers to keep law and order within the parks.

Singapore Botanic Gardens

The Singapore Botanic Gardens, established at its present site in 1859, has been acclaimed as a world-class botanical institution. In recent years, Singaporeans have come to know of it primarily as a recreational park.

The Government has approved a $51 million development programme for the Singapore Botanic Gardens. This will ensure that the Gardens is a leading institution for equatorial botany and horticulture, and also create an outstanding educational and recreational garden for Singaporeans and tourists alike. Fort Canning Park

Sir, no other park in Singapore enjoys the unique historical legacy of Fort Canning Park. Here, the history of Singapore can be traced continuously to the 14th century. The park served as the seat of administration in early Singapore, the heart of the island's defence and the site of our first Botanic Gardens.

Today, it is an under-utilised recreational park. Situated in the city's civic district, it deserves to be promoted as a historical and cultural attraction.

The Government will spend $25 million to redevelop the park into a history park to enable visitors to trace Singapore's multi-racial history through exhibits, reconstruction and multi-media events. Provision is also made to house cultural activities within the park.

Nature Reserves

The 2,795 ha of Nature Reserves serve as the last bastion and refuge for Singapore's native flora and fauna. Properly protected, managed and conserved, the Nature Reserves are invaluable as living classrooms for educators and their students and for Singaporeans in general.

The Nature Reserves also provide the type of recreational space, not found in any man-made park, which is increasingly being sought after by our urban populance.

The Nature Reserves are administered under the trusteeship of the Nature Reserves Board which depends on the Parks and Recreation Department for administrative and technical support. The potential of the Nature Reserves for recreation and education has not been fully tapped. As appointed guardians, the proposed National Parks Board will be given the proper staffing and financial resources to enable it to properly conserve and manage the Nature Reserves.

Members may be interested in the details of the development programme of these three areas. These are found in a note that I have asked the Clerk to circulate to Members. Some of the details indicated on these plans are the subject of further feasibility and technical studies. But the programme as presented should give Members and the public some idea of the extent of development that is envisaged.

Mr Speaker, Sir, my Ministry has considered several organisational options to manage these national parks and nature reserves. To fully realise their potential, the unique features and character of these parks should be properly integrated. The management must have the acumen and flexibility to manage and promote these national parks.

We have concluded that the best solution is to establish a statutory board with a clear mission and the requisite powers to realise the full potential of these parks and nature reserves.

The House will be glad to learn that the Government will continue to support the Board financially through annual grants. Our national heritage will not be compromised for commercial ends. Freedom from financial worries will enable the Board to use its creative energy in carrying out its mandate rather than in trying to be financially self-sufficient.

The present Nature Reserves Board will be dissolved when the National Parks Board is formed. The present Chairman and members of the Nature Reserves Board will be appointed en bloc to the National Parks Board.

Sir, Singapore is a city state. It is easy to let the urban sprawl encroach into our green and open spaces. The formation of the National Parks Board is our commitment to conserve our national heritage. It is also another step towards improving the quality of life of the present and future generations of Singaporeans.

Sir, I beg to move.

Question proposed.

Mr Ng Pock Too (Nee Soon Central): Mr Speaker, Sir, my GPC supports the Bill.

The establishment of the National Parks Board is indeed a step in the right direction. It will help to ensure that the limited land we have set aside for national parks and the nature reserves will be properly developed and managed as amenities for not only recreational and leisure activities for Singaporeans, but also for the preservation of our heritage and our culture.

I agree with what the Minister has said that it is easy to let the urban sprawl encroach into our green and open spaces. The National Parks Board has to ensure that our national parks and the nature reserves are optimally developed, as it would increasingly be very difficult to find such large recreational space with the biological and ecological factors that make our island conducive to plant life and bird life. But while it is crucial that the central catchment area and the nature reserves be safeguarded, the amount of land that is sterilised is not insignificant.

The nature reserves in Singapore presently occupy a total land area of 2,795 ha. In land scarce Singapore, we have to ensure that there is optimal use of all land resources in Singapore, including the central catchment area within the nature reserves.

Would the Minister consider allowing the development of more golf courses or other compatible land use such as parks in the central catchment area? This will satisfy both our needs for preservation of our water catchment areas and for freeing up more land for recreational amenities to our people.

Our nature reserves were set up to preserve and protect our indigenous plants and our mature rain forests. Any damage inflicted will leave permanent scars on our natural landscape. Can the Minister explain why does he allow other Government agencies to use our nature reserves for activities which have a negative impact on our nature reserves? For instance, our SAF use the forest reserves for training activities. This can cause irreversible damage to our forest reserves even if the damage areas are restored subsequently.

The Singapore Botanic Gardens is a popular venue for many Singaporeans who use the extensive grounds for their morning exercises and evening strolls. With the proposed developments mentioned by the Minister, will the Board deprive regular users of the gardens of their exercise venue? I hope this will not make the Gardens less accessible to members of the public.

The Minister has circulated the development plans for the Singapore Botanic Gardens and the Fort Canning Park. Can the Minister tell Members of this House what progress has been made since these development programmes were approved?

Dr Koh Lip Lin (Nee Soon South): Mr Speaker, Sir, I support the introduction of the Bill.

The proposal to set up a National Parks Board and the announcement of plans to upgrade the Singapore Botanic Gardens, Fort Canning Park and our Nature Reserves are most welcome. Singapore is a small island city. The Ministry of National Development and the Parks and Recreation Department have done a good job in maintaining our parks and nature reserves and in keeping Singapore green and beautiful. It is good to know that the Government has plans to preserve certain areas in Singapore for use as parks and nature reserves. However, being a small country with very little land, we cannot have national parks which occupy large areas such as those found in other big countries where a single park may be many times the size of Singapore island. Whatever we can preserve for use as parks and reserves, we have to be sure that we make optimal use and take utmost care of these areas.

I am glad that the Government is introducing a Bill to set up the National Parks Board and that Government will provide full financial support to the Board so that the Board will not have to worry about not being financially self-sufficient. Yes, Mr Speaker, Sir, I have to congratulate the Minister for being not so money-minded as some of his colleagues.

The development programmes for the improvement of facilities at the Botanic Gardens are indeed most timely. Although the Botanic Gardens is still one of the most favourite places of recreation for Singaporeans and tourists, some of the facilities have been observed to have deteriorated over the years. For example, there used to be a coffee shop in the gardens but there is none now. I was told that the public toilets in the gardens are in poor condition. I believe the proposed $51 million to be spent on upgrading and development will change the situation. However, I hope the upgrading and development will not lead to over-commercialisation of the Botanic Gardens. Every effort should be made to retain the original and natural beauty of the gardens. We certainly do not want to replace it with another Haw Par Villa or Disneyland. I would like to ask the Minister to give an assurance that the development will be carried out with sensitivity and care and that after the upgrading the Botanic Gardens will still be open to the public free of charge.

On Fort Canning Park, I would like to ask the Minister for the reasons why it is presently under-utilized. With the proposed $25 million development, I am sure that the park will become more popular. Are there plans to promote Fort Canning Park?

Finally, a question on nature reserves. Singapore is an island country. Our national parks scheme will be incomplete without a nature reserve with sea frontage. I would like to ask the Minister whether there will be at least one nature reserves site with proper sea frontage, including mangrove swamps and marsh lands, one which can also be designated as bird sanctuary. Such a nature reserve will be most welcome by nature lovers and bird lovers.

Mr Dhanabalan: Sir, I thank the two Members, Mr Ng Pock Too and Dr Koh Lip Lin, for their support of this Bill. They raised a number of points. I intend to group them together and take them in the order of interest.

First of all, on development programmes in the Botanic Gardens and Fort Canning Park. The programme for the development of both these areas was approved at the end of 1988. A conceptual master plan for the Singapore Botanic Gardens was produced with inputs from a study tour of American and European Botanic Gardens. Thereafter, we employed a consultant to translate this physical mas- ter plan for the needs of the Botanic Gardens here. This began in October 1989. This phase will end this month and will be followed by design and development and proper construction will begin in 1991. Some of the works such as the diversion of Cluny Road should be finished by early 1992.

In Fort Canning Park, renovation is underway to convert the former Squash Centre into a Cultural Centre. The Singapore Dance Theatre and Theatre Works would be housed in this facility. Structural investigations have been completed on the former Singapore Command and Staff College building and improvement works will follow to preserve the building for adaptive reuse. The development programme for both these areas would be completed some time in 1994. As I said, work will begin next year.

In the development of the Botanic Gardens, we are very conscious of the need to preserve the present tranquil beauty and ambience of the gardens. It is something that Singaporeans have come to expect and they enjoy the present Botanic Gardens and we intend, in the redevelopment, to ensure that we do not spoil the gardens. I think Members here as well as the public can be assured that there is no intention at present to impose an admission charge on the public to enter the gardens, but of course there may be, as part of the development programme, particular attractions in the gardens which may require an admission fee. We have not decided on that. But whatever we do we do not intend to over-commercialize the Botanic Gardens. The Government, in this case the Ministry of Finance, has agreed to continue to support the Board financially through annual grants to enable it to use its creative energy in carrying out its mandate rather than in trying to be financially self-sufficient. But if the Board wants to embark on programmes outside those that we have approved, they may have to also present a scheme to raise funds to fund such programmes. I want to tell Dr Koh Lip Lin that it is not a question of me being generous. All of us have to go to the same Minister for funds, ie, the Minister for Finance. All Government Ministers follow more or less the same principles. It is just that the Government as a whole has decided that these programmes should be funded by public funds.

Dr Koh mentioned that there used to be some public amenities which have fallen into disrepair. I want to assure him that there will be better amenities and visitor orientation facilities that would be provided as part of the redevelopment programme.

I note that, in the process of dialogue with the public, some concern has been expressed over the proposal to provide an internal transport system in the gardens. Some are concerned that such a system may spoil the rather quiet and tranquil nature of the park. I think Members will agree that the Botanic Gardens should be made accessible to all, not just to the young and the physically fit, but also to the ageing population. It is with this in mind that the transport system is being planned. But I want to assure Members as well as members of the public that in the planning and design of this system, we will exercise great care to choose a system that will not intrude upon the quiet nature of the Botanic Gardens. We will choose the right vehicles and decide on the most appropriate routes and operating times to ensure that we preserve the present atmosphere.

A question was raised as to why the Fort Canning Park is under-utilized. The trouble is that the present Fort Canning Park is sub-standard and requires considerable infrastructural improvements and better maintenance to upgrade it. In the process of upgrading this park, we are not carrying out the work in isolation. It is being done in conjunction with the overall development plan of the Civic District and proper access to the park will have to be provided. I think access is one of the problems. It is a rather steep access from most directions and we have to do something to try and make it more attractive to get to Fort Canning Park. One access, for example, that is being considered is an overhead connection between Fort Canning Park and the Clarke Quay conservation programme so that members of the public can gain easy access to the park. We intend to integrate the development of Fort Canning Park together with the whole Civic District programme and make the park more visible and more accessible to members of the public. I think the programme that we have in mind should achieve this purpose.

Mr Ng raised the question of those who use the Botanic Gardens in the mornings for their exercise. I am sure some Members of the House have noticed the rather incongruous sight every morning of about 1,000 young and old doing some ancient Chinese exercise to some very upbeat Seven Lonely Days kind of music. We do not want to discourage this use, but one must note that, with the development that we have in mind, some of the open spaces would be reduced. Facilities for the kind of exercise that people now do in the Botanic Gardens are provided in the other parks that the Parks and Recreation Department is developing. But we will continue to keep the park open for such morning exercise enthusiasts.

Mr Ng also expressed some concern about the use of the Nature Reserves by various Government agencies which have had a negative impact upon the Reserves. I think he has in mind basically the use by the SAF. Members must concede that in land scarce Singapore, multiple land use is a national necessity. Certain activities have to be allowed in the Nature Reserves. This Bill, of course, will enable the Board to have the power to manage the Nature Reserves properly and to mitigate potential dangers posed by such activities and avoid irreversible negative impact on the Nature Reserves.

I think people are not quite aware of the rather fragile nature of the Nature Reserves. SAF men who use the Nature Reserves for the various exercises think that as long as they do not damage the trees or the bushes they do not do any damage. But they are not aware, for example, that by constantly stopping at one spot, and damaging and destroying the grass, they cause the top soil to be washed away during heavy rains. And before you know it, the trees in the area begin to die although the trees have never been dire- ctly touched by the SAF personnel. The top soil is very thin and once it is washed away the trees in the area just begin to die. This is one of the things that we have to educate Singaporeans in, that nature is very fragile, especially in our Nature Reserves, and that we have to be very careful about how we use the Nature Reserves for our various recreational or other pursuits.

Mr Ng also asked whether some of the areas in the Nature Reserves could be used for golf courses. I think this is the hope now. Everybody is interested in golf. We are, of course, constantly looking for areas that are not usable for other economic uses to be put to recreational use, such as golf. But we must realise that golf courses are no substitute for the intrinsic value that a natural stand of forest trees can provide. In developing a golf course, the established trees must of course be removed and we have to manicure the place with grass and the whole natural condition of the area has to be completely changed. It would be wrong to think that as long as we keep the area open for catchment purposes, it does not matter what kind of vegetation we have there. Having said that, we are looking at parts of the central catchment area which can be converted to golf courses, especially where we can justify the golf course as a buffer between the forest and the built-up areas. So to the extent that we can do this without affecting the nature of the Nature Reserves, we will do so.

The last point I have is Dr Koh's request that we also consider a nature reserve near the sea. I think he will be glad to note that we have set aside an area in Sungei Buloh, an area of about 85 hectares, to develop as a bird sanctuary. This is an area which is at present used for prawn farming. We basically intend to leave the area as it is, with some very minor developments to provide visitors easy access, and it would be an attractive bird sanctuary. The programme will be completed about July next year. It is an area where many migratory wet land birds now come twice a year and I think some of us have been there and have seen some very attractive bird life. So this area will be preserved as a bird sanctuary. It will be managed by the Singapore Bird Park people because they know best how to manage this type of area. So we have provided another nature reserve near the sea.

Question put, and agreed.

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

The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. - [Mr S. Dhanabalan].

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