LAND SURVEYORS BILL(As reported from Select Committee)

Order for Third Reading read.

The Minister for Law (Prof. S. Jayakumar): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move,

"That the Bill be now read a Third time."

This Bill, Sir, was committed to a Select Committee in March this year. It is linked to the Architects Bill and the Professional Engineers Bill in that they have very similar provisions concerning, for example, the definition of "allied professionals" and the provisions relating to multi-discipline and corporate practice. Therefore, all three Bills were committed to a single Select Committee.

You have heard from my colleague, the Minister for National Development, about the written representations received by the Committee and the oral evidence heard. The representors were particularly concerned about the new provisions in the Bill regulating multi-discipline and corporate practice by registered architects, professional engineers and registered surveyors in Singapore. Members have, I am sure, read the Report of the Committee.

The Select Committee has made several amendments to the Land Surveyors Bill and they fall into two categories. Firstly, amendments which are similar to those made to the Architects Bill and the Professional Engineers Bill. Secondly, amendments which are peculiar only to the Land Surveyors Bill.

If I may deal with the first category, the common amendments. The amendments relating to multi-discipline and corporate practice and professional liability insurance follow those made to the Architects Bill and the Professional Engineers Bill. My colleague, the Minister for National Development, has already dwelt on these at length, but let me mention them briefly: First, to prevent nominee shareholdings for the benefit of non-professionals, at least two-thirds of the shares of any corporation licensed to supply title survey services must be owned legally as well as beneficially by registered surveyors or registered surveyors and allied professionals.

Second, the control and management of the business of a licensed corporation or partnership, insofar as it relates to the supply of title survey services, must be in the hands of a share-owning director or partner who is a registered surveyor with a valid practising certificate and ordinarily resident in Singapore.

Third, empowering the Land Surveyors Board to make rules to require partnerships, unlimited liability corporations and individual practitioners to take out and maintain professional liability insurance in respect of title survey services. This would allow the Board, if it deems fit, to respond to the needs of the industry when they arise.

Other amendments to the Bill which are also similar to those made to the other two Bills are:

First, in view of the impression that the Bill discriminates unfairly against practitioners in the private sector, Government surveyors will no longer be exempted from having to pay for registration;

Second, statutory boards which carry out title surveys as part of their statutory functions will not be required to take out a licence;

Third, as surveyors in the private sector will be required to be registered as well as to take out annual practising certificates in order to engage in title survey work, the Bill amends other Acts consequent to the introduction of practising certificates as a prerequisite for engaging in title survey work.

If I may turn to the few amendments which are peculiar to this Bill. The first concerns payment of title survey fees. At present, survey fees deposits are made with the Survey Department as required under the provisions of the Planning Act for the purpose of meeting the cost of title survey services rendered by the registered surveyor as well as the cost of the services rendered by the Survey Department, and the Chief Surveyor makes payment out of these deposits.

However, as the Bill now abolishes the fixed scale of fees for private sector registered surveyors and the fees for services rendered will be entirely a matter of negotiation between the parties, it will be difficult to determine the amount of deposit required to meet their charges. The Select Committee, therefore, proposed that such payments of deposits need not be made in future. References to such a deposit in this Bill have been deleted and appropriate transitional provisions have been inserted.

The Committee has also recommended that appropriate amendments be made to section 10(3)(b) of the Planning Act as soon as possible. The Survey Department will impose fees for its services by way of rules made under clause 40(2)(e) of the Bill.

The second amendment spells out an additional ground for removing the name of a registered surveyor from the registers of surveyors and practitioners. The existing grounds provided in the Act are death and cancellation of registration after disciplinary proceedings. This additional ground, which I may add is modelled upon corresponding clauses in the Architects Bill and Professional Engineers Bill, is where the registered surveyor has not renewed his practising certificate continuously for more than 10 years. Such a person would most probably not be in touch with his profession. He will not, of course, be prevented from applying for re-registration. The amendment brings the Bill in line with the other two Bills.

The other amendments to the Bill are consequential amendments or amendments of a technical or drafting nature.

Sir, I beg to move.

Question put, and agreed to.

Bill accordingly read a Third time and passed.