PARKING PLACES (AMENDMENT) BILL

Order for Second Reading read.

The Minister of State for National Development (Mr Lim Hng Kiang): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time."

This Bill seeks to amend the Parking Places Act to achieve two objectives. First, to allow rules to be made to regulate the parking of heavy vehicles and, second, to allow additional deterrent measures against illegally parked vehicles in car parks.

In May 1992, my Ministry, together with the Ministries of Communications and Home Affairs, announced the need for a vehicle parking certificate scheme to control the growing problem of illegal and indiscriminate parking of heavy vehicles in car parks and roads in HDB and private residential estates.

The illegal and indiscriminate parking of these heavy vehicles in HDB car parks and along roads in HDB and other residential areas is hazardous to motorists and pedestrians. Traffic Police's records show that in 1991, there were 14 accidents involving stationary heavy vehicles, of which one was fatal. In 1992, there were 29 such accidents, of which six were fatal. In the first seven months of 1993, there were already 23 such accidents, of which five were fatal. Many of these accidents could have been avoided if these heavy vehicles had not been parked indiscriminately along roadsides.

Heavy vehicles are also a noise nuisance to the nearby residents, especially in the early morning when the engines are being warmed up. In our high density residential environment in HDB new towns, the noise generated by these heavy vehicles warming up their engines can be very disturbing to a large number of residents. Similarly, residents in private residential areas are subjected to this noise by vehicles parked overnight along narrow streets fronting their homes.

HDB and URA have provided neighbourhood and centralised lorry parks for the parking of heavy vehicles. However, many of these lorry parks are grossly under-utilised as drivers do not want the inconvenience of travelling to centralised lorry parks to pick up their vehicles. Just like others who commute to work, for example, SBS or TIBS drivers, there is no reason why the drivers of these heavy vehicles should not also commute to work.

The Traffic Police has been taking enforcement actions against illegal parking. However, experience has shown that enforcement actions alone have not been very effective in solving this problem. Besides being labour intensive, enforcement actions are ineffective against indiscriminate parking of heavy vehicles along those roads which allow parking, particularly along roads in residential estates. In fact, more drivers will be tempted to park their heavy vehicles along such roads to avoid Traffic Police's enforcement action, thus aggravating problems faced by residents living in these residential estates.

To address the problem, my Ministry, together with the Ministry of Communications and the Ministry of Home Affairs, will implement a scheme to require all heavy vehicles to be parked overnight at designated proper parking lots.

Under the vehicle parking certificate scheme, all heavy vehicles will be required to have a proper overnight parking place. The availability of a proper overnight parking lot will be a condition for the registration and the renewal of road tax for heavy vehicles. This will ensure that all heavy vehicle owners provide for proper parking lots to park their vehicles overnight. Heavy vehicles will be required to park overnight at these designated parking lots. This is similar to the arrangement currently adopted by SBS and TIBS to provide bus depots for proper overnight parking of their buses.

Following the announcement of the scheme last year, the Public Works Department (PWD) has held a number of dialogue sessions with the lorry and bus owners' associations and several transport companies to gather their comments to refine the implementation aspects of this scheme.

PWD will begin licensing private heavy vehicle parking lots from January 1994. Operators of parking places will be issued with Vehicle Parking Certificates commensurate with the number of heavy vehicle parking lots in their parking places.

From 1st July 1994, all owners of heavy vehicles will be required to have a valid Vehicle Parking Certificate before they can register a heavy vehicle, or renew the road tax of an existing vehicle with the Registry of Vehicles. The Vehicle Parking Certificate will serve as documentary proof that their vehicles have an authorised parking lot.

With effect from 1st July 1995, it will then be an offence for any heavy vehicle to be parked unattended, between midnight and 6.00 am in the morning, at any location other than at a designated parking lot.

There will be sufficient supply of heavy vehicle parking lots to meet the anticipated demand. Currently, there are about 22,000 heavy vehicle parking lots managed by HDB and URA and the private sector. Additional lots will be created by allowing car park lots in industrial areas to double up as overnight parking lots for heavy vehicles. Owners of industrial developments will also be allowed to make use of space within their premises to park heavy vehicles, for optimal use of their land. PWD will provide kerbside parking along selected roads where parking of heavy vehicles does not pose a danger to other road users. URA has also identified land for the development of lorry parks by private parking operators.

Let me now turn to the second objective of the amendment. The Bill will also enhance the powers of the car park Superintendent to deal with recalcitrant motorists who repeatedly flout car parking regulations and ignore parking notices. This is to empower the car park Superintendent to fix immobilisation devices, or wheel clamps, on vehicles parked illegally in the parking places. This measure is quite commonly adopted in many other countries.

For the interests of the public, it is necessary therefore to introduce the Parking Places (Amendment) Bill.

Sir, I beg to move.

Question proposed.

Dr Kanwaljit Soin: I would like to speak on the proposed section 15(1)(ii) which gives a discretion to the Superintendent to physically immobilise an offending vehicle by placing a clamp.

If the rationale of the clause is to prevent the vehicle from being parked there and causing obstruction, then the actual physical clamping of the vehicle runs contrary to the rationale. A better and more civilised solution, and that will achieve the same deterrent effect, is not to do any physical clamping but to affix a traffic ticket with the bold endorsement "Vehicle deemed to be clamped". This can then be regarded as an aggravated offence of parking in respect of which no composition should be offered. This will mean that the offender will have to face the inconvenience and expense of going to court and very possibly suffer a higher fine.

By doing this, a few objectives will be achieved, Sir. One, we save the time and labour of the police officer or the Superintendent, in physically clamping and unclamping the car with the attendant saving of financial expenditure of buying clamps. Two, there will not be the inevitable and needless prolongation of the time during which the clamped vehicle is parked illegally with possible obstruction to the flow of traffic. The driver of the offending vehicle may decide not to have his vehicle unclamped expeditiously. He may decide to shrug his shoulders, cool off, have a meal first and then go and have his vehicle unclamped.

By not using physical clamps but notional ones, the traffic personnel can police more effectively by using his or her time and energy more productively.

Mr Lim Hng Kiang: Mr Speaker, Sir, we already practise notional clamps today by placing notices on the vehicles. But many times, these owners do not respond and they just throw away the notices. So the only thing that can work is not notional clamps but physical clamps.

Let me assure the House that this additional measure of wheel clamps will be used only selectively on drivers who repeatedly flout the law. For offenders who are caught for the first time, the usual practice of putting a notice on the windscreen will suffice. If the vehicle is parked in a place which physically obstructs the smooth flow of traffic, we have the powers today to tow away the vehicle. So the additional power of a wheel clamp is only aimed, first, as a deterrent and, second, against those who repeatedly flout the notices. So the Traffic Police, HDB and the URA have a list of people who have thrown away such notices for 10 to 20 times. The next time when they commit such an offence, their vehicles will be clamped.

Question put, and agreed to.

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 Lim Hng Kiang].

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