ESTIMATES OF EXPENDITURE FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR 1ST APRIL, 1995 TO 31ST MARCH, 1996

Order read for consideration in Committee of Supply [7th Allotted Day].

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

Head U (cont.) -

Resumption of Debate on Question [22nd March, 1995],

"That the sum to be allocated for Head U of the Development Estimates be reduced by $10 in respect of Code UJ 5100." - [Mr Chiam See Tong].

Question again proposed.

The Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Acting Minister for National Development (Mr Matthias Yao Chih): Sir, allow me to continue. The Community Improvement Projects Committee (CIPC) started life in 1965. Then, it was known as the Urban and Rural Services Committee (URSC). At that time, and since then, the Citizens' Consultative Committees (CCCs), on the ground, will determine what amenities are needed in the constituency and they will consult the PWD, Ministry of the Environment and other departments to request for improvements. If those works are within the budget and within the work plan of the departments, then those works will be carried out. If the requests are reasonable but the budget provided is not sufficient, then the CCC would apply to the CIPC for funding.

The CCC does not decide what they can have. They put in an application and the CIPC will evaluate and consult the relevant departments whether these are feasible, whether they can serve the residents effectively and efficiently and based on the budget available, the CIPC will decide whether the constituency can have the money. This money is given to the CCC to be disbursed.

The Opposition Members asked: why not give this money to the town councils? The answer is very simple. The town councils, by law, can only work within the boundaries of the HDB estates, in particular, within the common areas of the HDB estate and if we give the money to the town councils, then the private estates and privately-run commercial and industrial areas will never get this money.

Why not give it to the MP? The answer is no again because CIPC funds are public funds and in disbursing public funds we have to give them to a public body to be disbursed. No money is given to any MP, Opposition or PAP, for such purposes.

Mr Low Thia Khiang (Hougang): Sir, may I seek clarification? First of all, the Senior Parliamentary Secretary has gone back to the old story and standard answer of the CIPC. Mr Chiam and I did not say that the money should be given to the MP or the town council. What we are asking is simply the procedure of application to CIPC. Yes, money should be given to a public body because it is public money. Is the town council not a public body?

Mr Chiam See Tong (Potong Pasir): Sir, may I clarify? The situation from 1965 has changed tremendously. There are at the moment four constituencies held by the Opposition and probably there will be more in time to come. If you keep to this procedure, on the face of it, it would appear that all these Opposition constituencies will never get CIPC funds for community projects because members of the CCCs are all selected by the People's Association (PA). Unfortunately, PA is not under the Ministry of National Development. It is under the Ministry of Community Development.

If you look at PA, which is a statutory board, the Chairman of PA is the Prime Minister and Ministers are on the board. It is a very high-powered board. This board will select the members of the CCC. The CCCs will, in a way - I would not say beholden - have to look to the people who have appointed them. These are all political figures. Their action will definitely be politically-biased. They will certainly not approve something which will help the Opposition MPs. I think that is the crux of the matter.

When we wrote to the CCC for support to apply for CIPC funds, they not only refused us but they have not even got the courtesy to give a reason. The usual standard Government answer: We have looked at your application. We are unable to accede to it. We asked three times for reasons because Potong Pasir has so far not benefited anything at all from CIPC funds and there is a need for community projects, because community projects, especially linked walkways, are built in other constituencies. If other constituencies have a need for covered walkways, why not Potong Pasir? It is within the guidelines. That is the problem.

Unfortunately, when I brought up this problem the last time, the Minister conveniently said that CCC was not under his charge. So I should not ask him how they approve and not approve. The Ministry of National Development is the ministry that disburses the funds and yet it is another ministry that gives the approval. Again, there is some irregularity here. Perhaps the CCC should not be made an approving body in the first instance. Maybe, as we have suggested yesterday, it should be the MP himself. Normally, the MPs are the advisors in other constituencies and the CCC in a way will take the advice of the MP. So why not cut away the CCC and let the MP, who is the elected Member, make the application or approve it? If the MP does not know the wishes of the grassroots, then he should not be the MP at all. If he cannot read the ground, I am afraid he will probably be voted out in the next election. There is no other person who has got more interest in these projects than the MP himself if he wants to remain an MP.

I would suggest that the procedure be corrected and put the MP to be the person either to approve or to make the application. The town councils can make the application and approval given by the MP, just like MPs have approved many other applications. I would suggest this to the Minister.

Mr Matthias Yao Chih: Sir, I have listened to the comments by both Opposition Members very carefully but they have not listened to my comments carefully. I have said why the money should not be given to the town council. By law, the town council is confined to working within the boundaries of an HDB estate. It cannot do work outside of the estate and it cannot spend money outside of the estate. So giving CIPC money to the town council does not help those who live outside of HDB estates. So that is out of the question.

Mr Chiam's quarrel with PA and how the CCC is structured, I suggest he raise this under his cut on the CCC. But to suggest that because he is in Parliament, therefore, we must change a long lasting and long established practice which has worked very well is not necessary. The point is, from MND's position, we have got these funds to subsidize improvement projects. We look for a body within the constituency that can coordinate various requests and help disburse the funds. Where is this body? There is one, which is the CCC, and it was established a long time ago. The URSC had worked very well with the CCCs all this while.

Mr Chiam says conditions have changed. It is not the same as 1965. I am glad conditions have changed. There were more Opposition Members in 1965 than there are now. So his suggestion about changing the rules is not based on sound arguments. All he wants is the control of the money. The CIPC and URSC have never given money direct to MPs. We do not give them to PAP MPs. We do not give them to Opposition MPs. I do not think we need to change the rules.

Mr Chiam See Tong: Sir, on this point that in 1965 we had more Opposition MPs, I think if you read the history of the PAP there was a split at that time and the Barisan Sosialis MPs were no longer interested in being MPs. In that period, they were trying to work their way out and, in fact, they did. In 1965, they all walked out of Parliament. So they were not interested in any community projects. But we are. The present Opposition Members are keen to improve all their constituencies. 12.45 pm

My quarrel is that under the present system it would appear that no Opposition MPs will get any taxpayers' fund through the CIPC. That is my contention. As long as you have this checkpoint at the CCC, none of the Opposition Members can get through this checkpoint. They will be blocked right from the start, and no funds will be disbursed to any of the Opposition MPs. That is really unfair, because those funds are not PAP funds. They are taxpayers' funds. I think there should be a new system. Probably you allocate the fund pro rata. For so many voters in your constituency they will give you this amount. I think that is the fairest system.

Mr Low Thia Khiang: Sir, the Senior Parliamentary Secretary says it is not fair if funds are not allocated for improvements in private estates. Is it not true that CIPC also provides funding for community projects which are done in HDB estates? The funds are used for HDB estates.

As regard private estates, is it not also the elected MP's responsibility to look after the private estates? They could also suggest improvements in the private estate should the need arise. So why is it that application for funds should be given to the CCC for approval because we are also looking after the private estates?

Mr Matthias Yao Chih: Sir, Mr Low does not understand my answer. I shall repeat it. We cannot give the money to the town council because the town council can only spend money and work within the HDB estate. So if we give the money to the town council, none of this money can be used in private estates.

Mr Low Thia Khiang: No, I am not saying that.

Mr Matthias Yao Chih: He is not clear.

Mr Low Thia Khiang: The Senior Parliamentary Secretary does not understand my clarification. So far, the CIPC has never given any money to town councils, even for the PAP wards. You provide funds for upgrading community projects to the HDB estates. The fund is used for improvement works in HDB estates. What we are asking is that you allow the town council or the MP concerned to submit the application directly to CIPC for funds and the CIPC decides whether it is going to provide the funds for a particular project. That is what we are asking. The Senior Parliamentary Secretary has called for fine-tuning of the system yesterday and a proposal has been put forward by us. I would like to know his position on that.

Mr Matthias Yao Chih: Sir, the town council cannot put up a proposal and ask for money for improvement works outside of an HDB estate. That is the simple position, as provided by the law. Mr Chiam understands that.

Mr Chiam See Tong: Yes.

Mr Matthias Yao Chih: Thank you. On Mr Chiam's question, all I want to say is this. Mr Chiam does not want this money to be used in a politically motivated manner. So the best solution for all of us is, let us give this money to the CCC, as we have done since 1965 and let the CCC recommend and decide on its priorities. The money does not go to the PAP MP and it does not go to the Opposition MP. It is fair for all. So my position on Mr Chiam's and Mr Low's suggestion is that there is no need to change the present system.

Mr Low Thia Khiang: First of all, yes, the town council's funds cannot be used outside the HDB estate. The town council could, through the MP, look at the private estate and put up a proposal to the CIPC for improvements. Why can it not be done? Or the MP himself can put up the proposal. What is wrong with that? The fund is not going to the town council. It is a CIPC fund. I am not saying that you give the money to the town council. What I am saying is that you allow the town council to apply. There is no need for the CCC to apply. Allow the town council or the MP to apply for funds for certain projects and you consider whether it is viable. If you do not think so, explain why. Rather than going through the CCC and the CCC says, "We do not support your application." When we wrote in and asked for the reasons, they replied, "No need to give you the reason." I think this is not fair.

Mr Chiam See Tong: The Minister talks about the CCC. I have an amendment on the CCC and I will talk more about it. But he says that the CCC is not politically motivated. I think most CCCs, if not all, are highly politically motivated. This is proven by the fact that I have been an MP at Potong Pasir for nearly 10 years and the CCC has not lifted a finger to apply for CIPC funds. The best person to get things moving in a constituency must be the MP. It cannot be anybody else. If he wants his seat, he must do something. If he does not do anything, he will be kicked out. Whereas for the CCC, it makes no difference to them. So the CCC is not the best body.

I am going to repeat myself. As the system exists now, all the Opposition wards will not get any CIPC fund, and that is the reality. I have already mentioned that even in Hougang, before the Opposition MP came in, they were eagerly applying for funds. As soon as the Opposition Member came in, they say, "No, withdraw all the funds." That proves beyond a reasonable doubt that the CCC has got no interest to improve the constituencies under Opposition MPs. So if you have this system, Opposition wards will not get one cent of the CIPC fund. That is the problem. So if the Minister can solve this problem, I shall be very happy.

Mr Matthias Yao Chih: May I suggest to Mr Low that he discontinues with his line of questioning because it makes no sense and he knows it, but he does not want to give up.

Mr Low Thia Khiang: No.

Mr Matthias Yao Chih: I suggest that he goes to the library outside, take a look at the Town Councils Act and see whether the town councillors are charged with the responsibility of looking after the entire constituency or looking after the common areas of the HDB estate. After that, he may wish to file another motion or Question and we can have another debate on it.

As for Mr Chiam, his quarrel is really with his CCC in Potong Pasir. I do not hear this quarrel from the other Opposition Members with their own CCC. He has got an amendment under the CCC subhead and I suggest that he brings this up under that amendment.

Mr Chiam See Tong: An easy way out.

Mr Matthias Yao Chih: It is not an easy way out. I have said this before, and I say this again. Public funds are involved. Here is the CIPC fund. What do we do with this fund? We want to let the constituencies enjoy the use of this fund. We go to a public body that can disburse this fund and coordinate the projects in a proper manner. The CCC exists for this purpose and we will continue to keep contact with the CCC, look at the recommendations and decide whether they should get the money or not.

Mr Chiam's proposal does not get the support of the CCC of Potong Pasir. It is not the concern of the CIPC. The CIPC's job is to look at applications and make sure that the applications are reasonable, feasible and effective, and give the fund in support of these projects.

Mr Low Thia Khiang: I do understand the town council's main responsibility. It is for the HDB estate. It is under the Act. But the private estate is part of the town. Is it not part of the town? You call it a town council. It is part of the town. You cannot, of course, apply for funds for improvement works in a private estate.

An hon. Member: It is only for HDB estates.

Mr Low Thia Khiang: Yes, it is only for HDB estates. I understand that. I have no quarrel with that. What I am saying is that private estates, being part of the town, the town council can show concern and put up a proposal if the CIPC allows. We are not talking about using town council's funds. We are talking about putting up proposal on behalf of a private estate within the town to CIPC for consideration.

Mr Choo Wee Khiang (Jalan Besar GRC): There is no basis.

Mr Low Thia Khiang: Why is there no basis? It is part of a town.

The Chairman: Order. Yes, Mr Chiam.

Mr Chiam See Tong: Sir, I think the answer from the Senior Parliamentary Secretary is rather unsatisfactory. His Ministry controls the fund and of the two Ministries, MCD and MND, I would say that MND should be the Ministry that should initiate a change on the procedure of application for CIPC funds because it is controlling the purse strings. It is not MCD. So I would urge the Minister not to pass the buck over to MCD and say, "It is none of my Ministry's concern. Let them solve it." I would say the buck ends with MND.

I would urge the Minister to take the initiative to change this system of application for CIPC funds. I repeat myself again. If this system is not changed, none of the Opposition MPs would get any assistance from CIPC for funds for community projects. Can I urge the Minister to initiate the change?

The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Information and the Arts (Encik Mohamad Maidin B P M): Sir, I just want to clarify from the Member. Before we debate further on whether the responsibility of approving funds for improvement works in the Opposition constituencies should fall with MND or MCD, I think we should get back to the basic question. The general care of the constituency must be the responsibility of the MP. I do not think the Member should pass the buck from our shoulders to MND or MCD. Sir, the complaint made by the Opposition Members, Mr Chiam and Mr Low, is basically that the Opposition wards could not get funds from CIPC for improvement works in their constituencies. In other words, because of this situation, the Members now complain that they cannot do anything to improve the surroundings of the housing estates in their wards. I thought that was the question that was raised because of the current position of funding by CIPC.

Sir, improvements in many constituencies have been made even before CIPC was formed some years ago, and Members of Parliament in this House, whether PAP or Opposition, have done whatever they could to improve their constituencies. The Members of the Opposition have just said that without the CIPC fund, they are ineffective as MPs. They are now trying to pass the buck to MND and MCD. It is not fair.

Mr Low Thia Khiang: Sir, we did not say that no improvement works have been done. I think Mr Chiam will agree that the crux of the issue is the system of application which allows only the CCC within the constituency to submit the application. The CCC, given its affiliation to the PAP, will never support Opposition wards and therefore the application of public fund is biased towards the PAP constituencies. As a result, it is unfair. That is the crux of the issue. That is why I was very happy yesterday when the Senior Parliamentary Secretary said, "Well, put up a proposal to fine-tune the system." Yes, we have put up a proposal to improve the system. Now I would like to know whether the Senior Parliamentary Secretary agrees with our proposal. If he does not agree, why does he not agree that we change the system to allow town councils or MPs to apply directly to CIPC? Of course, the Senior Parliamentary Secretary, being the Chairman of CIPC, we may not get the fund applied for because he can reject it. But never mind. At least he is in Parliament. We can come to Parliament and ask him for justification as to why he refuses to approve certain projects. It is better than going to MCD and MCD says something else. I would like to have an answer.

Mr Choo Wee Khiang: I have actually applied for CIPC funds. I am an advisor to the grassroots organisation as well as the MP. As far as most of us are concerned here, I think we are very happy with the system and if we are so happy with the system, why change it.

Mr Low Thia Khiang: The answer is very simple. This is because you are from the PAP.

The Chairman: Order.

Mr Choo Wee Khiang: Let me finish. I think the grassroots organisations know exactly what is happening in the constituency. They have RC and CCC members, most of whom are local residents. They know exactly which spot to be improved. It is not the MPs because we do not stay in our own constituency. So I think it is better to leave it to RCs and CCCs to come up with proposals which we all are very happy. If Mr Chiam has any proposal in regard to the application of CIPC fund, he should approach Mr Gan and Mr Gan will decide in consultation with the RC and CCC members. If it is reasonable, I am sure the Chairman of CIPC will be more than pleased to approve. 1.00 pm

Mr Low Thia Khiang rose -

The Chairman: Order. I think hon. Members are repeating the same point over and over again. Unless Members have any fresh points to make, I would like to put the debate to an end. Are there any more new points?

Encik Mohamad Maidin B P M rose -

The Chairman: Do you have any fresh points to make?

Encik Mohamad Maidin B P M: Yes, Sir. This fresh point, in fact, was indirectly raised by Mr Low. Now he is saying that it is the responsibility of the PAP Government to help the Opposition Members so that they can win the next election. This was what he said. But that does not come under the MND budget, Sir.

Mr Low Thia Khiang: Sir, I have a fresh point to make with regard to Encik Maidin's comments. Of course, by virtue of the system of CIPC, it is the PAP Government's responsibility to make sure that the PAP win the next election and thereby deprive the Opposition wards of funds to improve the estate. Therefore, during the election you can compare and say, "You see, the Opposition has not done much to improve your constituency."

The other fresh point is with regard to Mr Choo Wee Khiang's comments. I regret to say that it seems to me that Mr Choo's grassroots know more about his constituents' needs than Mr Choo himself. I advise him not to rely too much on the grassroots leaders. Of course, I respect some of them who are really working for the people. But I think that may be his downfall.

The Chairman: Order. We have taken 15 minutes yesterday on this discussion, and almost half an hour today. I will ask Mr Yao to reply and then Mr Chiam can give his concluding remarks.

Mr Matthias Yao Chih: Sir, with your indulgence, I agree with my PAP colleagues in their unanimous response to Mr Low. Please read the Act and then come back.

Mr Chiam's point, if I can summarise it, is this. The Ministry of National Development should change the system because under the present system, the Opposition constituencies will never get any funding from CIPC. That is the point. The day the CIPC approves funding for any project in any Opposition constituency will prove his point wrong. When the day comes, I hope he withdraws all that he says. With that, Sir, at this point, it is not necessary to change the system. It has worked well and it will continue to work well.

The Chairman: Mr Chiam, would you like to wind up the debate?

Mr Chiam See Tong: Sir, Mr Maidin, I think, makes the issue stand on its head. He asked why the Opposition wards need CIPC funding when they can carry on with whatever funds they have and do something. I think he should reverse it and say that all the CIPC funds be given to the Opposition wards and let all the PAP wards do the funding on their own. Why does he not reverse the argument?

The other point is Mr Choo Wee Khiang of Jalan Besar GRC said that he is very happy with the system. Of course, he is happy with the system because he is having all the funds and we are not having it. I am astounded that he makes such a statement. As a senior Member of this House, I would advise Mr Choo that if he does not know his constituency better than his grassroots, I think he had better watch out at the next election.

With that, I thank you for your indulgence, Sir, and withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The sum of $498,806,550 for Head U ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates.

The sum of $11,345,011,200 for Head U ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.

Head J -

The Chairman: Head J - Ministry of Community Development. Amendment No. (1), Mrs Yu-Foo.

Mrs Yu-Foo Yee Shoon (Yuhua): Sir, I beg to move,

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

(In Mandarin): Sir, the further prosperity and progress of Singapore must be established on happy families, a more cohesive society and a more united people. In building up the spiritual civilisation and a cohesive society, the Ministry of Community Development plays a very important role. At a time when we are stressing on regionalisation and internalisation, we must not forget our roots. While enjoying a good material life, we must not forget to help those who are less educated and less fortunate among us.

Apart from that, the Ministry of Community Development must also reflect the views of the people to explain the Government's policies and strengthen the bond between the Government and the people. The Ministry has also to promote family values, look after the young and the old, sports facilities, the handicapped and the community needs.

Although every year there has been an increased budget for this Ministry, I think with so much to do, $300 million is not much because this only constitutes 1.9% of the annual budget of $18.5 billion. So I would like to know whether the Government can consider giving more money to this Ministry for all its activities.

I hope that my colleagues will not say that I am too soft-hearted. Of course, I agree that we should not have too much handouts and make people lazy, but our activities must be done through incentives, education and assistance. Under all these premises, we help our people to help themselves to become self-reliant.

Under these premises, I would like to raise a few points. In the inculcation of family values and social values, what kind of measures will the Government take to promote the social and core values of the family? I would suggest that the Ministry take the initiative to link up with the youth groups, the trade unions and the community leaders to educate the public, the young, the old, and the couples on how to live together happily in harmony. Because in this highly commercialised society, members of the family are constantly facing very heavy pressure. Our Family Service Centres should take the initiative to strengthen education of the family so that they would not break up the family ties. To wait for the family to break up before stepping in to mediate may be just too late.

Undeniably, our Women's Charter has gone a long way in enhancing the social status of women in society. In terms of education, employment and social status, I think our women have enjoyed a better position. But, unfortunately, there are still some women who come from broken families and they are hard put in terms of livelihood. They are quite helpless. I would like to request the Minister to amend the relevant provisions of the Women's Charter to help this group of women.

Next, I would like to ask how the Ministry of Community Development could promote a family-friendly policy. Over the last few years, the Ministry has already done a lot to promote social and friendly values. But I think we should strengthen our care for the children, the aged, the handicapped, etc. For the children, I think child care centres and creches are very important because a lot of couples are working to maintain a certain standard of living. So creches and child care centres play a very important role here. But many of these families have an income of less than $2,000 and they cannot afford to pay for such services. Therefore, they would not be able to make use of the facilities of these child care centres and creches. I would therefore suggest that the subsidies should be raised for these children so that their mothers can go back to work. They can be encouraged to bear more children and, at the same time, do not have to be over-reliant on foreign maids.

On the ageing population - I have another cut later on - I would just deal, in passing, on the subsidy for the old people. The Ministry of Community Development provides a lot of services for the old. The grants of the Government come to about 55%. For those families with an income of less than $2,000, it is quite difficult to send their old parents to this kind of centre. I hope that we would try our best to increase the subsidy to help the lower-income families.

On the handicapped and unfortunate children, they need special care from their families. But according to my understanding, the facilities for them are very limited. For example, I have a resident who has to send her handicapped child to Newton to attend special school from Jurong East and she has to work half-day. Child care centres do not normally accept these handicapped children because they need special care, and the centres do not have the means to do it. To the lower income group with handicapped or retarded children, I think it is very, very difficult. They face great hardship. So I hope that the Ministry will do an overall review on the distribution of these facilities and equipment for the retarded and handicapped children. I hope that the Government will give subsidy or grant to trade unions and other civic organisations to help in this area.

Next, I would like to deal with drug addiction. The Government has already set up a committee to prevent drug addiction, to help boost the confidence of the drug addicts and enable them to return to a normal life. Some women face great financial and social hardship because their husbands or children are drug addicts. I would like to ask the Minister whether there is any new plan in the pipeline to help these women. What is the progress in the Ministry's review of the drug problem in Singapore?

On welfare facilities and public assistance, I believe that the Government has a whole string of schemes in store. For example, we have the bursary, CDAC, 25th Anniversary grant, all kinds of subsidies and rebates, but when it comes to application for such assistance, the applicants find themselves facing a lot of problems. For example, if the family's income is more than $2,000, it will be very difficult for them to apply for a bursary. The CDAC only helps families whose combined income is less than $1,000. A family staying in a 3-room flat qualifies for public assistance, but I think most of the time their applications are rejected. Although these people have a family income of between $1,000 and $2,000 and they live in a 3-room flat, if the husband or the wife or any member of the family is suffering from some prolonged chronic illness like kidney disease, they just cannot make ends meet. They are helpless. So I hope that in handling the application for public assistance, the department concerned can be more flexible so that these poor people can find our Government to be more humane.

Finally, I would like to talk about human resources and financial resources. The Ministry of Community Development has a lot of plans to carry out but I do not know whether we have enough professionals and volunteers to implement such policies and plans. I hope the Government can give some incentives to encourage more people to take part in voluntary work. At the same time, the Ministry should link up with the Ministry of Education to get more students to spend at least two to three days each year on voluntary work.

On financial resources, we know that the various charitable organisations have been actively raising funds every year. In order for these fund-raising campaigns to succeed, they need very good publicity, and such publicity is normally done through the mass media, like the newspapers, radio, TV, etc. 1.15 pm

The Chairman: Order. Mdm Foo, you have exceeded your time.

Mr S. Chandra Das (Cheng San GRC): Sir, the welfare programme of the Ministry of Community Development aims to develop a compassionate and caring society through the participation of volunteers and the community at large.

Sir, towards this end, I am very happy to note that for the financial year 1995/96, there is an increase of 44.7% in the Ministry's budget over the previous year. As a percentage of GDP, the Ministry's share will now increase from 0.24% to 0.31% over last year. This is a good sign.

Sir, the Government's record in most areas of activity, be it in the administration of the port, airport, telecommunications, is excellent. In fact, we are No. 1 in many fields. I would like to see the day when we are rated No. 1 for looking after the disadvantaged among us. We are not a poor country and also we need not go to the other extreme of giving handouts in the form of State welfare. We have to strike a judicious balance. In any society, there will be a percentage in the population that needs special attention. We are not alone in this. It is, therefore, very important for the Government to play a major role in looking after the needs of the disadvantaged in our midst.

The appeal for many helping hands, as spelt out by the former Minister for Community Development, is a good one and should be encouraged and supported by all. But I believe that the biggest hand must be that of the Government. Some believe that the Government's hand is getting smaller and, in some cases, even becoming invisible.

Here, Sir, I would like to pay tribute to all the volunteers and voluntary organisations for their sacrifice and dedication to help the disadvantaged. Whilst they are happy doing this, many feel that a good part of their energy and time is spent on fund raising. Their time and specialist knowledge could certainly be put to better use. More generous funding from Government will help to alleviate this area. Secondly, corporations and the more generous in our society are constantly asked to fork out donations for one charity or another, be it the Community Chest, children's home, welfare home, Kidney Foundation, you can keep on going.

Sir, Singaporeans are, by nature, very generous and I believe many are beginning to feel the overload. There is a case for greater Government involvement in this area. I believe more hands will be forthcoming if the big hand of Government sticks up in front. I would appeal to the Minister to persuade his colleague, the Finance Minister, to make more funds available for voluntary organisations. If generous funding is available from Government, I believe more can be done to help the poor and disadvantaged by the volunteers and voluntary organisations.

Sir, having said this, I would like to ask the Minister for Community Development whether his Ministry has any new plans and programmes to take care of the disadvantaged amongst us? Secondly, I would like to know what has happened to the 25th Anniversary Endowment Fund. How much has been disbursed and to whom? Are there any plans to have a 30th Anniversary Charity Fund with Government matching dollar for dollar?

Dr Michael Lim Chun Leng (Cheng San GRC): Sir, Singaporeans are looking at better homes, bigger cars and a better quality of life. They discuss about their vacations, their clubs and the restaurants they frequent. Unfortunately, there is a small segment of Singaporeans who can never make ends meet, let alone think about these matters.

The Public Assistance (PA) scheme is meant to help some of these financially distressed to regain their independence. Under the current PA scheme, the quantum given is really meagre. I think that if MCD is sincere in helping them gain their independence, there is much more that can be done to help these families.

Firstly, the PA rates should be revised to a more realistic figure. Before MCD tries to convince us that the PA figures are realistic, why does it not ask some of its officers to try subsisting on PA rates in present day Singapore.

Secondly, the benefits given to Singaporeans, in terms of rebates and SOTUS, often do not benefit the low income group. MCD should ensure that these families are not disadvantaged when benefits are given out. MCD must be proactive and devise measures to pass some of these benefits to those on public assistance. Otherwise, the poor will get poorer.

Thirdly, MCD should also provide assistance in obtaining skills training for those who are able to work and to give them a salary during this period of skills training. This will make it easier for them to find a job and be independent.

Fourthly, MCD should liaise with the bus companies and SMRT, or MRTC, to allow free transportation for these low income families while they are on Public Assistance. For example, under the current scheme, a two-person household of two adults is given a grant of $240 per month. If they have to travel a long distance to work, the transportation costs alone can easily take up one third to half of the grant.

Somehow, with such a big budget surplus, it is difficult to convince such families that enough has been done. If not given sufficient assistance, the gap between these families and the rest of Singapore will widen. Subsidy and welfarism are not dirty words to be shunned. If applied selectively and correctly, we can help these low income families enjoy the fruits of Singapore's success without creating a welfare mentality.

Encik Imram bin Mohamed (Nominated Member): Sir, presently over 2,700 disadvantaged families are receiving public welfare assistance. The allowance they receive varies from $155 per month for a single-person household to a maximum of $445 per month for a family of four or above. As Dr Lim has just mentioned, the amount is not quite enough to meet the daily needs. Thus, many of them receive additional assistance mainly in kind from voluntary welfare organisations (VWOs). The recipients of PA are not allowed to take up any form of employment, otherwise their allowance will cease. I feel the scheme works against the principle of promoting self-reliance. There are no incentives for recipients to seek jobs.

This is understandable for the old and the infirm. However, those who are able should be encouraged to be self-dependent, even partially. They should be given the opportunity to supplement their income. May I suggest that the PA recipients be allowed to work part-time in voluntary welfare organisations without losing their financial assistance. They could work as cooks, cleaners, receptionists, child-minders, and so on. In this way, they will be earning their supplementary income instead of simply receiving them as handouts from the VWOs.

Dr S. Vasoo (Tanjong Pagar GRC): Sir, in the last decade, the number of child care centres run by the voluntary welfare organisations, the trade unions and the private sector has grown significantly,. However, the demand for child care centres in the new towns has become more acute. Many of the young parents in the new towns have to wait for a long time for places to admit their children in these child care centres. The Ministry is not as proactive as it should be. I would want to find out what are the plans that the Ministry is making in meeting the anticipated demand for child care places in the new towns.

Sir, the other aspect which requires attention is that the subsidy for child care has not been reviewed in the last two years and the cost for child care has increased quite significantly. The average cost is about $350 a month. The subsidy from Government is about a third of this amount and therefore a large number of working class parents have found increasing burden in trying to find access to the use of child care centres.

Sir, I see that the child care facilities provide an overall net gain to families, particularly to the working class. Otherwise many of these children would remain as latchkey children and, in the longer term, it will have consequential effects on the well-being of our community as well as the nation. I feel that easy access to these child care facilities is indeed important because children can socialise and get a better headstart when they go to school. I am of the opinion that the Ministry should request the Ministry of Finance to increase the subsidy for child care services so that a larger proportion of the working class can gain access to such a service.

I would like to find out what plans the Ministry of Community Development has to revise the child care subsidies as well as to make long-term plans for the development of child care services, particularly in the new towns.

Dr Michael Lim Chun Leng: Sir, increasingly, in many families, both parents are working adults. This raises social concerns that need to be addressed. When the children are young, there are child care facilities to enable the children to be looked after. MCD has, to its credit, provided subsidies to enable child care facilities to be made affordable to most.

However, there is a need for a school-going child to be looked after so that -

(1) the child will not be led astray by bad company before and after school hours;

(2) the child will be able to spend his spare time in a constructive manner; and

(3) the parents can continue working without having to worry about the safety of their children.

As school-going children are at an impressionable age, the Government should invest in programmes, such as before-and-after-school-care (BASC) programmes to ensure that the school-going child's spare time is used wisely and he will learn good values. It is definitely a better alternative than having school children who join bad company and spend their spare time loafing in shopping centres, billiard saloons and video arcades.

The Minister should consider the following measures to promote BASC:

(1) Capital grants to voluntary welfare organisations (VWOs) to set up centres to provide for before-and-after-school-care services in housing estates.

(2) Operating subsidies to VWOs to hire staff to operate this service.

(3) To provide subsidies for lower income families who wish to use this service. It is the lower income families where it may be important for both parents to be wage earners. Instead of an across-the-board subsidy of a fixed quantum for each child, the VWO operating the BASC service may be given a subsidy and they are allowed to exercise discretion to subsidise the child according to his family's income status.

The easy way out for the Ministry is to say that the current incentives are sufficient. However, if the Ministry considers it important to provide subsidies for child care centres, it should also consider this service as an extension of child care. As this is the age where children are most impressionable, it is all the more important that the Ministry should provide sufficient incentives for voluntary welfare groups to develop BASC. 1.30 pm

Dr Kanwaljit Soin (Nominated Member): Sir, I would like to urge the Minister to make child care facilities more accessible and affordable for children from poor and disadvantaged homes. According to the 1990 Census statistics, about one in 10 households in Singapore was either in poverty or vulnerable to poverty. These households have a monthly income of less than $200 per person in the household. I am sure the Minister is well aware of these statistics.

Children of low-income families, economically and socially deprived, often do not have an equal start as their better-off counterparts. The latter are often exposed to intellectually stimulating play early in their lives compared to children of low-income families.

Kindergarten classes only provide two hours of school and this is not enough to provide adequate early childhood education for the poor and disadvantaged children.

A report on "The Importance of Early Education" identifies reasons why it is crucial to be provided an early start:

(1) Good and early education leads to later educational success. Among the three ethnic groups, Malay children followed by Indian children have the lowest rate of enrolment in child care centres. This could be one factor that has led to Malay and Indian children being under-achievers in school.

(2) Early child care provides socialisation experiences, as Dr Vasoo has just said, which according to the study, reduces the risk of later juvenile delinquency.

Also, by providing child care facilities, mothers are provided an opportunity to go back into the workforce, thereby allowing an increase in household income. Statistics from DOS show that for 43% of low-income dual career couples, the wife provides 50% of the family income. The present child care subsidy of $130 per child is not enough for these poor families, especially if they have two children needing child care facilities. Even with the subsidy, poor families cannot afford child care.

Sir, I am aware that besides the child care subsidy of $130 for working mothers, in 1993, a new scheme was introduced called the centre-based financial assistance scheme. And this is targeted at low-income families. With this scheme, there is a two-tier subsidy scale of $50 or $100, depending on the net income of the family.

However, there are not enough places for low cost child care in Singapore, and this is what the Ministry has to look into. We could try to emulate a model child care system that has emerged from Japan. Parents pay according to a sliding scale, depending on their income, with the poorest family getting free whole day child care and the wealthiest paying $570 per month. The system is subsidised, but this is justified as an investment in the future of the children themselves. At first, the purpose was to help the working mothers, but Japan has realised that the main function of the child care centres is to help the children themselves.

If we, in Singapore, can also come to the same realisation, then we will have to make changes in our policies regarding subsidy towards child care.

Providing an adequate number of places in child care centres will not make child care accessible to economically deprived families. Adequate financial subsidies that will contribute to making child care affordable for all families is really the key. What I am asking for is not for more child care places in general but, specifically, for more low cost child care places. Instead of having selective child care centres catering to the low-income families, I am suggesting that 5-10% of all child care centres reserve places for subsidised low cost child care. MCD could have this instituted.

Finally, Sir, I would like to appeal to the Minister to peg child care subsidies to the parents' income so that children of poorer families will get much larger subsidies. It is more important for children from low-income and disadvantaged families to attend whole day child care than it is for their peers from better-off families. I am sure that the Minister is aware of this crying need for this levelling up of society and should therefore earnestly consider this appeal for the less fortunate children in our society.

Dr Vasoo: Sir, much has been said about the issues, problems and challenges of our aging population. We have come out with plans to try and tackle the problems which we will be facing.

The issue is whether there are comprehensive plans to deal with the problems of the aged and to enable families to cope better with the problems of their aged parents. I think this matter will become very acute in the decade ahead.

Sir, we also have a growing number of aged who will be retiring in the next decade, and there will be surplus manpower available. There are very little comprehensive programmes to tap this valuable manpower resource and to provide opportunities for many of them to be involved in gainful as well as other useful community activities.

In short, we have various viewpoints and plans to deal with the problems of the aged. There is a need to look at this whole issue more comprehensively so that we will be able to deal with the different types of aged. We have the go-go aged, the go-slow aged, the slow-slow aged and the no-go aged. In this context, one has got to look at how we can provide plans to deal with this whole aging problem.

The Ministry has up to date been segmental in dealing with some of the needs of the aging population. The challenge before us is to come out with more comprehensive plans to deal with the problems. As I see it, no amount of institutional provision is going to solve the problems of care of the aged. There is a need to enable families to continue to look after their aged parents. In this connection, the Ministry should see how families can be supported to enable them to continue to look after their aged parents within their home and in the community.

My own assessment is that the service in the direction of community care is rather thin and it needs to be strengthened. The Ministry perhaps may have to be more visible in this direction. And more comprehensive community care programmes and community support programmes should be planned to meet with the challenges ahead.

I would like the response from the Minister in terms of the Ministry's overall plan towards developing community based programmes to deal with the aging population.

Dr Michael Lim Chun Leng: Sir, may I take my two cuts together?

The Chairman: Yes.

Dr Michael Lim Chun Leng: Sir, the number of aged in Singapore will increase significantly and this can, of course, pose a social problem in the future, as presently most families are small families. Therefore, there must be measures to encourage our senior citizens to keep healthy, live a more active lifestyle and the Ministry must assist Singaporeans in looking after their aged sick.

Unfortunately, there are always elderly Singaporeans who do not have dependants and are too elderly to work. These older generation Singaporeans have no CPF and may not have savings. If they were to depend on the meagre public assistance, there is not much to look forward to every day. Surely, having given the best years of their life to the nation, it is not too much for the nation to give them something to look forward to in their twilight years. For those without a home to call their own, the Ministry should work closely with HDB to provide rental flats at special rates. The Ministry should also work with HDB to provide shelter for the elderly widow or widower who may otherwise be deprived of a rental flat when their loved ones depart. The Ministry should also work with voluntary welfare organisations (VWOs) to adopt these families on a long-term basis to add meaning to the lonely years of these elderly Singaporeans.

In encouraging our elderly to be more active, there are several concessions for senior citizens and there is also a Senior Citizens' Week to recognise the importance of senior citizens.

However, there is much more that can be done to encourage the elderly to be active. The bus services and SMRT give concessions to senior citizens during off peak periods only. If senior citizens are encouraged to work, they will have to use these services during the peak periods. They are also likely to earn a lower income. If they have to pay full rates, it may not be financially sound for them to continue with their lowly paid jobs. The bus companies and SMRT should consider extending the concessions throughout the whole day and not limiting it to off peak hours. Many senior citizens feel that this should be so.

I have been given to understand from senior SBS officials that SBS is not against this idea. I think TIBS and SMRT should also not oppose this proposal. In an earlier debate, the Minister for Communications said that he would refer the matter to the PTC. I suggest that we take the bull by the horns; if SBS is not against this idea, let them extend the concession hours. If TIBS and MRTC are not willing to extend the concession hours, let them differ in their opinion and explain their position to the public. We do not need to get a consensus from all three organisations to get things moving. I hope that the Minister will look into this issue and take this up with the Ministry of Communications.

The Senior Citizens' Week should be an activity that senior citizens should look forward to every year. It should not be a week that activities are organised, and senior citizens are sent in organised bus loads to the site of activities to make the event happen. It should be a week in which senior citizens from all over Singapore should spontaneously come out to the streets to celebrate the event. This can only happen if the Government, statutory boards and the private sector are committed to making this event a success. Places of interest such as the Jurong Bird Park, the Singapore Zoological Gardens, museums, Sentosa and other places of interest should provide free entry to all senior citizens and even have organised activities at these places to suit the needs of senior citizens. All public entertainment areas such as cinemas should provide free tickets to senior citizens during this period. All these places of interest and places of entertainment will benefit as it is likely that the senior citizens will be brought there by their children and even their grandchildren. The bus companies and SMRT should also allow free transport services to all senior citizen pass holders during this period. Hotels and restaurants should give special discount to senior citizens during this period with the aim of making it a memorable week for them and not with the aim of commercial gain. If the Government, the statutory boards and the private sector are sincere in making the Senior Citizens' Week a success, they must be forthcoming and supportive of measures to make this event a memorable and successful one. As they say, charity begins at home and therefore Government, statutory boards and Government-linked companies should take the lead. 1.45 pm

In encouraging the senior citizens to be more active, MCD should also consider expanding the facilities and staffing to Senior Citizens Centres under the CCC or CC. These centres should provide a wide range of educational and recreational activities where senior citizens can participate and spend their time constructively.

Let us not pay lip service to our senior citizens. Let our actions express our care for the aged.

I will move to the next topic on Family Services. The importance of promoting family cohesiveness is recognised by the Government in its promotion of family values. In addition to national programmes, Family Service Centres (FSCs) have been set up in population centres to address the needs of families. MCD has also recognised that FSCs have several roles to play and hence the growth in the number of FSCs. The Ministry should enhance the effectiveness of Family Service Centres by providing adequate guidelines and support. There are several ingredients to a successful FSC.

Firstly, suitable premises in population centres should be made available. Currently, the application for the setting up of a FSC in the housing estates involves several agencies such as the HDB, the NCSS and MCD. As they say, too many cooks spoil the broth. Hence, MCD should provide a single window service to facilitate the processing of the application. After all, if voluntary organisations are willing to offer time, effort and funds to promote family cohesiveness, MCD should do its best to facilitate.

Secondly, it should cater to all Singaporeans. One major tenet for the success of a FSC is its ability to cater to the needs of all Singaporeans of all races. FSCs may have to make adjustments to ensure that the minority groups do not feel alienated. For example, Indian Singaporeans may feel uncomfortable approaching a FSC which only has English and Mandarin letterings and brochures. MCD should provide guidelines to ensure that there is a conscious effort by all FSCs to make all Singaporeans comfortable in using the services of FSCs.

Thirdly, it must have the infrastructure to provide family services. The FSCs must have trained social workers and counsellors to provide family education programmes and counselling. Currently, they are only given a one time grant for the training of social workers. As there may be staff turnover, the Ministry should consider giving a grant to train newly employed social workers. After all, it defeats the purpose of having a FSC if the staff are not adequately trained.

Fourthly, it can be a first line defence to potential family breakup. FSCs may be able to play an important role in marital conflict and prevention of divorce. Just as those considering abortion have to watch an educational video and be counselled, the Ministry should consider making it compulsory for all couples intending to proceed with divorce proceedings to attend educational video programmes on resolving marital conflicts and the effects of marital breakup on the children. Such couples should also attend a series of marital counselling sessions conducted by a marital counsellor who is able to communicate effectively with them. The FSC may be an ideal place for such programmes as it will be in the heart of major population centres.

Fifthly, and finally, the FSCs should also provide social services that will meet the needs of the present day family - a small family with both parents working. Programmes such as the before-and-after-school-care services and homework centre keep young children occupied in a constructive manner and relieve stress on the family unit.

Dr Kanwaljit Soin: Sir, I would like to commend the Minister for his Ministry's work in raising the status of social workers but I think we still have some way to go yet.

Social workers are as important to society as engineers and doctors, but this is seldom acknowledged. Social workers deal with problems in society that, if left unattended to, would lead to a tear in our social fabric. I am referring to problems caused by marital conflict, juvenile delinquency, drug addiction and poverty. However, all this work often goes unrecognised and social workers are overburdened, underpaid and suffer from burnout. It is the creators of material wealth that get the kudos in our country while those who help social cohesion are often forgotten.

It is no wonder, therefore, Sir, that according to a study done in 1992 by the Singapore Association of Social Workers, the following findings were revealed: Since 1974, the National University of Singapore has trained 830 social workers. Over the years, only half of the social work graduate took up social work related jobs. Subsequently, of this half that took up social work related jobs, only one-third of the cohort remained in social work related jobs.

We need to ask ourselves why two-thirds of those trained as social workers quit their field or never ventured into it and yet we have the perennial complaint of the shortage of social workers. Why is it that the law of demand and supply is not working here? Why is there market failure and how do we explain that in spite of the acute shortage of social workers, their salaries have not gone up significantly?

In the civil service, social work graduates are paid the same salary as other graduates on similar grades. The National Council of Social Service has adopted a salary which is comparable to what the civil service now pays its social workers but considering the type and load of work undertaken by social workers, this is not enough. Furthermore, many of the affiliates of NCSS cannot even afford to pay what the civil service and NCSS pay to social workers. Non-funded affiliates have a hard time trying to raise money for their operations and thus poor social workers have to continue to serve for the love of the cause while their peers, who are not necessarily more deserving, make much more money in other fields of endeavour. Where is the justice and sense of reward for social workers for a job well done? To address this, Sir, I have six suggestions.

(1) MCD should have a campaign to elevate the status of social workers and highlight the importance of their work and also try to attract more men into the profession.

(2) The pay of social workers should be raised. Civil defence officers get 10% higher pay than market rates. Why can we not apply this to social workers?

(3) There should be more collaboration by MCD, NCSS and NUS so that satisfactory placement is done of social work graduates so that there is a lower rate of attrition.

(4) Professional social workers need continual upgrading and training as social work graduates upon leaving the university do not have enough life experiences to be able to deal with the many challenging and changing conditions of society. In this respect, the MCD has taken the right step in starting the marriage and family counselling course run by the Family Resource and Training Centre, but more needs to be done in this area of continual upgrading.

(5) MCD and NCSS should help to top-up the salaries of social workers who are employed by affiliates so that the pay of social workers is more reflective of the importance of their work to society. There should be more opportunities for promotion, especially in Family Service Centres and other social agencies.

(6) There should be a formal registration of trained social workers so that there is more professionalism. At this time, many well-meaning people who help in charitable causes are said to be doing social work. Thus, there is a confusion between the roles of these worthy individuals and the professionally-trained social workers. We cannot fudge the two categories of people.

Finally, Sir, I appeal to the Minister to look into this important matter, otherwise the progress of tackling social issues may be held back due to a lack of social workers. Maybe one of the reasons why not enough emphasis has been laid on the importance of social workers is that they are considered to be dealing with welfare issues and this is associated with handouts. Social workers are not just patchers up of social conditions requiring welfare. They do not just act as a band aid. What they do has long term consequences on the integrity and stability of families. In this light, would the Minister please give this matter his considered attention?

Mr Kenneth Chen Koon Lap (Hong Kah GRC): Now that Singapore has been confirmed to be out of the Malaysia Cup tournament, it is time for us to move on and concentrate on our soccer league.

I am glad that the FAS has proceeded with such speed to come out with a comprehensive plan to promote the S-League. The report of the task force committee on the S-League has covered all the technical and economic aspects of implementing our domestic football programme. I must congratulate the task force for a job well done, and I am confident that the FAS has the technical competence and the experience to make our new S-League a success. However, I would like to bring to attention that the promotion of soccer is unlike promoting any other sports such as swimming and athletics. Essentially, soccer is more than a sport. It is also a spectator entertainment. Therefore, it is very important to recognise that, apart from the technical and logistics aspects of managing the game, much attention has to be paid to the promotion and marketing aspects.

As we all know, the popularity of soccer is tremendous. In many countries, it is almost viewed as a religion. The soccer game can evoke emotions and passions of millions of people. It can even uplift the spirit of the nation. In this respect, I would like the Singapore Sports Council not to under-estimate the task of marketing and promotion. Take, for example, in the United States, the American football game is not merely a sport. When the game is played, there are a lot of other entertainments being staged with the game. Therefore, when any of the game is played, it is an outing for the whole family with all the fanfare and trimmings. It is the same as the NBA basketball game or any baseball game. While I am not suggesting that we move to that extreme, nevertheless, in order to ensure that the S-League is successful, I would suggest a team of consultants who has the experience in promotion and marketing be engaged to work hand-in-hand with the technical personnel of the FAS to cover the total package of staging the S-League.

I understand that about $10 million is allocated for the implementation of this project and that a target of three years is set. Thereafter, each team would have to look after their own financial commitment. I would like the Singapore Sports Council to review this 3-year target, as I feel that the period given may be too short to expect all the teams to completely be financially independent. I would suggest that some flexibility be built in, although we would not like to see the League to be subsidised forever. However, judging from the experience of soccer promotion in the United States and Japan, we may require a little longer for a successful implementation. Now that we have made the decision of promoting the S-League, true to the Singapore tradition, we must make sure that it would be a success.

The Acting Minister for Community Development (Mr Abdullah Tarmugi): First, I would like to thank the various Members who have given their comprehensive comments on community development issues, sometimes passionately. Before I respond to these concerns and suggestions, I have a piece of good news for the Member for Tanjong Pagar GRC on the issue of child care subsidy. The Government has decided to increase the monthly child care subsidy for each child from $130 to $150. This is actually a 15% increase. That is for the full-day child care. For the half-day, we have decided to increase from $65 to $75. The new rates will take effect from April this year. The increase would mean that the Government would have to spend close to $40 million in child care subsidies in the next financial year. 2.00 pm

Dr Soin has shown concern that even with the subsidies, it may not be enough for low income families. She had mentioned the centre-based subsidies of $100 and $50. Child care centres, in fact, have on their own, come in to help through reduced fees, waiver of registration fees and deposits, free uniforms, and also subsidised activities. But I agree with her. I think we can certainly do more and we will look into the suggestions that she has proposed.

The Member for Cheng San GRC suggested that similar care be given to school-going children. While school-going children also need proper guidance and supervision, they require, in fact, fewer hours of care a day. Where parents can arrange for family members, neighbours or friends to look after their children, I encourage them to do so. This, indeed, would be a better alternative as the children would receive more personalised care and attention from relatives, from people they know, from people they love.

The 1990 Census survey showed that for children aged between seven and 12 years old, most of their parents are able to take care of them. In fact, 76% of children are cared for by their parents and 11.9% by grandparents. So only about 3% of children are left on their own.

Though no Government grants will be given to BASC, I assure the Member we will continue to assist the VWOs and other non-profit organisations by helping them to secure Government premises at subsidised rates. Currently, in fact, most VWOs running BASC have a sliding scale for fees which is based on family income. Those VWOs who are charging low fees or nominal rates are, in fact, also helping lower income families.

The Member for Yuhua touched on the heart of our policies when she says that community development starts with the family and that we should help families that need help. Indeed, it is the very strength and weaknesses of the family that determine the social fabric of our society. The family today is not the same as the family of the past. Change is inevitable, but change, when it happens too fast, can be a source of stress on the family, and stress can also come when members of the family have difficulties fulfilling their roles and responsibilities. So, unless the family can handle the stress well, it may end up as a dysfunctional family.

Family Service Centres (FSCs) have been set up to help families under stress with their problems. There are 14 such centres now funded by the Ministry and we plan to have 24 by the year 2000. I would like to inform the Member for Cheng San GRC that FSCs must adopt a non-sectarian approach and must be open to all persons regardless of race, language or religion, if they want to receive funds from the Government.

FSCs do try to engage staff who are multi-lingual. Where it is not possible to do so, FSCs have turned to the clients' family members, volunteers, neighbours, or even HDB officers for interpretation or translation facilities. And I am pleased to inform the Member for Cheng San GRC that all the 14 FSCs so far, with the exception of one that is run by SINDA, have clients from the four main ethnic groups.

The Member is right in saying that FSCs must have trained social workers and counsellors and each FSC to be managed by staff with the relevant background and experience. While in service, the staff attend courses, seminars, workshops on various topics. A one-time grant is also given to the Family Resource and Training Centre (FRTC) to develop a curriculum for a two-year Diploma Course for social workers in FSCs and to run the first course for 20 staff. These staff in turn would be able to train other colleagues when they complete their course.

Sir, FSCs discharge a variety of functions, one of which is marital counselling. I agree that couples intending to divorce should view video tapes on how to resolve their marital conflicts and attend counselling sessions as proposed by the Member for Cheng San GRC. However, it would be difficult to force unwilling couples to do so. We will, however, in our public education programmes, encourage couples with marital problems to seek help from FSCs early. FSCs and agencies dealing with marital problems will be encouraged to persuade their clients view these videos during the counselling sessions.

The training and career prospects of social workers have been raised by the Member for Yuhua and also Dr Soin. Dr Soin also expressed interest in the career advancement of social workers. A few years back I would have agreed entirely with Dr Soin that social work was a very poor cousin indeed among professionals. I think the situation is improving and it is no longer the situation today, especially after the Government's salary revision for the Welfare Scheme of Service in 1994. She also mentioned about the NCSS reviewing the salary scales of the voluntary sector and has recommended a scale comparable to that of the civil service. The new scale should be able to attract and retain good social workers. But, again, I agree with her that we will continually seek to improve the working conditions or the career prospects of social workers.

There is constant dialogue between NUS, NCSS and the Ministry on the social work curriculum to ensure that what they do and their career prospects are always improving. For example, following the Ministry's feedback, NUS has amended its syllabus to place more emphasis on family work. And training does not stop at the graduate level. The Diploma course, run jointly by the NUS and FRTC, which I mentioned earlier, is one example. We will certainly continue to work with the University and also other agencies to prepare social workers for the challenges they will face in their work.

When it comes to getting volunteers, as mentioned by the Member for Yuhua, both NCSS and MCD have award and incentive schemes to recognise the contributions of the volunteers and these schemes are reviewed periodically. However, I think it is important for us to note that many individuals volunteer their services out of personal conviction to do something for the less fortunate in the society. And it is this sense of personal achievement that motivates the volunteers more than any award or incentive schemes that NCSS or MCD can devise.

The Member for Yuhua called for a review of the Women's Charter. MCD is reviewing the Women's Charter to see how we can give recognition to women who stay at home and ensure that their non-material contributions to the family will be recognised. This is especially so in the division of matrimonial assets in the unhappy event of the marriage breaking up. We will keep the Member and also Parliament informed on the outcome of this study.

On the problems of the aged, I share the concern of the Member for Tanjong Pagar GRC and also the Member for Cheng San GRC about the ageing population. Indeed, by the year 2030, one out of four Singaporeans will be 60 years old and above and they form a very large pool of experienced and resourceful persons. I agree that they can only contribute if they remain active mentally and physically. I cannot agree more with the Member for Tanjong Pagar GRC about the desirability of the aged to stay in the community and also in the arms of the family. In fact, MCD is looking into this aspect and the Ministry is in the process of restructuring itself to put more emphasis on the family, and not only on dysfunctional families but also on well families to see the family as a whole, including the aged and children.

The Member for Cheng San GRC mentioned the Senior Citizens' Week as one of the programmes organised by the Ministry. One of the objectives of the Week is to prepare individuals for their retirement years, and it is an occasion for us to recognise the contributions made by our senior citizens. Private companies, as mentioned by the Member, have been offering concessions to senior citizens, especially during the Week. Nevertheless, MCD will continue to encourage more companies to join in the effort.

Senior citizens who need help for medical care are looked after by the voluntary welfare organisations and the Ministry of Health. The support programmes include meal delivery services, home medical care, hospital geriatric services and care, nursing homes, and respite facilities. For those who have no dependants or who cannot live with their families for one reason or another, there are 20 sheltered homes. Two more are in the pipeline. For those who are frail and require medical attention, there are 45 nursing homes.

More recently, the Ministry, together with HDB, has implemented a congregate housing programme to support low-income senior citizens living in 1- and 2-room rental flats. Under this programme, three blocks of rental flats in three housing estates with a high concentration of low income senior citizens are being upgraded to be more user-friendly to the elderly. Each block will be adopted by a voluntary organisation which will give help to the elderly and they have been given grants by the Ministry to cover the development and recurrent costs as well as space to operate in.

The Member for Cheng San GRC has asked that I raise the issue of concession for senior citizens to travel during peak hours on buses and trains. I think the rationale for not giving them concession during peak hours has been given by the Minister for Communications before and I shall not raise it again. Nevertheless, I will raise the issue on behalf of the Member for those senior citizens who need to travel to work. I will raise this with the Ministry of Communications.

Sir, we are constantly monitoring the needs of the elderly and adjusting our programmes to meet their needs. The Ministry of Health and my Ministry are in fact spearheading a national survey of senior citizens. Besides assessing the needs of senior citizens, we hope the survey will, for the first time, establish the needs of the aged and also the care givers. The survey findings will, hopefully, be available by the end of this year. These findings should help us to come out with policies and programmes to ease the stress on the family.

I now come to the issue of helping the less fortunate brought up by the Members for Cheng San GRC, Mr Chandra Das and Dr Michael Lim. NMP Encik Imram also asked about financial assistance plans for the disadvantaged.

Sir, this group of people will need help, especially help to escape from their poverty. We have, for example, the Small Family Improvement Scheme (SFIS) which finances the education of children of these families, besides helping the families to own their homes. Besides the SFIS, there is a whole array of programmes and services for the less fortunate in our society actually. I think it would take time for me to mention the whole list but if Members are interested, I can send the list to them because it will take some time for me to list them individually in this House.

Mr Chandra Das from Cheng San GRC has asked about the 25th Anniversary Endowment Fund set up in 1991 with an initial capital of $31.3 million to help the destitute and low income families. 2.15 pm

Mr Das may like to know that, since its inception, the fund has given out a total of $4.96 million to voluntary welfare organisations to finance their respective programmes. The 25th Anniversary Fund was set up to mark a special event, a quarter century of the nation's independence. It is the culmination of a year-long effort. It is just like a wedding anniversary where you have the silver, golden and diamond jubilees. The Government has no intention of setting up a similar fund for the nation's 30th anniversary. We will, however, continue to raise funds for charity during the National Day celebrations, as we did last year and every year.

I come to Public Assistance. Sir, Public Assistance (PA) rates have always been an issue of contention. Critics always claim they are never enough and that the eligibility criteria are too strict. I understand these feelings and I empathise with the compassion most of us must feel for the disadvantaged among us. But the Government is not unfeeling either. Ours is not a case of dismissing the problem. Neither, Sir, is it a matter of how much surplus we have or the lack of it. Rather, ours is a matter of philosophy, a matter of approach to helping this group of people in our society. I know some may snigger at this statement, but the experience of many other countries serves to convince us that what we are doing is indeed not wrong.

I would like to remind Members that the PA scheme is meant to provide a basic subsistence living for the truly destitute. It is for those who have no means of support or income and who are unable to work for one reason or another. If we give PA to those who can work, we may unwittingly perpetuate their dependence on aid and take away their desire to be independent.

The Member for Cheng San GRC can be assured that every effort has been and will be made by my Ministry to assist PA recipients who can work, to undergo skills training and find employment. The Member also spoke on the need for free transportation for PA recipients travelling to work. While no free transportation is given, 87% of the PA recipients are senior citizens actually and they already enjoy concessions by the bus companies and SMRT. For those who need to visit Government or restructured hospitals or outpatient clinics for medical treatment, they are reimbursed for the transport expenses, including taxi fares for the frail and aged.

Sir, it is true that PA recipients may not benefit from rebates and SOTUS given to Singaporeans. But rebates and SOTUS are not meant to be a financial assistance scheme for the destitute anyway. While PA recipients do not benefit from rebates or SOTUS, they do enjoy other benefits. One such benefit is the waiver of rents and conservancy charges announced by the Minister for Finance recently. But what is not widely known, or often dismissed, is that, apart from their monthly allowance, PA recipients also receive many other forms of assistance from the community, for example, free medical treatment in Government or restructured hospitals and outpatient clinics, free textbooks for their children, remission of supplementary school fees and pocket allowances from school for their children as well as assistance in cash or kind from voluntary welfare organisations.

Sir, PA rates are pegged to the actual consumption values of the households on the scheme. They are reviewed once every two years. The last revision was in 1993 and the rates were revised again last year to offset the impact of GST. A research company has just completed a survey to find out the consumption values of PA recipients. We are now studying the survey findings and, if necessary, the PA rates will be reviewed this year.

Sir, the Government has been and will always be flexible in administering its financial assistance schemes. I would like to reiterate once again that community development is not, cannot and must not be the sole responsibility of the Government. It is through the joint efforts of the Government, the citizenry and organisations in the community that we can build a cohesive, caring, compassionate society and assist in creating a civic society in Singapore. Our many helping hands policy is, therefore, a correct one.

And talking of the many helping hands policy I like to refer to the comment made by the Member for Cheng San GRC. In implementing the many helping hands policy, the Government has always adopted a very low profile. We want to give recognition to the work and contributions of individuals and organisations. This, however, must not be interpreted as the Government's hand disappearing, as has been suggested by Mr Das. I can assure the Member that the hand is, has been and will continue to be a very active and supportive one. The hand may be invisible but it is there.

Between FY90 and FY94, the Government in fact paid almost $80 million to voluntary welfare organisations to cover their development and operating expenditures. In the coming financial year, the Government will be spending another $20 million to help the organisations to run their programmes and facilities. All these figures, mind you, do not include other subsidies, such as rental of premises, medical services and free education. I would like to say sincerely and honestly that our safety net is wide enough to catch all and whoever needs help will be helped to be independent and to move forward together with others. That is what community development is all about.

The Member for Yuhua specifically asked whether funding will be given to unions, statutory boards and corporations to set up social service centres. Sir, they will receive the same funding and incentives as other organisations in setting up similar facilities.

I now come to the last item on football mentioned by the Member for Hong Kah GRC. Sir, in promoting sports, the Singapore Sports Council adopts a pyramid concept. At the base of the pyramid is the Sports for All where we encourage all Singaporeans to exercise and to take part in sports activities. The top of the pyramid is the Sports Excellence programme where effort is focused on the development of international champions.

The Sports for All and Sports Excellence policies have served us well and they are meant to provide Singaporeans with a very wide choice of sports to pursue, either for recreation or for competition. The Member is interested in giving football a much higher profile for Singapore. Indeed, football is the third most popular sport among Singaporeans, after swimming and badminton. Partly because of its popularity, football has been identified as one of the seven core sports actively promoted under SPEX 2000 programme. The SSC will continue to promote football when the local league gets underway.

A task force, appointed by FAS, has just completed its review. The FAS, together with the SSC, will study the recommendations to make sure that football remains not only a popular sport but also one that we will excel in. I do not want to pre-empt the recommendations nor the outcome of the review but I can assure the Member that MCD will give its support to any proposal to make football a sport which Singaporeans can be proud of and which can bring the country together.

Dr Michael Lim Chun Leng: Sir, on a point of clarification. Since the Minister recognises the need for many of our young children to be in child care centres because many families have working parents, I fail to see how this need will disappear the moment the children start attending school. When these children grow up, the families that put the children in the child care centre, because they have to work, and there is no one to look after them, will continue to have this problem even when their children go to school. So I think there is a need for this before-and-after-school-care service. Perhaps the Ministry should look into this need. The need will increase as more of these children reach school-going age.

Mr Abdullah Tarmugi: We will look into this problem.

Encik Imram bin Mohamed: Could I have the Minister's comment on whether he would consider allowing PA recipients to work for the VWOs?

Mr Abdullah Tarmugi: Sir, there is no stopping PA recipients who want to work with VWOs, either on a part-time or full-time basis, and our assessment will come after that. Each PA recipient will be assessed on his own merits. Although there is a blanket policy that PA recipients who work will not receive PA, there have been a few who are allowed to work because of circumstances and which we feel merit the client to continue receiving PA.

Mrs Yu-Foo Yee Shoon: I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The Chairman: Amendment No. (2), Mdm Foo.

Mrs Yu-Foo Yee Shoon: Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head J of the Main Estimates be reduced by $10 in respect of Code JD 1500.

(In Mandarin): The Minister has just explained some of the problems relating to the aging population of Singapore. Here, I would like to stress certain developments in this area. Although the Ministry of Community Development has done quite a lot in providing facilities to help the aged people, I think the steps taken are still somewhat slow because we have now about 200,000 old people in Singapore. By the year 2030, we will have some 850,000. I believe most of us in this House may well belong to that age group by then. Actually, I do not really know whether the discussion on the problems of the aging population should come under the Ministry of Health, the Ministry of National Development or the Ministry of Community Development. It seems that every Ministry or Government agency has done something for the aged.

Here, I would like to appeal to the Government to look into the possibility of setting up a national coordinating committee to deal with the problems of the aging population. In terms of health, the Minister for Health has already referred to this matter and the Minister for Community Development has also mentioned that we have now some 45 homes for the aged sick which have places for just 350 old people. If we take the present proportion of the aged in our population, we have only 1.5 places for every 100 old people. By the year 2030, we will need to have at least 90 of such homes. If each home can accommodate 150 old people, that means out of every 100 old people, there will be only two places available.

Now, we have also the Home Nursing Scheme. Last year, the Government spent only about $40,000 on the home nursing scheme. I think that is too little because the home nursing service has enabled those old people who cannot go out of their home to be served at home. They need people to cook and send food to them, and help them to do some domestic chores. Basically, I support the view that old people must be allowed to stay at home. Our young people should allow their old folks to stay with them. But these young people need the Ministry of Community Development to provide some training facilities on how to understand the physical and psychological development of old people, how the young and old people can live together, and try to narrow the generation gap between the young and the old. Young people should be trained on how to take care of the aged, how to bathe them, how to feed them, and so on.

The next point I would like to touch on is the question of accommodation. I believe the HDB has already worked very hard on this but, personally, I am dissatisfied with the Minister's answer that it would be difficult to give the first-timers priority in their application for HDB flats.

Next is on the question of fund raising. Many charitable organisations have found it very hard to raise funds for the less fortunate children and the aged. But when it comes to fund raising, a lot of money has to be spent on publicity. Singapore Press Holdings and the Television Corporation of Singapore are profit-oriented organisations. They charge commercial rates for the publicity of these charitable organisations. I would appeal to the mass media not to charge them so much for their publicity, particularly when the Television Corporation of Singapore and the Radio Corporation of Singapore are receiving subsidies, in terms of licence fees, to provide public service programmes. I think I am not asking too much in this appeal.

Mr Abdullah Tarmugi: Sir, the Member for Yuhua has asked about programmes and services for the aged, Government's future plans and things that are wrong with these plans. I think most of these points have been dealt with in my earlier answer.

I would like to respond to her specifically on the question of coordination of service delivery for the aged. I wish to inform the House that although there are clear demarcations between the Ministry of Health and my Ministry in terms of service provision, there is very close liaison between the two Ministries in planning, implementation and coordination of the programmes for the elderly and their families. This is to ensure that there is a continuum of care as well as a network of services to meet the varying needs of the elderly and their families.

My Ministry has an information and referral service and the Ministry of Health has the Care Liaison Service. Besides providing coordination, information and referral services, these units also provide advice and assistance to the elderly and families who need help in the care of the elderly.

The units help in the placement of the elderly and also link the elderly and their families to services provided by voluntary as well as Government bodies. Recently, a coordinating committee was set up by the Ministry of Health to better coordinate the medical, social and support services for the elderly and their families. This will, I think, enhance the delivery services for the elderly.

The Member also made mention of the mass media charging voluntary organisations. I cannot agree more with the Member's sentiments. This is something which we have also been debating for some time. All I can say is that I hope the mass media mentioned by the Member will take heed of her comments.

Mrs Yu-Foo Yee Shoon: Sir, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The Chairman: Amendment No. (3), Encik Imram.

Encik Imram bin Mohamed: Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head J of the Development Estimates be reduced by $10 in respect of Code JD 08994034.

Sir, when one thinks of the need for facilities for low-income families, the things that immediately come to mind are a home environment that is not conducive to learning, the lack of motivational factors and guidance for the young. One may also observe that the residents of 1- and 2-room flats spend much of their free time in the common areas around their HDB flats, as they do not normally have the means to indulge in other recreational activities. May I ask the Minister whether the budget provision of over $800,000 under this code for the development of facilities for low-income families would address the areas I mentioned. I notice that this budget provision is made for the first time this year, and the amount appears too little if it is meant for what I think it is for. Perhaps the Minister could clarify.

Mr Abdullah Tarmugi: Sir, I believe the NMP is referring to the sum allocated under sub-code JD 08994034, as has been mentioned by him earlier. This sum is actually the development expenditure for three new Family Service Centres (FSCs) and the upgrading of four existing social service centres for FY95. The development expenditure of the FSC programme in the previous years was reflected under another cost centre when the programme was in its pilot stage, ie, development of facilities for the disabled and low-income families. Now that the Government will be funding the capital expenditure of seven new FSCs and the upgrading of 17 existing FSCs over the next few years, the development expenditure for FSCs is shown under its own cost centre.

Encik Imram bin Mohamed: Sir, I thank the Minister for his explanation and I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The Chairman: Amendment No. (4), Mr Chiam.

Mr Chiam See Tong: Sir, I beg to move,

That the sum to be allocated for Head J of the Main Estimates be reduced by $10 in respect of Code JE 1500.

Sir, CCCs and RCs are grassroots organisations. They are set up by the Government with taxpayers' money. The purposes for which they are set up are to promote social, cultural, educational and recreational needs of the residents of HDB estates. These organisations are also highly endowed with facilities. In order that they can carry out their work more effectively, they are provided with premises at the void decks. They are provided with ample notice boards strategically located at every block of flats, and they also have facilities available to them at the community centres. From time to time, they also get facilities from the HDB.

I can say that in Opposition wards, the incumbent MPs there do not get such facilities. In fact, what the RCs and CCCs get far outweigh the facilities that are made available to the Member of Parliament there.

Sir, I am bringing up this issue again. In other constituencies, all the elected Members of Parliament are automatically made advisers to the grassroots organisations, except in Opposition held wards. I would call on the Minister to rethink on this issue and appoint the MPs in Opposition wards as advisers to the grassroots organisations in place of PAP prospective candidates. I think there are good reasons. Because the purposes of these CCCs and RCs are to serve and promote the welfare of the constituents. And I think no person can do that better than the incumbent MP.

The reasons are quite obvious. The aim of the PAP prospective candidates, of course, is to get elected and if they can help it, they would not assist the incumbent MP in promoting and giving more facilities to the constituencies. In fact, they would encourage these grassroots organisations to support them in their politically motivated activities. In fact, I have observed that this has been done. Instead of these grassroots organisations concentrating their efforts in non-political activities, they are to some extent promoting the interest of the PAP prospective candidates. For example, I have already mentioned that these PAP prospective candidates, of course, would not advise their CCCs to support applications for CIPC funds by the Opposition held town councils. These grassroots organisations often do not recommend. I have known of cases where they do not recommend children of Opposition activists to get into the PCF kindergartens or to get promotion. These grassroots members often are also seen accompanying the prospective PAP candidates in their walkabouts. What does this show? It shows that these grassroots organisations are partisan. They are not neutral. And if they are partisan, I am sad to say that they will soon lose their credibility. Why? Because they will not be recognised as grassroots organisations, but people will say that they are PAP organisations. This is sad, because these grassroots organisations are supported by public funds.

On balance, I would urge the Minister really to rethink again and get incumbent MPs, even in Opposition wards, to be advisers. And I am certain that these Opposition MPs, because they are MPs, will have better or more interest in the constituents than the PAP prospective candidates who are not MPs. And the public funds that are allocated for these grassroots organisations, I am sure, will be better used. 2.45 pm

Mr Cheo Chai Chen (Nee Soon Central): ( In Mandarin): I am also going to deal with the question of Citizens' Consultative Committees (CCCs) and Residents' Committees (RCs). I would like to raise three points with the Minister:

(1) It should be clearly stipulated that MPs should automatically become the advisers of RCs and CCCs.

(2) It should be clearly stipulated that the CCC and RC members must not belong to any political party. They should have no political affiliation.

(3) It should clearly be stipulated that members of a CCC must be residents in the constituency.

On the first point, I feel that if MPs are automatically made advisers to CCCs and RCs, then it will be in keeping with the wishes of the voters and the principles of democracy.

On the second point, if the members of CCCs and RCs do not belong to any political party, it would cut down the political colour of these two organisations and to make sure that there is a balance in these organisations.

On the third point, I feel that if members of the CCCs are local residents, they will have a better understanding of the local conditions. I discover that in Bukit Gombak, Potong Pasir and Nee Soon Central, the members of the CCCs have refused to endorse the funding of covered linkways for these three constituencies. I wonder if they really understand the needs of the local residents. I am beginning to doubt. I do not think any local resident will refuse to have more covered linkways in their constituency.

If the Minister can adopt my three points, then he will be able to pacify the heat over the controversy for the CIPC funding.

The Minister for Home Affairs (Mr Wong Kan Seng): Sir, I am answering the questions by the two MPs because they both raised questions about the RCs, the CCCs and the CCMCs, the role of the adviser, who should appoint the adviser and who should be the adviser, and how these community organisations should serve the residents. Since I have been tasked to look after the People's Association by the Prime Minister, I will deal with these questions.

In fact, these questions are not new. These questions have been raised ad nauseam. These questions have been raised a few years ago and I have given answers to all the questions. Since the questions are the same, the answers would be the same. I do not see how the MPs can change my answers because they have been raised in the last few years.

Just to recapitulate, to remind Mr Chiam and Mr Cheo, why we have these grassroots organisations. I think Mr Chiam also recognises the purpose of these grassroots organisations. They are to help Government promote social cohesion, racial harmony and act as a bridge between the people and the Government. That being the case, if we have an Opposition MP there as the adviser, would he be the bridge in helping to facilitate communication, transmission and explanation of policies between the Government and the people? I do not think so. I think that Opposition MP Adviser would be an obstacle rather than a facilitator. For that reason, I say that Opposition MPs cannot be appointed as the adviser of the CCCs, RCs or the MCs.

Mr Chiam says that he had noticed that these organisations have been helping to promote prospective PAP candidates. If they indeed do so, I see nothing wrong in that because if they find that that adviser is worthy of support and they want to help him, so be it. But we have not compelled anyone in these grassroots organisations to say that they must help a PAP man. We have not given such a policy directive. If the grassroots organisations and the members and volunteers feel that they want to help the adviser, by all means. There is nothing wrong in that. I do not know what Mr Chiam meant by his observation that this has been done. Maybe he has some examples of how the grassroots organisations have helped to promote the interest of the prospective PAP candidate. Has he got any example?

Mr Chiam See Tong: Much obliged, Sir. The most recent rampant example of promoting a PAP prospective candidate is the highlighting of his news and pictures in all the notice boards at Potong Pasir. That is a fairly strong example. Of course, the other example is his frequent walkabouts and everybody knows that. These are examples of promoting the interest of the PAP prospective candidate. Notice boards should be confined to social, cultural, educational, recreational or sporting activities, and not to highlight the sayings and interviews of the prospective candidate. What is the purpose of this? It is quite obvious.

Mr Wong Kan Seng: I thank Mr Chiam for enlightening me as to what was bugging him. If he says that Mr Andy Gan should not be walking about, then Mr Andy Gan must actually move out of Potong Pasir. Mr Andy Gan himself stays in Potong Pasir. So he has to walk around Potong Pasir. There is nothing wrong with that. Unless he wants him to live outside of Potong Pasir, but even then there is nothing to prevent a citizen from walking anywhere in Singapore. If he is the adviser of the constituency, all the more he should walk around to understand the needs of the constituents and what he can do for them. When he is able to do something for them, he will understand and appreciate the concerns and problems that the constituents face. It is perfectly legitimate as an adviser. If he did not do that, I would say that was a dereliction of duty. I am glad to hear Mr Chiam saying that Mr Andy Gan has been very active.

Mr Chiam says that the RC notice boards have been used to promote the news concerning the adviser. What did Mr Andy Gan put up? I anticipate that Mr Chiam may raise this question. So I asked what the RCs in Potong Pasir have actually done. They said that there is one article dated 24th December 1994 which they put up. Mr Andy Gan was interviewed by the Straits Times. This was an interview about what Mr Gan would do and his views about the constituency, his concerns, and the problems and difficulties he faces in an Opposition town council. I think that was a very good interview that he gave.

But RC notice boards are not just used to communicate or inform members about the activities of the adviser. They are also used to inform residents of important events, policies and things that are of concern to them. It must definitely be so because the job of RCs is to inform the residents about Government policies and the goings-on in the country. So when there is news about the upgrading of the Kim Keat flats, which is a neighbouring constituency to Potong Pasir, I am sure the residents in Potong Pasir will be very interested to know what is going on in the neighbouring constituency. So when this news was publicised and the Prime Minister went to open this new upgrading project, he made an observation which was very valid: that if Mr Andy Gan was indeed in Potong Pasir and able to do this for the residents, the Prime Minister would be very happy to go and open the new project if it happens in Potong Pasir. But it is not the PAP candidate's news or the adviser's news that is being communicated to the residents. I am also told that even news concerning the SDP was also publicised in the RC notice boards. One was an article concerning the SDP entitled "SDP - their appearance and their reality", written by Ng Wei Joo, who found out what was brewing within the SDP and its leadership. They put it up so that people would know the kind of problem that their MP, who is an SDP MP, is facing in his own party. I think they have every reason to be informed. There is nothing wrong with that either.

I am also told that residents were also informed about what Dr Richard Hu, our Finance Minister, has said about the Budget. What is in it for them in the Budget. If the residents have missed the chance to read this in the papers because they are too busy, they can read it in the notice board. Again, there is nothing wrong with that. But if Mr Chiam objects to RC notice boards being used to purvey or communicate news, activities or articles concerning the residents, their MP, or their adviser, then does he object to the town council doing the same thing? Can he tell me?

Mr Chiam See Tong: Sir, I have also anticipated that question. We in the Potong Pasir Town Council have not bothered to slap a fee on the RCs or try to take their notice boards down. But we will just treat it as a tit-for-tat. If they can do it now, we can do it too. I am glad the Minister has answered in the manner that he has answered. So at least we play on an even level field.

Mr Wong Kan Seng: In other words, Mr Chiam does admit that even for a town council, where he is the Chairman, and all of us are either Chairman or members of town councils, we do from time to time make use of the town council to publicise activities of the candidate or the MP.

Mr Chiam See Tong: If they can do it, we can do it.

Mr Wong Kan Seng: I agree.

Mr Chiam See Tong: They started it, we follow. So that is fair. All right, let us play the game.

Mr Wong Kan Seng: I am not saying that Mr Chiam should not or cannot do it. I think it is fair. He is quite right. In fact, publicising the news of the adviser is not new. Many constituencies have done it, including mine. So I think it is quite a fair game for the RCs, CCCs and the MCs to keep the residents informed of things that are happening in the constituency, including news concerning their MPs or advisers. That is fair enough, does he not think so?

Mr Chiam See Tong: Yes.

Mr Wong Kan Seng: I also do not quite understand why he said that the PCF rejects children of members of Opposition parties.

Mr Chiam See Tong: Yes.

Mr Wong Kan Seng: They do? Then Mr Chiam must understand that the PCF is run by the PAP. It is the PAP Community Foundation kindergarten. So obviously the PAP Community Foundation kindergarten has to take care of all the children in the constituency. When we have too many children going for an inadequate number of places, then there must be a certain priority to be given to the children. And depending on the vacancies, if certain children cannot find a place, it cannot be helped. But I am not saying that they would not be able to find a place. They can find a place. They can go to the People's Association kindergartens. There is nothing to stop any Opposition Member from sending their children to the People's Association kindergartens, which I believe Mr Low has done. So we are quite open. The PA is very neutral, as far as admitting children of citizens into their kindergartens is concerned.

Mr Low Thia Khiang: Sir, may I seek a clarification from the Minister? I would like to know from the Minister this. Is the character or nature of the PCF a charitable or political organisation?

Mr Wong Kan Seng: No doubt the PCF is a charitable organisation. Therefore, when it admits children, it tries to admit all the children, if possible. If it cannot, then there must be certain priority set. That is it. Nothing more, nothing less.

Mr Low Thia Khiang rose -

The Chairman: Order. Mr Wong, are you giving way?

Mr Wong Kan Seng: Yes. 3.00 pm

Mr Low Thia Khiang: The priority set is based on political reasons. I know Mr Chiam has said the position is that Opposition party members' children are not admitted. Being a charitable organisation, is the priority based on political reasons?

Mr Wong Kan Seng: No, I did not say that it is based on political reasons. I said that there are certain priorities. First priority will be that if you are the sibling of another child who is already studying there. That must be the first priority, like our school admission system. Secondly, if the parents have been very active in the constituency, then I think you also deserve some priority. Because "very active" means they volunteer their service and I think we should give some recognition to people who volunteer. And then the rest of it will be open to all the children.

Back to Mr Cheo's question about MPs automatically becoming advisers. I said no, it is not automatic, unless they are able to help explain the Government's policy. I do not think his party would allow him to do that. Would it?

Members of grassroots organisations should not be members of a political party? Is it right for us to say that volunteers cannot be members of a political party? If we do that, are we not denying them the democratic right to join any party, to be associated with anybody? Are we not breaching the rights in the Constitution? I do not think I can do that. I think I will continue to allow members of grassroots organisations to belong to members of any political party.

CCC members should be residents. Yes, as far as possible, we try to get the residents. If we cannot find enough of them, if the advisers can find others to help them, I do not think we should deny capable Singaporeans of helping in the CCCs just because they do not live in the constituency. If we do that, then I think the constituency will be the poorer for it because the constituency will not be able to benefit from the advice, the help and assistance from whatever ability that this member can bring to the constituency. I think our CCCs are enriched by the experience from a wide cross-section of people who can contribute to the CCCs. Some of them may not live in the constituency, well, we cannot help it.

Mr Cheo Chai Chen: ( In Mandarin): Sir, just now, the Minister for Community Development said that the Opposition Members cannot help to explain the Government's policy to the people.

Mr Abdullah Tarmugi: I did not say that.

Mr Cheo Chai Chen: ( In Mandarin): I meant the Minister for Home Affairs. I feel that the Minister's view was one-sided. Although the Singapore Democratic Party is an Opposition party, our objective is to serve the people of Singapore. We want to improve the standard of living of Singaporeans. We do not object to all Government policies. If a policy is good, we will support and promote the policy. But if the policy is no good, then we have a duty to point it out. So, this problem does not arise. Why is it that the Opposition won in some constituencies at the last General Elections? This was because the residents in some constituencies were not happy with certain policies of the Government. They did not agree with the Government policies and they have their own views. That is the reason.

As for the members of CCCs and RCs not having any political affiliation, I think this has nothing to do with the spirit of democracy. Even for our armed forces, we stipulate that members of the armed forces and civil servants cannot join any political party. If the Minister says my suggestion is wrong, then the civil servants have been deprived of their rights.

Mr Wong Kan Seng: ( In Mandarin): Sir, I would like to clarify what Mr Cheo said just now. Under the Instruction Manual of the civil servants, there is nothing to say that civil servants cannot join a political party. If they wish to participate in political activities, they just have to inform their superior officers and they will be allowed to participate in the political activities.

As to whether Opposition Members can help to promote Government policies, I have my doubts. In this Parliament, we can see very clearly that many policies are being opposed by the Opposition parties because of their opposing stand. They said, "We are the Opposition. Our policy is better than the ruling party's policies. So your policy is no good, I have to oppose." If you do not agree with what I have said, you can correct me. In my years of experience in Parliament, I have noticed that more than 90% of the Government policies are being opposed by the Opposition parties. I think Mr Chiam See Tong would agree with me.

Mr Cheo Chai Chen: ( In Mandarin): Sir, Opposition MPs are able to get the support from their constituents because they do not agree with the Government policy or they are doubtful about the Government policy and they feel that the policy is not good enough. This is in keeping with the spirit of democracy.

If we support the Government all the way, then we should not be in the Opposition parties.

Mr Wong Kan Seng: ( In Mandarin): This last sentence is indeed "hitting the nail on the head". Since he is in the Opposition party, then why should he want to be the adviser of a Government organisation? I really do not understand his point.

Mr Cheo Chai Chen: ( In Mandarin): We have never said that we wanted to be the advisers to the Government. He is talking about these grassroots organisations. Is the Minister saying that the grassroots organisations are Government organisations?

Mr Chiam See Tong: Sir, in the case of Potong Pasir, it is not a question of insufficient space that Opposition activists' children were not admitted to the PCF kindergarten. In fact, two of the kindergartens in Potong Pasir had been closed down. It shows that there are not enough students or whatever reasons. So it is not a question of not enough space. They can easily open them up and put more students in there. But they did not do that.

The other point is about Opposition MPs being the advisers of grassroots organisations in their constituencies. I think there is a case for it because these organisations are supported by public funds and, therefore, you cannot say that they belong to the Government. In fact, they belong to the citizens of Singapore. They are set up with taxpayers' money; they are not money from the PAP party that supports them. So I think there is a case for Opposition MPs to be advisers in these organisations. If you really call them "grassroots organisations", then the person who should be guiding them should be the MP who is in charge. If he does not guide them properly and does not do a good job, of course, he will lose his seat as an MP. So he has got an interest. And if you set the rules that there should be no politics, I think it can be done. Just as I have been trying very hard at our town council to make it above politics. But, unfortunately, Mr Andy Gan has not allowed me to do so. He started the ball rolling, putting his photo on the notice board, I can also put my photo on the notice board. So it is a question of tit-for-tat, who starts first.

If we set the ground rules, it can be done. If that is done, I would imagine the beneficiaries would in the end be the residents themselves, instead of having the prospective PAP candidate leading the so-called grassroots and there is an incumbent MP. Of course, the incumbent MP is there to make sure he gets elected and the oncoming onslaught from the prospective candidate is to make sure that he is removed. So there is already a clash there. How do you resolve this problem? The best solution is to let the incumbent MP do his job, and if he does not do his job, then he gets out-voted.

Mr Wong Kan Seng: Mr Chiam said that it is not because there are not enough vacancies in the PCF centre in Potong Pasir. But I understand that the PCF centre in Potong Pasir had to close down because Mr Chiam's Town Council raised the S&C fees.

Mr Chiam See Tong: No.

Mr Wong Kan Seng: He made it difficult for them to carry on. That is my understanding. Firstly, whether I am right or wrong, I think the records speak for themselves. Secondly, Mr Chiam wants to change all that because he thinks that the Opposition and the grassroots organisations can work together. Whereas we are saying that we are elected to govern and like any other democratically elected government, we are empowered to set up any agency to help promote and propagate its policies and explain them to the people. When Mr Chiam wants to change all that, he can, when he becomes the Government.

Mr Chiam See Tong: Sir, there are two points. Firstly, the PCF kindergarten at Potong Pasir was closed down because the Town Council at Potong Pasir raised the service and conservancy charges. This is half-truth and not the full truth. We raised it to show the market value of the S&C charges in relation to premises used for kindergartens. The PCF centre is not the only kindergarten in Potong Pasir. There is another kindergarten there run by a church organisation. It is called Kindercare. We did the same thing for them. In all our letters informing them that the S&C charges had to be raised, we enclosed a form. It says they can apply to us, and we will immediately give them up to 90% discount. The other kindergarten said, "All right. We will apply." And immediately they got the discount. So the amount of increase, if I can remember from memory, is only about $35. The PCF centre would also get the same rate. If I remember correctly, it is $15 and $45.

But Mr Andy Gan, the adviser to the kindergarten over there, refused to apply. He is too proud to apply to an Opposition MP for a reduction. And that is the reason why he has to proudly bear the full rate. Whose fault is that? We asked them to apply and enclosed a form. They just had to put a signature, and they would get a discount. But he refused. So who is to blame? It is not us.

Government has been asking everybody to apply to the CCC for all kinds of approval. I, as an elected MP, have to apply, but I get the thumbs down in regard to CIPC funds. So why can they not? Mr Andy Gan, I think, should learn some humility if he is going to be the next MP. That is the first lesson. That is in regard to the S&C charges that he was talking about.

I cannot recall the other point.

Mr Wong Kan Seng: That if he wants to do all the things that he wants us to do now as the Government, then when he is in Government, he can do it.

Mr Chiam See Tong: Yes. I do not deny that the Government's duty is to govern the country. I do not deny that at all. The Government has set up grassroots organisations. I do not deny that they can also set up grassroots organisations. But the point is that - I have to repeat myself - these grassroots organisations are supported by public funds and they are for public good. So the issue now is whether or not an Opposition MP, as an adviser, in contrast with a prospective PAP candidate, would be a better adviser and could serve the purposes of the constituents better. You have got two choices. You can appoint the elected MP and in my case I have nearly 70% support. So straightaway you have already got 70% support for your grassroots organisations if the MP is appointed as the adviser, whereas Mr Andy Gan has got only 30%. So I would like to ask the Minister, on record, who has got better support. 3.15 pm

Mr Wong Kan Seng: I think that is non sequitur, ie, this argument about him getting 70% support and, therefore, with 70% support of the residents, he should run all the activities in the constituency. What the Government wants the PA grassroots organisations to do is to help to explain its policies and carry out the activities for the people. Who do you think will do the job better? Is it the Opposition MP who will stand in the way? Or is it an adviser appointed by the Government? My belief and experience have always been that the latter is better.

As to his reply to me concerning the S&C charges and so on, I think he should look through the records on what was actually said to the PCF in Potong Pasir. Before the PCF in Potong Pasir received the letter, it knew about it from the newspapers and only when it protested that he subsequently said, "Okay, if you want a discount, I shall give you a discount." It was not conveyed that way right from the start, as far as I could remember. That is the case.

Mr Chiam See Tong: Sir, we increased the rates effectively on 1st April 1994 together with the introduction of GST. We sent the letter on 4th April 1994. How can the Minister say that he knew about it from the newspapers? It was quite soon after. I think it is quite reasonable even if there was already a publication about that news.

Sir, on the point about explaining Government policies, the Government policies can be explained through the newspapers, radio, or TV, and they do not have to get a prospective PAP candidate to explain Government policies to the residents. But in any event, during my time at Potong Pasir, I did not see any of the PAP prospective candidates explaining Government policies to the grassroots. The only time I read in the newspaper that they were there was when they were telling the hawkers there not to increase their prices when GST was introduced. That was the only news I heard of them promoting Government policy. Other than that, what have they done?

Mr Cheo Chai Chen (Nee Soon Central): ( In Mandarin): Sir, in a democratic country, any political party can become a ruling party or an opposition party. So, although there is a distinction between the ruling party and the opposition party, their objectives are the same and, that is, to serve the national objective for the well-being of the people, albeit in different ways or perspectives. Any government should treat all Opposition Members of Parliament fairly.

In the other constituencies, all advisers are the incumbent Members of Parliament. However, in the Opposition wards, the MPs should also become the advisers to these grassroots organisations. I think there should be equal treatment and this is a fair and universal principle.

Mr Chiam See Tong: Sir, thank you for giving time for this debate. With that, I withdraw the amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The Chairman: I think hon. Members can continue their arguments over tea.

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

Mr Speaker: Order. I suspend the Sitting and will take the Chair again at 3.40 pm.

Sitting accordingly suspended at 3.20 pm until 3.40 pm. Sitting resumed at 3.40 pm