FINAL SUPPLEMENTARY ESTIMATES OF EXPENDITURE FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR 1ST APRIL, 1996 TO 31ST MARCH, 1997 (Paper Cmd. 1 of 1997)

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

[Mr Speaker in the Chair]

The Chairman: Final Supplementary Estimates of Expenditure for the financial year 1st April 1996 to 31st March 1997, contained in Paper Cmd. 1 of 1997.

I shall deal first with the Head of Expenditure in respect of which an amendment stands on the Order Paper Supplement. Head W, Ministry of Trade and Industry, Mr Chiam See Tong.

Head W -

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

That the sum to be allocated for Head W be reduced by $10 in respect of Code 2000.

Sir, this House is asked by the Minister to approve an additional supplementary sum of $78 million to provide for rebates on utilities for citizens living in 1-, 2-, 3-, 4- and 5-room HDB flats. The Code under which this allocation is made is 2000, Other Operating Expenditure. I looked up last year's Budget which was presented to Parliament under Paper Cmd. 4 of 1996 and there are several subheads. But I believe that the subhead in which this particular allocation is being asked for comes under subhead 2400, Public Relations.

Sir, anyone looking at this subhead will notice the tremendous increase of funds allocated from FY 94 to FY 96. In fact, in 1994, the sum actually used up for this particular subcode on "Public Relations" was only $755,000, and the estimated sum for last year jumped to $23 million. This is a huge jump, Sir, for Public Relations.

We are being asked in this House today to add to this $23 million an additional sum of $78 million. Sir, the question I would like to ask the Minister is: at the time when this estimate was made in 1996, did he realise that there would be a requirement of an additional $78 million? This is over three times more. If he knew, Sir, then the estimate should have been more correctly put in place rather than giving such a low figure.

On the other hand, was this additional $78 million a last minute after-thought? It was felt that it was necessary to have this amount because it was an election year and therefore the money was spent. Sir, these are the questions we would like to ask the Minister.

Sir, another question we would like to ask the Minister is this. Under this head of "Public Relations", does "public relations" mean only giving refunds to HDB citizens who are dwelling in 1-, 2-, 3- and even 4- and 5-room HDB flats?

As regards handouts, Sir, to me this is an out-and-out handout of $78 million to citizens who are residing in HDB flats, and we are repeatedly told by the Government that it does not believe in handouts. I believe the story has always been told that you should not give a Singaporean a fish which will only fill his stomach for one day, or less than a day, but give him a fishing rod, teach him how to fish and that will serve him for life. I wonder why is the Government now contradicting itself by giving handouts. But we also note that the handouts are very clinical in nature, very specific and not a general handout. We note that, of course, last year was an election year and such big handouts were given.

I would ask the Government that instead of giving a fish for one day, just like these handouts, it should, with this money, give the citizens a more permanent benefit. Give every HDB precinct a neighbourhood library, an educational tool which they can use and train themselves for life, and perhaps more recreational and cultural facilities in HDB neighbourhoods.

I have always advocated a smaller class size and money could also be allocated to the schools to reduce the class size. Give them a better education, train them and they can use it for life.

I notice that this money is handed out for public utilities. Public utilities mean electricity and water. Government is taxing on these two items and we have even heard since 1992 that water conservation is an important factor in Singapore. So this policy of handout to HDB flat dwellers to pay their public utilities bills is in fact a direct contradiction of the Government's policy of conservation of water. The Government is, in fact, taxing Singaporeans for excessive use of water. There is also an announcement that water rates will be increased. So if the HDB flat dwellers know that the Government is going to pay for their water bills, why save? In this sense, the Government is really contradicting itself. But I hope that if the Government believes in the conservation of water, even if it was an election year, they should not give the handouts.

The Minister for Trade and Industry (Mr Lee Yock Suan): Sir, I am replying because this concerns the Ministry of Trade and Industry, whose supplementary budget the Member is proposing to cut.

The Member first raised the point that there is a big increase in the item and whether this was foreseen. The Member may have forgotten the big debate we had last year over the rise in PUB electricity tariffs. The Government had corporatised PUB and found that, in fact, Singapore Power was undercharging for electricity and the return was below acceptable rates. Therefore, the tariff rate had to be increased and so that this would not be a burden on lower income families, the Government decided to give a grant to the lower income families, ie, those living in the smaller flats. It was decided that for 1- to 3-room HDB flats, the dwellers would be given $150 as a rebate of their utility bills, and for 4- and 5-room HDB flats, the rebate was $100. This amounted in total to $75 million. So the sum was not foreseen at the time when the budget was passed.

At the time when this item was debated here, I think Mr Chiam did not object. In fact, he was probably one of those who welcomed this. No doubt, it was an election year but this is something that has been given year after year. In fact, when the economy is doing well, the Government has been sharing out the prosperity with Singaporeans through various forms of rebates, such as rebates on utilities bills, rental rebates and rebates on S&C charges of HDB flats.

Mr Chiam raised the point: why not use this for libraries and swimming pools and so on. May I suggest to him that he can opt out of all these rebates. He can use the sum saved to pay for the swimming pool or library to be built in his area if he wants to. But I am sure all the other Members would welcome the rebates for their constituents.

The other point he raised is in anticipation of a similar rebate to be given for the increase in water tariff that we have implemented with effect from 1st July this year to encourage families to save water. It is important that we increase the water tariffs to drive home the message that water is a precious resource and people should be careful with the use of water. So the rate will be going up significantly over the next four years. In fact, it will be like quadrupling of the rate for some people. To offset this, the Ministry of Finance has worked out, in conjunction with my Ministry, some rebates which will be announced later on.

It is important that we price the various resources correctly, and water is a very special resource. So with proper pricing, the users can then decide how they want to use their resources. Do they want to spend more money using water wastefully or conserve on water and make use of the grant that the Government is giving them for other purposes: for the education of their children, for example? So I do not think there is any contradiction in the way that we are doing it.

As to why this item is put under the "Public Relations" head, I think it is just a convenient place to put the money. It does not really matter because Ministries are now allowed to vire sums from one item to another. So it happens to be a convenient item where we could increase the amount.

Mr Chiam See Tong: Sir, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

The sum of $82,000,000 for Head W stand part of the Final Supplementary Main Estimates.

The Chairman: I shall now deal with the remaining heads of expenditure in respect of which no amendment stands on the Order paper Supplement.

In respect of the Main Estimates, they are heads B, E, J, L, P, R, U and Z.

I propose to take those heads of expenditure en bloc.

Question, "That the sums stated for those heads of expenditure which appear in the last column of the Schedule of Total Supplementary Main Estimates of Expenditure shown in Paper Cmd. 1 of 1997 stand part of the Final Supplementary Main Estimates", put and agreed to.

The Chairman: In respect of the Supplementary Development Estimates, they are heads I, J, P, R, U and W.

I propose to take those heads en bloc.

Question, "That the sums stated for those heads which appear in the last column of the Schedule of Total Supplementary Development Estimates of Expenditure shown in Paper Cmd. 1 of 1997 stand part of the Final Supplementary Development Estimates", put and agreed to.

Question, "That the sum of $245,346,700 shall be supplied to the Government under the heads of expenditure for the public services shown in the Final Supplementary Main Estimates contained in Paper Cmd. 1 of 1997", put and agreed to.

Question, "That the sum of $1,899,757,330 shall be supplied to the Government under the heads of expenditure for the public services shown in the Final Supplementary Development Estimates contained in Paper Cmd. 1 of 1997", put and agreed to.

Resolutions to be reported.

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

Dr Richard Hu Tsu Tau: Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to report that the Committee of Supply have come to certain resolutions.

Resolutions reported -

"That the sum of $245,346,700 shall be supplied to the Government under the heads of expenditure for the public services shown in the Final Supplementary Main Estimates of Expenditure contained in Paper Cmd. 1 of 1997".

"That the sum of $1,899,757,330 shall be supplied to the Government under the heads of expenditure for the public services shown in the Final Supplementary Development Estimates of Expenditure contained in Paper Cmd. 1 of 1997".

Dr Richard Hu Tsu Tau: Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That Parliament doth agree with the Committee on the said resolutions."

Question put, and agreed to.

Resolutions accordingly agreed to.