CIVIL DEFENCE SHELTER BILL

Order for Second Reading read.

The Minister for Home Affairs (Mr Wong Kan Seng): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time."

The Bill requires developers of residential properties to build shelters in all new flats and houses. It also empowers the Commissioner of the Singapore Civil Defence Force (SCDF) to regulate and enforce the law.

Before I go into the provisions of the Bill, let me share with the House my Ministry's rationale for the civil defence shelter programme.

Rationale

Despite the relative calm and stability in the region, Singapore cannot afford to take its peace and security for granted. Hence, our emphasis on total defence to prepare Singaporeans for any possible threat.

The civil defence shelter programme is an integral part of our civil defence efforts. It will ensure that Singaporeans are well-prepared and protected in times of emergency. It will also provide psychological assurance to our servicemen in the frontline that their families would be safe.

Progress to-date

The shelter programme began in 1983, when public civil defence shelters were built in nine underground MRT stations along the North-South and East-West lines. Since 1986, public shelters have also been built at the foot of new HDB blocks and in other public buildings, such as schools and community centres. In 1994, we started to incorporate household shelters in new HDB flats, the first one was in Hougang.

Today, we have a network of public CD shelters in HDB housing estates, community centres and clubs, schools and underground MRT stations around the island. Having household shelters in all new HDB flats and private dwelling units is the next logical step forward. Not only would they increase the coverage of the population, but they would also be more convenient and accessible to Singaporeans in times of emergency.

Singapore is not the only country to implement such an extensive shelter programme. Sweden, Switzerland and Finland are among the many countries who require CD shelters for their citizens by law. Although their shelter programmes started in the 1960s, they have yet to achieve 100% shelter coverage today. We have learnt much from these countries, as we formulated our own shelter policy to meet our specific needs. Perhaps the most important lesson we learnt is that it requires a considerable period of time to implement a comprehensive nationwide shelter programme. Hence, it is imperative that we proceed with the next phase of the programme now - through the incorporation of household shelters in all new HDB and private dwelling units.

Provisions of the Bill

Let me now elaborate on the key provisions of the Bill. As I have said earlier, the legislation is targeted primarily at new residential developments. Re-developments involving addition or renovation works will not be required to incorporate shelters. But, of course, owners can voluntarily do so, and the SCDF will gladly offer advice if sought. Shelters will also not be required for housing developments meant for short term, non-private or commercial-type habitation such as hotels, boarding houses, nursing and old aged homes, hospices, service apartments and staff apartments. We will continue building communal shelters in existing housing estates as and when there are suitable new developments such as schools and community centres.

Part II of the Bill spells out the specifications of, and regulations for, the construction and provision of both household and storey shelters. Clause 3 of the Bill requires every new flat or house to have a shelter that meets SCDF's specifications. The shelter can be built either within each dwelling unit (termed household shelter), or at a common area to be shared by several apartment units located on the same storey called storey shelter.

Clause 4 of the Bill specifies the duties of flat/house owners and occupiers in relation to the household and storey shelters. For example, they are allowed to carry out addition or alteration works which may affect the shelters only with the written permission and in accordance with the conditions imposed by the Commissioner, SCDF. They are also required to maintain the shelter and, as necessary, carry out improvement works directed by the Commissioner. As long as the occupiers abide by these rules, they are free to use the shelter space in peacetime. However, they should promptly prepare the shelter for occupation once notice is given by the SCDF to do so. Some possible uses of the household shelter space include a pantry or study area or even storeroom, while households provided with storey shelters could use them as storage space.

Parts III and IV of the Bill provide similar legislation for public and improvised shelters respectively. Clause 5 of the Bill will empower the Commissioner, SCDF to require Statutory Boards to build public shelters in non-residential buildings which they own. Clause 6 specifies the duties of the Statutory Boards in relation to the public shelters; these are similar to the provisions in clause 4 for household and storey shelters.

Clause 7 of the Bill will empower the Commissioner, SCDF to designate suitable buildings as improvised shelters during emergencies. But he can exercise these powers only when the Minister for Home Affairs deems a Proclamation of Emergency imminent or when he deems it necessary in the interest of public safety. Such an order can be in force for only seven days unless the President decides otherwise. Clause 8 specifies the duties on owners or occupiers of improvised shelters; these are similar to those in clause 4 for household and storey shelters.

Part V of the Bill touches on the use of shelters during a state of emergency. Clause 9 empowers the Commissioner to serve a notice requiring owners or occupiers of any shelter to prepare it for occupation during a state of emergency. In the case of non-compliance, the Commissioner or any authorised person may enter any storey, public or improvised shelter to prepare it for occupation, and recover the costs and expenses incurred in doing so from the occupier or owner.

Clauses 12 to 29 in Part VI of the Bill provide the Commissioner, SCDF with additional powers which he would require to regulate and enforce the law effectively. These include empowering the Commissioner and his authorised officers to enter and inspect any premises and shelters. There will be a consequential amendment to the Building Control Act (BCA) so that a shelter as defined under the Shelter Bill will fall within the definition of `building' in the Building Control Act. This will enable the submission and approval of shelter plans, construction and commissioning of shelters, and any addition and alteration works to shelters to be governed by the BCA and its regulations.

Conclusion

Sir, my Ministry will give the private sector a grace period of six months after the Bill has been enacted before enforcing the new legislation. This will allow building plans which are already in an advanced stage of preparation or have already been submitted to be approved without any shelter requirements. It will also allow the building industry time to familiarise themselves with the shelter requirements. The duration of the grace period was decided in consultation with URA and professional bodies such as the Singapore Institute of Architects and the Institute of Engineers of Singapore.

The enactment of the Civil Defence Shelter Bill is a significant milestone in the Government's efforts to provide shelters for the protection of all Singaporeans.

Sir, I beg to move.

Question proposed.

Mr Chng Hee Kok: Mr Speaker, Sir, I welcome the Bill. I also welcome the six-month grace period, as announced by the Minister, for developers. But, nevertheless, there are cost implications and I wonder how the implementation of this Bill will affect land which have been tendered but building plans have yet to be submitted to the Government.

The other question for the Minister is that over the long term, will there be adequate places for all Singaporeans? And if there are not, will there be any plans for the Government to impose on old buildings to be retrofitted with civil defence shelters? If that is the case, who will bear the cost, Sir?

Mr Kenneth Chen Koon Lap (Hong Kah): Mr Speaker, Sir, I support the Bill.

It is always very difficult to appreciate, especially in peacetime, why we put so much emphasis on the defence of our nation for any eventuality of war. Even in this House, questions have always been asked by Opposition Members as to why we are spending so much on defence and why we require our National Servicemen to undergo such intensive training. But we live in a very unpredictable world and anything can flare up at the snap of a finger. Therefore, it is prudent to always expect the unexpected and never be caught unprepared. The security of our nation not only requires the ever preparedness of our SAF, every Singaporean has to share the responsibility of ensuring our nation's stability and safeguarding the life of our people. The proposed Bill to require various premises to be provided with CD shelters is definitely one of the necessary measures that has to be taken. It will not only provide the physical protection to our people in times of war or civil commotion, it will also give everyone a sense of security now that there are safe places to take refuge in times of need. However, I would like to comment on three areas where I hope the Minister can respond.

Firstly, this Bill covers new houses and flats and new buildings which are subdivided into flats to be provided with CD shelters. It also empowers the Commissioner of the Civil Defence Force to require CD shelters to be provided by new buildings or buildings owned by statutory boards. But what about commercial buildings such as shopping centres, offices and entertainment complexes, and also educational buildings such as schools, tertiary institutions or any such civic buildings? Are they not required to provide the necessary CD shelters? These are buildings that will have a great number of people gathering in them at some time or another. Therefore, the provision of CD shelters would be of utmost importance.

Secondly, although a lot of existing buildings such as MRT stations and community centres and, I believe, certain underground car parks are already provided with CD shelters, I wonder how many Singaporeans really know that such CD shelters exist. For example, in our community centres, most of our CD shelters are being used for various purposes such as gymnasium, senior citizens' corner, conference room, etc, as they should be, because it is important for us to maximise the use of all built-up areas and not leave them idle to serve a purpose which hopefully would never be required.

However, it is obvious that all Singaporeans must be aware of the existence as well as the location of such CD shelters. I would suggest that locations of these shelters be made known to all Singaporeans through wider publicity and the provision of clear directional signs. It can be similar to those provided for MRT stations, community centres or some important public buildings. I think it would also benefit everyone if a logo could be popularised to denote such a shelter.

Thirdly, since developers already have to bear additional costs to construct these shelters in their developments, although I do not think any of them would object to such a provision, I would suggest that the area occupied by these shelters should not be included in the gross floor area (GFA) of the development so as not to lessen the buildable area which they are entitled to by the given plot ratio.

Mr Chiam See Tong (Potong Pasir): Sir, contrary to what the hon. Member for Hong Kah has said, the Opposition do appreciate that adequate provisions must be made for the defence of our country.

Sir, I suppose the building of Civil Defence shelters in new houses, new flats and other buildings must be part of the Total Defence strategy of this country. I am in agreement that Civil Defence shelters must be built. But I do not agree with some parts of the Bill. The widespread building of CD shelters to meet emergency needs is something new to Singaporeans. As the Minister has said, this is not new in some countries, in particular, Switzerland. I believe that, in Switzerland, they have been building CD shelters even before World War II. Probably, due to their thorough preparedness, that was a contributory reason for the country not being devastated like the other European countries in World War II.

Singapore is a small country with densely built-up areas. In times of war, the civilian population has nowhere to run to unlike other countries with a big land mass, for example, Russia. When the Germans attacked Russia in 1942, the civilian population could retreat with the army to its vast hinterland and the army could fight back from there. Singapore has no such hinterland. The civilian population, in times of war, has no countryside to run to. They can only hide in the CD shelters if there are enough of them.

Now, I would like to touch on the Bill. Sir, I do not agree with clause 3(1) which imposes a duty on new house owners to provide household shelters in accordance with the specifications. Land is very scarce and expensive in Singapore and it is not fair to make a land owner to sacrifice part of it for a shelter, if the piece of land is really small. There may be a case for persons who own big pieces of land, say, 10,000 sq ft and above. But for persons who own small plots of land, it is not right to ask them to put aside part of it for a shelter which they may never use in their lifetime.

What the Government should do is to build more communal shelters in private housing estates so that these shelters can be used by private house owners. Of course, if the private house owners want privacy, they can on their own build shelters on their land. I would propose that the Government build more communal shelters on public land rather than try to construct shelters in houses and buildings. These communal shelters could all be built underground so that the surface land above the shelters can be gainfully used.

Sir, the Bill does not state the specifications of the shelters. I am curious to know what level of safety these shelters are supposed to give to the people who seek refuge there. Are these shelters strong enough for only civil commotions and emergencies? Or are they built for conventional wars? Are these shelters supposed to be built to withstand nuclear wars? Are these shelters built to protect Singaporeans when there is a nuclear attack? If there is a nuclear attack, are these shelters built to the specifications to withstand only low tonnage nuclear bombs? Or are they also built to withstand higher tonnage nuclear bombs? I would like the Minister to clarify.

I note that town councils have to maintain such shelters if they are built on common property. In this respect, is the Government going to give a grant to the town councils to maintain the shelters built on common property under their charge? If the Government does not give such a grant, it would place further financial burden on these town councils because their income is only from the service and conservancy charges, which are just enough to maintain their estates.

I would also like to ask about the costs of building these shelters. What is the cost that each house owner has to bear? Perhaps, the Minister could answer this. Would this cost be tax exempted? In the course of building shelters in multi-storey buildings, what is the percentage of the cost of the shelters when compared to the building as a whole?

Mr Jeyaretnam: Mr Speaker, Sir, I was not in the House when the Minister introduced the Bill. But I would like to know from him whether there is any particular reason for introducing this Bill at this time. I hope I shall not be thought flippant if I say that my immediate reaction when I saw this Bill presented to Parliament was to ask, "Oh, are we in imminent danger of invasion from another country? Or is there an imminent danger of insurgency breaking out in the country?" So I should like to know what has prompted the Government to bring in this Bill at this point of time. One would have thought, following the news everywhere, that the world is becoming more peaceful except I suppose in certain areas where you have local wars. Do we have real fears in Singapore about some country in this region going to war with us? I suppose I will be told these are questions which I must not ask. The government knows best. But I think people must be told why we now find it necessary to have household and storey shelters built all over Singapore. And it is not being provided by the Government. It has got to be paid for by the owner of the house, which means someone who is building his new house has to go to the extra expense of providing a shelter and even when it is being built by developers. The developers are not going to absorb the cost, are they, of providing the shelters. It will be passed on to the purchasers of the apartments. So this is throwing another burden, another expense, to purchasers or builders of new homes and purchasers of apartments.

Mr Chiam has rightly pointed out that if it is necessary, should the Government itself not provide public shelters in all parts of Singapore, especially in areas where there are big concentrations of our people, so that people may seek shelter there. To ask our citizens to put up the cost of providing shelters which, as Mr Chiam has again rightly pointed out, they may not find it necessary to use, is adding an unnecessary cost and expense on our people and it is not as though they have got a lot of money to spare. I would, therefore, like to hear something from the Minister when he replies as to why the Government has considered it necessary to introduce this Bill at this moment of time.

Mr Wong Kan Seng: Sir, let me first deal with the questions raised by Mr Chng Hee Kok. He asked whether land that has been tendered already would be affected by the CD Shelter Bill. For land that has already been tendered or not tendered, it really has nothing to do with the CD Shelter Bill. As far as the developer or whoever buys the land is concerned, it is the final selling price of whatever purpose they put the land to. If it is a commercial building, they will factor into account the cost of constructing the building. If it is for residential purposes, they will factor into account the need to provide a shelter, whether it is a storey shelter or household shelter. Only those building plans which are to be approved six months after the coming into force of the Bill will be required to include CD shelters. For those plans, that have already been submitted, we will give them enough time so that approval can be given for the plans and they will not be affected. In other words, when they have decided to tender for the land and price the homes or flats for sale to the people, that is, before this Bill comes into force, they will not be affected. It is only after the six-month period after the Act comes into force that they have to take into account the need to build CD shelters. We have consulted the professional organisations as well as some developers on the length of time that is needed to prepare for new building plans and we were told that the six-month grace period is enough. That is why I mentioned the six-month grace period.

Mr Chng asked whether there will be enough shelters for all our people. Since the building plans started in 1983, it is about 14 years now, I think we have about 274,000 shelter berths and most of these are in public shelters such as MRT stations, schools, community centres, void decks, underground, etc. It is only since 1994-1995 that we started to have HDB flats incorporate household shelters in the flats. So with the development in Hougang, about 900-odd units already have these household shelters. And with the building programme of about 30,000 units of HDB flats a year, we expect, over time, more and more people will be covered.

In addition to the requirement that new homes should have shelters, we are also building public shelters in the 14 MRT stations in the North East line. Since the programme started in 1983, we have built 274,000 shelter berths and 20 years down the road since the programme started, in 2003, 40% of our people would be covered by shelters. So there ought to be enough shelters as time goes on, unless we expect trouble in the year 2003, which I do not think is a likely scenario. Many countries which started their building programme long ago are still unable to provide adequate or enough shelters for all their people. Switzerland, Finland and Sweden are examples. It would take a very long time for us to provide enough shelters for all our people.

Mr Kenneth Chen asked about shelters in commercial buildings and shopping centres, etc. We expect that in times of tension and hostility, people would most likely want to stay indoors rather than to go shopping. But if they are around the shopping complexes and there are no shelter spaces, there are still places such as MRT public shelters where they can take cover. So we do not think there is a need to require commercial buildings to have shelters.

The Member also said that more campaigns should be conducted to create more public awareness that we have shelters. Since the programme started, we have conducted a number of campaigns on a regular basis. In 1988, for example, we had a major public shelter programme exercise in Tiong Bahru. The following year, we had it in Lavender Station. In 1991, we had an exercise in Braddell Station. In 1993, we had an exercise in Newton Station. And last year, we had another exercise in Tiong Bahru MRT Station.

As for the void deck community centre-type of shelters, I think the residents are aware that these are shelters, because some of them do go there. They send their children there for kindergarten classes or to buy things in bookshops, etc. Many of these shelters have been put to use, and when residents go there they would know that these are public shelters. But I will ask the SCDF to study whether we need to put up more direction signs that there are public shelters in these places. When the time comes when we need these shelters, definitely, we will conduct very extensive public awareness exercise to tell people where these shelters are.

Mr Chen also suggests that the shelter space should not be included in the gross floor area. The amount of space taken up by the additional thickness of the wall for the household shelter is actually very minimal. Take the example of a 4-room unit. From what I am told, the additional space taken up due to the increased width of the wall is only about 1.5% of the total floor area of the flat. So there is actually no need to exclude this part of the household shelter from the calculation of the GSA. Similarly, for other types of development, I think there is also no need to exclude the shelter space from the GSA because shelter space is not an empty space. Shelter space is actually a space that can be used as a room, a storeroom, or as a pantry. Or in the case of a storey shelter, it can be a very large storage area. There is no need to make separate provision to exclude the shelter space from the GSA.

Mr Chiam has noted that other countries have shelter programmes but they have taken a long time to build, and that is our plan too. It will take us a very long time to complete our shelter programme. But he said that he does not agree with clause 3(1) which requires households to have household shelter, particularly for people who own a small piece of land. If they own a small piece of land, they can build an underground shelter in the basement. Or they can turn that shelter into a room shelter or household shelter like an HDB flat and make good use of that household shelter. Actually the shelter does not eat into the small land that the land owner may have.

He asked about the type of protection that the shelter will give. I believe that the technical people and the SCDF people, when they discussed the requirements and specifications, although these are not stated here because they may change from time to time depending on the kind of threats that we perceive, would have taken into account the need to provide adequate protection. But, of course, the more stringent provision we make, the higher the cost. And if we are going to take into account all kinds of scenario including nuclear blast, then I think the cost will be much higher. I do not think that is the intention right now because we have to assess realistically what are the likely types of weapons that are going to hit Singapore and then make a realistic provision for the shelters. I believe that this will be in good hands and have been studied and I will leave it to the technical people to consider upgrading the shelters as time goes on and as we build new shelters.

Mr Chiam asked who bears the cost. I just said that the household shelter is actually the space within the home. And if it is within the home, then whoever uses the home will have to pay. In other words, the home owner will have to pay for the cost. The cost is not really that phenomenal. From what I know, for a 4-room flat, for example, at current price, it ranges from $6,000 to $8,000 for the strengthened space. And it works out to be about 4-5% of the price of a HDB 4-room flat. For a 5-room flat, it is about 2-3%. For a private flat, it is about 1-2%. And the larger the development, I suppose the smaller the percentage, depending on how many people they need to put into that shelter.

I think the answer is quite simple. Home owners who use the shelter will have to pay for it. It is not wasted space like Mr Jeyaretnam suggests. He asked, why are we doing this? I hope he was in the House when I was outlining the rationale for this Bill. I said that Singapore must be prepared for all eventualities. Today, we are peaceful and we hope that the region will remain peaceful forever. But we cannot take things for granted and we must be prepared. And building shelters, conducting civil defence exercises and various things to make sure that we are well prepared for any eventuality is the right thing to do, which only a farsighted Government like the PAP would think of, and not people like Mr Jeyaretnam.

I believe I have dealt with all the questions, Sir.

Mr Chiam See Tong: Sir, I would like to know who maintains town councils' shelters and whether the cost would be tax exempted. What about the level of protection? If the safety level of these shelters is not adequate, they might give a false sense of security to the citizens.

Mr Wong Kan Seng: Let me deal with the question of adequacy of protection. Right now, from what the experts have studied, the level of protection is adequate. As regards town councils' shelters, like any public space, they will have to maintain them. They will have to share the cost with the residents who use the space. It is like any other public space.

Mr Chiam See Tong: What about tax exemption?

Mr Wong Kan Seng: These are expenses which the household would normally incur for their own protection. So there will be no question of tax exemption. There is no need for tax exemption.

Mr Jeyaretnam: Sir, point of clarification. The Minister says that after constructing these shelters, the residents may use them for whatever purpose they would like to put them to, and he suggests storeroom. If a resident stacks up all his old furniture or other things in the storeroom, what good will that shelter be when it comes to an emergency or wartime? Someone has to remove everything out first.

Mr Wong Kan Seng: Sir, I think a primary 6 student will be able to answer that question. When you have no need to use the shelter, you use it as a storage space. You put whatever you want into the room for storage. But when tension comes about and when you need to use the shelter for protection, I am sure you would do the wisest thing in the world to save your own life and remove those things.

Question put, and agreed to.

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

The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. - [Mr Wong Kan Seng].

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

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

Sitting accordingly suspended at 3.13 pm until 3.40 pm. Sitting resumed at 3.40 pm