COMPASSVALE PRIMARY SCHOOL ACCIDENT (Setting up of Commission of Inquiry)

Mdm Claire Chiang See Ngoh asked the Minister for National Development if he will consider setting up a Commission of Inquiry to investigate the Compassvale Primary School accident.

The Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for National Development (Assoc. Prof. Koo Tsai Kee) (for the Minister for National Development): Mr Speaker, Sir, since the collapse of the roof of the uncompleted school hall on 15th June this year, the Building and Construction Authority (BCA) has conducted an investigation, and many other investigations. Their preliminary findings show that the collapse of the roof was most likely the result of a design error.

BCA has conducted precautionary checks on buildings designed or checked by the same individuals responsible for the Compassvale Primary School. These checks include physical inspection of the buildings for signs of defects. The BCA is satisfied that all existing schools designed or checked by the same individuals are safe for occupation. In other words, the individuals responsible for designing Compassvale Primary School did not commit the same error elsewhere.

I am also pleased to report that as of today the BCA has visually inspected all the 362 schools in Singapore, both Government-aided and Government schools, and has found them to be structurally sound. We are confident that the present system of building control and checks has created and will continue to ensure a safe built environment. The record speaks for itself. In fact, the feedback in the past, and even today, has been that our system has been overly cautious and stringent. Nonetheless, the BCA was asked to carry out precautionary checks on other similar structures in schools to make sure that they are absolutely safe. The BCA will continue to review the current system to further minimise the possibility of accidents like Compassvale occurring ever again. The BCA will also work with the various professional bodies and other parties in the construction industry to safeguard the integrity of our system.

This being the case, the Ministry does not see the need to convene a Commission of Inquiry.

Dr Lee Tsao Yuan: Will the Senior Parliamentary Secretary also inform the House whether similar checks are made with all buildings, rather than just schools, that this particular designer has contributed to the design?

Assoc. Prof. Koo Tsai Kee: Sir, because of time constraint, the BCA enlisted the assistance of the other agencies like HDB and the corporatised PWDC to check in the first instance all Government and Government-aided schools. It will then extend this surveillance to public buildings.

As for private buildings, it is actually not the BCA's on-going activities to check for their structural integrity. The Senior Minister of State for Education has already reported that within our system all buildings need to be audited structurally every five or 10 years. Residential buildings are audited every 10 years, and the others every five years. Completed buildings do not just collapse overnight. There will be degradation in structures resulting in cracks, subsidence, leakages and things like that. These will usually be reported by the residents or the Town Councils, the principals or whoever is in charge of the building. It is not necessary to inspect all buildings in Singapore. In any case, there are no resources. We have to depend on the integrity of the professional engineers who design the buildings in the first place and the accedited checkers who check the buildings. Having said that, I am very sure that all the buildings in Singapore are safe.

Mr J. B. Jeyaretnam (Non-Constituency Member): Sir, may I follow up on the question asked by Mdm Claire Chiang about releasing the names of the structural consultants? We were told that it cannot be released. May I know why not? What is the reason for not releasing the names? The second question is this. We were told that there will be no Commission of Inquiry but there is an investigation underfoot. Has the investigation been completed and will it be made public? When they are completed, will we have a full report?

Assoc. Prof. Koo Tsai Kee: Sir, while a Commission of Inquiry is not necessary, the BCA has done preliminary investigations and they would likely prefer charges against the engineers or parties involved in the faulty design. The Senior Minister of State for Education did not release the names of the engineers involved because this is already obvious. If he goes to the school that was under construction, he will see the names of the developer, the consultants and the M&E plastered on the board. Because we are taking legal advice from the Attorney-General's Chambers, and there are likely to be some charges preferred against the parties concerned, we would not release their names in this Parliament. But if he wants to know their names, he could just go to the school and he would see their names plastered on the board there.

Mr Jeyaretnam: Give the name of the company.

Assoc. Prof. Koo Tsai Kee: The names of the developer, the contractor, the M&E engineers, the structural engineers and the quantity surveyors are all there.

Dr Lee Tsao Yuan: I want to ask the Senior Parliamentary Secretary what sort of compensation would be given to the foreign workers who have been hurt in the accident because it seems that some of them were very seriously injured and could actually have been impaired for life.

Assoc. Prof. Koo Tsai Kee: Sir, that is a matter for the Ministry of Manpower to answer. She may want to file a Question for the Minister for Manpower to answer.

Mr Jeyaretnam: May I ask whether the Senior Parliamentary Secretary will answer my question about releasing the investigation report when it is all completed.

Assoc. Prof. Koo Tsai Kee: Yes, of course. Once the charges are preferred the Professional Engineers' Board would take action, and at the same time the Building and Construction Authority is likely to prefer charges. Once these charges are made, the due process of appeal must be allowed, and these would obviously be made public.

Mr Chuang Shaw Peng (Nominated Member): Since the problem is most likely due to design, can the Senior Parliamentary Secretary tell the House whether the person responsible has carried enough insurance policy to cover the losses and damages? If not, would the Ministry ensure in future that all consultants should carry the appropriate insurance policy?

Assoc. Prof. Koo Tsai Kee: The Professional Engineer must carry his own professional liability insurance and it is for him to ensure that he is covered himself.

Mr Chuang Shaw Peng: I understand from the industry that a good number of professionals do not carry insurance at all. If such an accident occurs again when one of the houses, condominiums or schools collapses and the contractor is not insured, the residents will get nothing out of it because the person can just declare himself to be a bankrupt. Nowadays, with the new Bankruptcy Act, after three years, he is all right again.

Mr Speaker: I think your question is hypothetical.

Assoc. Prof. Koo Tsai Kee: Let this be a lesson for the professional engineer.

Mdm Claire Chiang See Ngoh: Sir, I am not satisfied with the answer that we do not need a Commission of Inquiry. Just by pure chance, we had averted this disaster, it could have been a tragedy. Therefore, in the interest of the public, should we not carry out this commission? Because it has far-reaching implication as well on the building guidelines and public safety. If not, could the Senior Parliamentary Secretary also clarify what level of disaster must we reach to justify a Commission of Inquiry?

Assoc. Prof. Koo Tsai Kee: Mr Speaker, Sir, while I said that a Commission of Inquiry was not necessary, there was an internal committee of inquiry within the BCA and within the Ministry. So we will find out what is the problem. We are satisfied at this point that the problem is an isolated one as opposed to the Hotel New World disaster where a Commission of Inquiry was convened. In that incident, of course, deaths were involved, but the nature was different. In that instance, there was a combination of problems - design, maintenance, construction - resulting in a necessity for a Commission of Inquiry. In this case, we have isolated the problem. It is, to our mind, based on our preliminary findings, a clear case of design error. So it is an isolated one-off accident. The fault lies mainly in the designer and probably the checker. So it is not a comprehensive problem that we cannot isolate.