Hansard, 1967-12-20

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

Development Estimates of Singapore for the year 1968 contained in Paper Cmd. 27 of 1967. For the convenience of hon. Members, I intend taking the total for each head of expenditure as it appears in the last column of the Summary of Estimated Expenditure on pages 5 and 6 of the Paper. The heads of expenditure in respect of which amendments stand on the Order Paper Supplement will be taken first. But before doing so, I would like to draw Members' attention to the guillotine times. Hon. Members will have noticed from the guillotine times that we are today on a schedule that gives hon. Members less time than we had on the Main Estimates. While on the Main Estimates we have been able to apportion times in multiples of five minutes, it has been necessary for the Development Estimates to restrict time for debate on certain heads of expenditure to as low as two or three minutes. In order to assist hon. Members to make the best use of the available time, I would like to repeat something I said last year. What we will be considering in the Committee of Supply today are Development Estimates, and accordingly it will not be in order for Members to address remarks on policy or on the day-to-day running of the various departments and statutory bodies against whom items of proposed expenditure appear. Debate is confined to the proposed items of development expenditure, and I hope it will not be necessary for me to remind hon. Members of Standing Order 46 (1) which requires a Member to confine his observations to the subject under discussion and precludes the introduction of irrelevant matter. If it is the intention of any Member not to move an amendment standing in his name, advance information to the Clerk will also help in making the best use of the available time. Lastly, while I appreciate many Members have put in a great deal of effort in preparation for the debate, they must be prepared to modify and shorten their speeches having regard to the time available. We will now turn to the first Head - Postal Services. Head 02 - The following amendment stood in the names of Madam Chan Choy Siong and Mr Teong Eng Siong - That the total sum to be allocated for Head 02 be reduced by $100.

Madam Chan is not here. Mr Teong Eng Siong.

(In Mandarin): I am not moving, Sir. The sum of $7l6,l00 for head 02 ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. Head 10 - The following amendment stood in the name of Mr Teong Eng Siong - That the total sum to be allocated for Head 10 be reduced by $100.

Mr Teong.

(In Mandarin): I am not moving, Sir. The sum of $16,000,000 for Head 10 ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. Head 11 - The following amendment stood in the name of Inche Mohd. Ariff Bin Suradi - That the sum to be allocated for Head 11 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (001) of subhead 10l.+

Inche Mohd. Ariff.

(In Malay): I am not moving my amendment No. (1), Sir, but I would like to speak on amendment No. (2)*. * The same amendment also stood in the name of Mr Ng Yeow Chong.

Amendment No. (2) , Mr Lingam.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 11 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead l0l*. * The same amendment also stood in the name of Mr Ng Yeow Chong. I am taking my other amendment also, Sir, i.e., amendment No. (4)++, together. I wish to raise one or two points under this Head and that is about a community centre in Macpherson Housing Estate. A site has been ++ Amendment No. (4) reads as follows: That the sum to be allocated for Head 11 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 201. recommended to erect a community centre in this vicinity. I wish to emphasise that at least 50,000 people are living of this estate. I hope the Minister, instead of saying that there are no funds available, will do his best to put up a community centre in Macpherson Housing Estate which will serve the people of this area.

(In Malay): Sir, if my memory serves me right, it was announced that a community centre would be built in an area where there are more than 200 or 300 people. The residents of Kampong Eunos in my constituency number more than 1,000. We have made an application for a community centre and there is a site which has been acquired by Government, yet a community centre has not been built. Can Government please provide one for the residents there?

Sir, I would like to take this opportunity to ask the Minister of Defence whether he is aware that a site at the corner of Old Airport Road and Jalan Satu in Old Kallang Airport Estate was earmarked for a community centre in 1965. When will the People's Association carry out the plan? At present, my constituency has a community centre which was converted from the previous Katong Boys' Club. It is located in a remote corner of the constituency and is serving people predominantly from the Geylang area. My constituents in the housing estate at Old Airport Road are unable to make full use of this community centre because it is not conveniently located. This being the case, Sir, I am very anxious to hear from the Minister whether he will approve the building of a community centre at Old Airport Road on the site already earmarked in order to serve the people at Old Kallang Airport Estate.

Sir since amendments Nos. (3)*, (5)+ and (6)++ stand in my name, I would like, with your permission, to the talk on People's Association and thereby not move those amendments. * Amendment No. (3) reads as follows: That the sum to be allocated for Head 11 be reduced by the whole sum in respect of subhead 101. + Amendment No. (5) reads as follows: That the sum to be allocated for Head 11 be reduced by the whole sum in respect of subhead 201. ++ Amendment No. (6) reads as follows: That the sum to be allocated for Head 11 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 402.

Please proceed, Mr Ng.

Thank you, Sir. There is a provision of $60,000 for works and buildings for which $15,500 is asked to be revoted. There is another revote for furniture and equipment. I would like to point out the lack of facilities in my two standard community centres - one is the Punggol Community Centre and the other at Punggol Point. Regarding the Punggol Community Centre, I notice that there is a piece of vacant land near the centre to which facilities can be extended. Similarly, at Pungol Point the centre has been trying to obtain the necessary permission for the adjoining land to be utilised as an added facility. Sir, I hope the Minister concerned will look into this matter. Sir, I now come to the rural community centres. Again the two items are revotes. I wish to talk on the poor siting of some of the rural community centres in my constituency. They are Kampong Sungei Tengah Community centre, Jalan Serangoon Kechil Community Centre and another is located at 7½ m.s. Upper Serangoon Road. In my opinion, these centres are badly sited. No doubt the centres are there, but very few people go there to make use of the facilities. For example, in Jalan Serangoon Kechil the centre is sited in a rubber estate, much to the inconvenience of the people in the kampong which is about a quarter of a mile away and where the population is about a couple of thousand people. I do hope the Minister will take steps to move such centres to suitable sites so that they can be of benefit to the community.

Move them yourself.

Sir, since the Minister for Finance has asked us to move the centres ourselves, may I add that Punggol Constituency is a rural constituency and, for that matter, the rural people may be classified as poor people? I think it is the duty of the Minister for Finance to allow funds to be allocated for the building of community centres for the benefit of the community.

You are not poor.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the Anson Community Centre is too small for the area. I hope the Minister will consider expanding the centre a little so as to make it more suitable for the area.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I think the Member for Punggol has forgotten that when we consider sites for community centres, Members of Parliament of the constituencies are consulted.

Point of clarification, Sir.

If the Minister will give way.

Yes, I will give way.

Thank you very much. For the information of the Hon. Minister of Defence, the construction of the centres was carried out in 1961 and I was elected to this House in September 1963.

Sir, I did not say that the Member for Punggol was consulted. I said the Member of Parliament of the constituency, if there was a Member, or else the sites were decided after the Prime Minister had visited these areas and had come to an agreement with the elders of the villages. Therefore, having sited these centres and having spent the money which was provided by the Ministry of Finance, it would be wasting public money to shift them. As my colleague, the Minister for Finance has said, if they feel that a certain centre is badly sited, they can move it themselves. There are lots of things which they can do themselves. For instance, the residents of Changi themselves built a community centre, and Changi is a rural area. 3.00 p.m. I would like to take up another point brought up by the Member for Punggol and that is the vacant land adjoining the community centre at Punggol Point which can be used to provide better facilities for the community centre. I would say the fault lies with him and his committee, because the People's Association have obtained permission from the owner of the land for its use, subject to the management committee of the community centre building a chain-link fence. They have done nothing so far and, therefore, they cannot make use of the facilities. Mr Speaker, Sir, the Member for Punggol has also said that his community centre is badly sited because it is about a quarter of a mile away from the nearest concentration of population. Mr Speaker, Sir, you know that land in Singapore is rather limited, and if everyone wants to have a community centre right in front of his doorstep, it is something that is impossible. If a man is really imbued with civic consciousness and is willing to serve the public and, at the same time, wants to enjoy some of the facilities provided by a community centre, a distance of a quarter of a mile to the community centre is nothing. The Member for Anson has said that his community centre is too small for his constituency. I for one would like to see large areas being made available for community centres. But, unfortunately, as the hon. Member knows, there is a limitation of land in Anson and in most constituencies in Singapore, and land is quite costly. It is a question of putting every available piece of land to the best economic use. Similarly with Mountbatten, Mr Speaker, Sir. The present community centre there is sited about a quarter of a mile away from the place which the Member for Mountbatten thinks is a suitable site. I have my doubts, because if we were to spend money on building another community centre in the place indicated by him, in a year or two he would come round and say the same thing, that it is badly sited. So all in all, I think these community centres are sited in the best available spots and they can serve the community there quite well. For the information of the Member for Kampong Kembangan, what the Prime Minister said was not, "Where you have 200 or 300 people in an area, a community centre will be built." I would rather think it is nearer the truth if his statement was 300 or 400 families living in an area. I would like to say that, inasmuch as we would like to have dozens of community centres in a constituency, there is a limitation of land and funds. As for MacPherson Estate, I have every sympathy with the Member concerned and I will look into the problem.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the Minister of Defence has said that the Punggol Point Community Centre is responsible for putting up a chain-link fence. Sir, we all know that it is very costly to put up a chain-link fence. In view of the small monthly subsidies given to community centres, I think the management committees will have to manage within the limited scope of the subsidies granted. The second point refers to the Staff Club House for the People's Association. While acknowledging the good work done by the staff of the People's Association to the community, I would like to ask the Minister (1) where is the Staff Club House to be located? (2) who will be allowed to use it, not forgetting that a good number of the staff are sprinkled all over the community centres in the island? (3) why is it necessary to build it? and last but not least, can we afford it?

The Minister has said that land is scarce for the building of community centres. But, actually speaking, there is some land. I think the original estimate was for $80,000. During the time when no money was available, a very small building was built in Anson. I do not think the Minister is objecting to the extension of the building. I think it will cost about $3,000 or $4,000 to establish a vigilante post there. We have not enough space. Therefore, he must consider taking action.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I am considering now. If the Member for Anson can assure me that, by spending $4,000 he can extend the area of the community centre in Anson to a size suitable for use, I will allow that.

Thank you.

But I will be surprised if he can acquire 4,000 square feet of land in Anson for $4,000!

Only the building.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I was told by the Member for Anson and other Members that it is not so much the building that they go for but the playing-fields. There is no point in having a large building where there are limited playing-fields.

I am asking for an extension of, say, 15 feet by 30 feet, because the other place for playgrounds and other purposes can be used. I only want to extend the building. I am not talking about using the whole land -

Order. Matters of this nature can be better discussed by inviting the Minister to the Anson Community Centre. An hon. Member: That is right!

I quite agree with you, Mr Speaker, Sir.

I agree with you, Mr Speaker, Sir, because these are details on which we should not waste the time of the House. For the information of the Member for Punggol, there is a very good reason why we call the committees "management committees". They have to manage everything well within their means. Sir, what is the Staff Club House for? The People's Association has a staff of about 1,200 who are responsible for the running of, I think, 183 or 184 community centres. As the Member for Punggol has pointed out, the staff are: spread all over the island and they have few opportunities of meeting one another socially or of discussing their work. All members of the staff are citizens of Singapore and I am sure the Member for Punggol will not deny a section of our citizens facilities for social intercourse and sporting netivities. That is one of the reasons why we decided that there should be a Staff Club House for the, staff of the People's Association. Another reason is to give them the facilities to meet and talk about their problems. I think the Member for Punggol is aware that we just held a staff seminar of the People's Association: to discuss ways and means ot improving their work in the community centres so that there can be an interchange of views between the members of the staff of the People's Association. The Member for Punggol has also asked me whether we can afford a Staff Club House. Surely, if we cannot afford it, the Minister for Finance will not have allowed it to be in the vote! The answer is 'Yes'. This is going to be a substantive Staff Club House situated next to the headquarters of the People's Association and the rugger field in Mountbatten Road. The first priority for its use will be confined to members of the staff of the People's Association. But we do not like to have any government facilities lying idle and I have already proposed to them that they can also entertain applications at times - I think it will be quite often - from any organisations, bodies or groups of people who want to use it.

I beg leave to withdraw. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Amendment (7)*. Madam Chan.

I am not moving, Sir.

(In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the total sum to be allocated fot Head 11 be reduced by $100.* This item involves a vote of $235,000 for the purpose of putting up new community centres in the rural areas. Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to ask the Minister three questions: firstly, how is the vote to be allocated? where will the community centres be built? and will there be any community centre for Sembawang? Secondly, has the staff conference of the People's Association achieved its proposed objectives? Thirdly, the staff should be trained in staff relations and their work duties so that they will be able to do their work better. Finally, I would like to pay tribute to the management committees of the various community centres.

The Question is, "That the total sum to be allocated for 1-lead 11 be reduced by $100." Mr Lim, three questions were addressed to you. The first was on the location of the new community centres. That is within the rules of debate. The other two questions arise out of the staff conference and the Member's comments on staff training. They are completely irrelevant in this debate. I will therefore be grateful if you will not answer them. 3.00 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, if the Member is very interested to know whether or not he is going to get an additional community centre in his constituency, I am unable to enlighten him. The programme md the plan are with the People's Association and can always be made available to him. But if he does not want to avail himself of this opportunity, but wants me to write to him, I will do so. As for the other questions, Mr Speaker, Sir, I will abide by your ruling.

(In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, I am not very satisfied with the answer. I ask for a division.

Mr Speaker, Sir, it is a matter of detail. The vote is allocated for the building of community centres all over Singapore. I regret very much that at this moment I am unable to tell him whether $1,000 or $5,000 is to be allocated for Sembawang, or whether nothing is to be allocated for Sembawang. But if he really wants to, he can put in a written Question, and I will give the full details of how these votes are allocated. But, in general, the principle is that this vote is to be allocated for building community centres all over Singapore.

Mr Lim. I think the Member's desire not to withdraw his amendment is more the result of what I have said rather than what you have said.

Question on the amendment put, and negatived. The sum of $235,000 for Head 11 ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. Head 12 -

(In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, the provision for this Head is only $10 and so I cannot ask for a token reduction of $100.

Point of order, Sir. Even before he moves his amendment, the Member has started to debate on it!

Mr Teong, I take it that you are withdrawing your amendment?

(In Mandarin): No. I want to say something. Mr Speaker, I beg to move, That the total sum to be allocated for Head 12 be reduced by $10 instead of $100. I would like to ask the Minister three questions. Firstly, why should there be only a token vote of $10? Secondly, since there is no plan, why should it be included in the Development Estimates? Thirdly, has any plan been drawn up? If so, why cannot he ask for a supplementary vote next year?

Mr Speaker, Sir, to answer the third question first. It is because I probably might ask for a supplementary estimate next year, and that is why there is a token vote of $10. The token vote of $10 indicates that we either have a plan to carry on with the project in mind - in this instance, it is the purchase of a launch for the supervision of barter trade and also for enforcing immigration regulations at the Jurong wharf - or that the plans are not completely finalised so that we have not made up our minds as to what sort of launches we need to have, or how many launches there are, and the cost. That is why the token vote is put in. As you will remember, Mr Speaker, Sir, in the debate on the Supplementary Estimates which took place a week or so ago here, Members accused the Ministries concerned of not being exact in their estimates of the votes. Here is another reason why, not having been able to work out all the details of the plan in time, or not being able to decide whether the plan can feasibly be carried out next year or not, we put in a token vote of $10. Contrary to the belief of the Member for Sembawang, when he says that there is no plan at all for this project, I can assure him that every time we put in a vote, there is a plan on the project.

(In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, I am happy with the explanation, and I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The sum of $10 for Head 12 ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. Head 20 -

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 20 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 103. Mr Speaker, Sir, I think we can congratulate ourselves on being one of the first countries, if not the first country, in this region to have educational TV. But I see that only a small sum of $11,000 is being provided for its development next year, as compared with a sum of $691,500 for the previous year. I wonder whether all the development has been done this year, so that next year there need only be a small sum. Furthermore, I understand that the programme is not quite up to standard and I fear that ---

Mr Tang, I am afraid that discussion on the standard of the programme will be out of order under this Head.

As you please, Mr Speaker, Sir. What I fear is that a small sum of only $11,000 may not be sufficient for the development of this educational television programme.

Mr Speaker, Sir, our educational TV service was launched, as you know, on the 30th of January. 1967, after nine months of planning and preparation. The service is designed to improve the quality of teaching and to supplement ordinary classroom work. The programmes for the first year were directed to Secondary I and II students and, as the Member for Choa Chu Kang has pointed out, were very well received. But towards the end of the year, it was felt that the time was ripe for the expansion of the educational television service to cover other classes in stages from Primary III to pre-University level for 1968. So plans for expansion were drawn up and submitted to the Economic Planning Unit for consideration. The Economic Planning Unit thought that the service should consolidate itself before launching out into new fields and advised deferment of the expansion proposals. That is why the small sum was provided for expenditure next year. However, despite financial restrictions, staffing shortages and the comparatively brief experience in this field, ETV has made remarkable headway. This was confirmed by the winning of a special prize in a contest in Japan, which was open to television establishments all over the world, including the B.B.C. For the information of the Member for Choa Chu Kang, since then the Economic Planning Unit has been having second thoughts on the matter, and I understand that a review of the proposals for limited expansion is being undertaken now.

I am glad to hear that the E.P.U, has reconsidered its decision and that possibly a further sum may be voted on. I am quite satisfied and indeed very glad to hear what the Minister has said, and I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 20 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (001) of subhead 301. Mr Speaker, Sir, I know that the University has essentially all the basic requirements to teach the various academic subjects leading to the degrees conferred by her. These, to my mind, are not enough to grace the dignity of this queen of higher education. What she really needs to crown her glory is a University Hall that will have enough space to cater for the annual convocations, act as an examination hall, and be utilised as an indoor stadium for badminton and other indoor sporting activities. It is, therefore, a crying shame that this institution, with an associated history of providing higher education for some 60 years, has yet to be provided with the necessary funds to build such a hail, whereas junior institutions such as secondary schools and vocational institutes can boast of such facilities. Will the Minister for Education, who is an old boy of the University, reconsider with some sympathy the urgent need for this so-called Great Hall of the University?

Mr Speaker, Sir, the building of a Great Hall for the University of Singapore has been receiving attention even before the former Oei Tiong Ham Hall was converted into offices to cater for the expansion of the University. The present thinking is to establish a Sports and Recreation Centre in which a multi purpose hall, as suggested by the Member, for convocations, examinations, lectures, debates, conferences, seminars, theatrical productions, film shows, and recreation, will be prominently featured. The complex will be built on the land near the existing playing-field and the whole area, in fact, is now being filled up in anticipation of this development. However, in view of our limited financial resources and the need to give priority to other more urgent development projects, the development of this centre has not received urgent attention. The cost of implementing this project will therefore have to come mainly from donations, and I hope the public, especially the alumni of the University, who have benefited directly from their old University, will respond generously to the call for financial assistance.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I am glad that some form of appeal will be launched sometime in the near future, so that the various alumni of our University will make sure that our University will be an institution of some greatness in the form of a Great Hall. With that, Sir, I beg to withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. 3.15 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 20 be reduced by the whole sum in respect of subhead 302. Sir, under this item I notice that an Institute of South-east Asian Studies is being proposed. Can the Minister for Education inform this House: (a) What the proposed Institute of South-east Asian Studies is? (b) Why cannot it be organised and run by the History, Political Science, Sociology and other similar Departments of the Singapore and Nanyang Universities? (c) What are the proposals for staffing the institute? Will recruitment of the staff from overseas take place? (d) Has Government explored the possibilities of foreign aid in the way of money and talent for the proposed Institute? Sir, with your permission, can the Minister for Education also explain to this House what progress has been made towards the building of the Adult Education Centre? As I see it, Sir, it is no use coming to Parliament to ask for big sums of money to be voted when the establishment of such an institute cannot be realised.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the institute of South-east Asian Studies is to be set up for the purpose of carrying out systematic research and studies on the economic, political, social and cultural problems of the countries in South-east Asia. It is intended to bring together high quality intellects trained in a variety of disciplines and get them to addiess their minds to certain problems as a full-time occupation for a long period with the hope that the expertise they develop will help Singapore to understand South-east Asia in detail and in depth. And this is better done by a separate institute devoted to this purpose than by other departments in the Universities, either of Singapore or Nanyang. The institute will have a director and several other subordinate full-time staff, and some of the university academic staff will also be drawn into the various projects of studies to be organised by this institute. It is for that purpose that the institute will be sited at the University of Singapore. The staff of this institute will be open both to local as well as expatriate scholars. I am sure that when the institute is set up, foreign aid will be sought from the appropriate foundations.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I think the Minister has not answered my last point on the Adult Education Centre. Can he please oblige?

The plan for the Adult Education Centre has been shelved - not exactly shelved - but for the time being it is still under consideration by the relevant authority and it is not certain when it will receive urgent consideration.

Sir, I well remember that when I was debating on this particular topic some time ago, the Minister of State for Education was painting a very good picture of what the Adult Education Centre would be and today ---

Mr Ng, thought you were going to be very short. But if you are going to expand on the Adult Education Centre, I am afraid I must rule you out of order on this amendment. However, you may be able to bring your remarks under the next amendment which is an amendment to the whole head.

Sir, I beg leave to withdraw. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

(In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the total sum to be allocated for Head 20 be reduced by $100. Sir, the allocation for this head totalling $4,863,310 is mainly for the following. $400,000 for the University of Singapore, $921,400 for Nanyang University, and $2,149,600 for the Ministry of Education Administrative Building. This shows that the Ministry of Education is paying great importance to higher education. But I would like to ask two questions. I remember the Minister for Education once declared that the Ministry would be considering the setting up of an aeronautical faculty in the University of Singapore. What is the progress of this plan so far? Secondly, can the Minister say when the Ministry of Education Administrative Building will be completed?

Mr Speaker, the proposal to set up a technological university has not been finalised and the creation of an aeronautical faculty will, as I said last year, have to await the establishment of a technological university. As for the building of a new headquarters for the Ministry of Education, about 20 per cent of the work has been completed so far, and it is expected that the building will be ready for occupation by the end of 1968.

Mr Ong Pang Boon, before I ask Mr Teong if he wishes to withdraw the amendment. I believe Mr Ng would like to say something on the Adult Education Centre.

Mr Speaker, Sir, this question was debated on the 30th of December, 1965. The Hansard Volume is No. 24, issue No. 14, col. 788 when I moved the Development Estimates then. I quote: 'I would like to urge that the plan to build an Adult Education Centre be speeded up,...'. I went on to say something about the Adult Education Board for which a bouquet was in turn handed back to me by the Minister of State for Education. Today, I am indeed greatly disturbed to hear that such a plan for adult education purposes has to be shelved because of its low priority. I shall be very grateful if the Minister will elaborate on why this plan has to be dropped.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I am as disappointed as the Member for Punggol that this proposed plan for an Adult Education Centre has to be pigeonholed. But as he is well aware, there are many urgent calls on the financial resources of the State, and it is the view of the relevant authority that this project is not as urgent as many others.

(In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, in view of the explanation by the Minister. I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The sum of $4,863,310 for Head 20 ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. Head 21 - The following amendments stood in the name of Inche Mohd. Ariff Bin Suradi -

Inche Mohd. Ariff.

I am not moving my amendments Nos. (1), (2) and (3).

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the total sum to be allocated for Head 21 be reduced by $100.+ + The same amendment also stood in the name of Mr Teong Eng Siong. Sir, I take it that this head deals with the building programme of both primary and secondary schools. But I notice that under primary schools the three items have to be revoted. I shall be grateful if the Minister can explain these revotes. What are the schools? Are they for existing schools or are the schools in the process of being replaced, and what are the new schools? Coming down we have the secondary schools. I would like to inquire as to the number of new schools that will be built and where these schools will be located. Also, is the number of schools, both primary and secondary, sufficient to meet the ever increasing school population demand, not forgetting that more and more students are going into the pre-university classes?

(In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, under this vote it seems that there is a reduction compared with what was voted for last year. I do not know whether this is due to the fact that we have enough schools. 3.30 p.m. That is why we have a reduction in the vote for next year. Whether there are sufficient schools or not, I feel that it is because we have two sessions in our schools. If we are going to revert back to the system of a full-day school, it seems there are not enough schools for the future. I would like to know the reason for the reduction of this vote. I remember the Minister said a few days ago that four vocational schools would be built in the future. Where are these schools to be built?

Mr Speaker, Sir, I see that the vote for the reconstruction of Raffles Institution is only $10 for works and buildings. I understand part of the school is now falling to pieces. Surely something must be done in case of any possible accidents to the pupils there.

$10 of Scotch tape!

(In Mandarin): Sir, I would like to pose two questions to the Minister on construction of secondary schools. Since the beginning of this year, the Ministry has noted that secondary school halls can be used for sporting activities, such as volleyball and badminton. However, the halls in certain secondary schools have glass windows. Therefore, the principals stop their staff and students from playing volleyball there. I want to know whether the Minister has plans to change these glass windows into some other type of windows for the school halls.

Sir, the revote for new primary schools under subhead 101 is for the construction of three new primary schools. These are situated at Mattar Road, Toa Payoh and Delta. Circus. The revote of $362,000 is meant to carry out major extensions to the Yio Chu Kang, Canberra and Sembawang Hill Estate primary schools. Another sum of $294,000 is revoted for construction of primary schools to replace Rangoon Road and Pulau Bukom primary schools. The primary school enrolment will reach its peak in 1968 and will register a gradual decline from 1969. There is enough accommodation to cater for the requirements of primary education in the next decade and no new primary schools need to be built except to replace old schools or to serve residents in new housing development areas. Therefore, the reduction in development expenditure for the construction of primary schools necessarily follows. As far as the secondary school building programme is concerned, eight new secondary schools will be functioning in January 1968. These new schools together with the existing ones will provide sufficient secondary places for the next two or three years. This will give us time to do some hard thinking on our future policy on education and to find answers to questions such as -are we doing enough to overcome the traditional preference for an academic type of education, despite the better employment opportunities for those with technical or vocational training? is there a case for increasing the duration, scope and content of vocational education? Or should more places be provided at pre-university level at the expense of secondary level? To what extent can we afford to improve the quality in education by reducing class sizes and increasing the teacher/pupil ratio or reverting to a full-day school? The solutions to problems such as these will affect the number and type of secondary schools to be built in future. The Member for Sembawang wants to know where the four proposed vocational institutes will be built.

Mr Ong, I have ruled both Members and Ministers out of order under similar circumstances on another Head. Perhaps your answer can be given under Head 22.

Yes. The question of rebuilding Raffles Institution is receiving attention at the moment, and I think the problem is now one of selecting the best site for this school. I hope a decision can be arrived at early next year and construction can be proceeded with as expeditiously as possible. The Member for Paya Lebar has raised the question of providing some other more durable material for windows instead of glass for secondary school halls. This problem, I think, will be looked into early next year and I hope some solution can be found.

Sir, I am no old boy of Raffles Institution but I attended the last Annual Dinner as a guest. At the function the President made a speech. He was the guest of honour. He informed the annual gathering that a site for Raffles Institution had been found and I think i! was somewhere around Grange Road.

Mr Tang, I do not know in what connection you have referred to the President's name or how you intend to use it. But may I draw your attention to Standing Order 46, paragraph (7) , which precludes the use of the name of the President for the purposes of influencing Parliament.

I do not intend to use the President's name to influence the course of the debate. But I just wish to quote what the President said. He announced that a site had been found for the rebuilding of Raffles Institution. I was just wondering whether the Minister could enlighten this House on whether the present site has been rejected and a new site found.

Sir, I am still concerned about the possible injury to pupils of Raffles Institution. Can the Minister tell us whether the damaged parts of Raffles Institution have been repaired before the school reopens next year?

Sir, I think that that part of Raffles Institution which was condemned by the P.W.D, is beyond repair and there is no intention to waste any more public funds on it. But the main portion of Raffles Institution is still usable, although the cost of maintenance is very high. At the time when the President made his speech at the dinner given by the Old Boys' Association of Raffles Institution, there was a site available. But since then I think there have been competing claims for the same piece of land and a decision will have to be made as to who should receive priority.

Sir, I am satisfied with the Minister's explanation regarding primary and secondary schools. I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The sum of $5,937,120 for Head 21 ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. Head 22 -

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the total sum to be allocated for Head 22 be reduced by $100. It is indeed gratifying to note that there will be piovision for more vocational institutes to be built, and also the need to pay for land acquisition in respect of sites for vocational institutes. Therefore, I would ask the Minister for Education whether there will be other vocational institutes, apart from those mentioned in the various subheads, to be built and, if so, their locations. Realising the important part played by vocational training, will the Minister consider increasing the period of vocational training which it now provides? In this light, I would suggest that a four-year vocational training period be implemented, i.e., to provide the necessary know-how in respect of skilled labour, or technical know-how which is urgently required in our industrialisation scheme and in the various trades too. I notice that the vocational institutes provide a two-year course of training for primary school-leavers, especially those who do not make the grade for academic or technical secondary training. I think a two-year course is barely sufficient to enable a 14-year old child to be able to pick up the necessary skill or know-how. I think if the four-year scheme were to be implemented, it would not only tremendously benefit the students looking fo: jobs in the labour market, but also the public. 3.45 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I think the Member for Punggol is referring to vocational schools and not to the Vocational Institute, because he said that a two-year course is provided for primary school-leavers. There is a distinction between a vocational school and the Vocational Institute. We have enough vocational schools in Singapore. In fact, in 1967, nearly 9,000 primary school-leavers will be posted to vocational schools. The two-year course in the vocational school is intended to provide general vocational training and not specialised training in any one trade or craft. However, the Ministry is now considering the extension of this two-year course to three years based on a U.N.E.S.C.O. report, so that more intensive training in a particular skill or craft can be given during the third year. However, this will mean an additional burden on the Education Estimates and cannot be implemented until more funds are available for education. For those students who have done well in vocational schools, they are given preference for admission to the Singapore Vocational Institute where facilities are available for the training of skilled craftsmen. As the Member is aware, provision for four more such vocational institutes have been entered in next year's Development Estimates. It is our view that if these four vocational institutes can be completed by 1969. the shortage of training facilities will be resolved.

Mr Teong, has your inquiry been answered?

(In Mandarin): No, Sir.

Mr Speaker, Sir, may I draw he attention of the Member for Sembawang to page 21 of the Development Estimates where the location of these four proposed vocational institutes are given: there is one at Jurong, one .it Qucenstown. one in the Macpherson Road area, and one on the Kallang industrial site.

Sir, I quite appreciate what the Minister for Education has just explained, but there is a relationship that I am trying to point out. You have the vocational institute, but you also have the vocational school to give the primary school-leavers - the failures, so to say - more training. But he says that there is a lack of funds to carry out such a project. I remember well the phrase "Spring source of the Nation" and also the words "Education is the best form of investment a country can have." These are our policy statements. But as to the lack of more funds, I hope the Minister for Education will try to persuade his colleague, the Minister for Finance, to give the necessary funds to carry out such a project, so that our young children will benefit. You do not have to throw out our projects just because of a lack of funds!

Mr Speaker, Sir, I share the sentiments of the Member for Punggol. But we are given only a certain sum of money and we have to decide how it is to be spent - whether there should be more facilities at the primary level, the secondary level, the pre-university level or the vocational institute level. The proposal is to set up four more vocational institutes and they will draw students mainly from those who have gone through a two-year course at the vocational schools. It is a debatable point whether the students who have gone through the two-year course at the vocational schools will be able to follow the instructions given at the vocational institute, or whether we should extend this two-year course by another year. I think it must be determined, to a large extent, by the financial resources available.

Sir, I do not wish to press my point further. I beg leave to withdraw.

Is it the pleasure of hon. Members that leave be given to withdraw the amendment?

No.

Question on the amendment put, and negatived. The sum of $4,204,520 for Head 22 ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. Head 31 -

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 31 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 901. Mr Speaker, Sir, I note that there is a vote of $76,500 provided in 1968 for the building of markets. What I want to know is where they will be built and whether a market will be built in Tanjong Rhu Housing Estate to resite the unlicensed hawkers now congregating in the car park at Kampong Arang Road. Sir, the subject of markets in Tanjong Rhu Housing Estate was, in fact, raised by me in a Question for Oral Answer in this House on 5th December, 1966. In reply, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Health said - I will quote from Hansard, Vol. 25, No. 7, column 439: 'I am very happy indeed to inform the Member for Mountbatten that the problem of resiting the unlicensed hawkers now operating in the car park near Kampong Arang Road has been fully considered by the Housing and Development Board and that a twostorey hawker centre will be built as soon as possible to accommodate them at Lots 202-4, Mukim 25, off Mountbatten Road, as the operating site for the hawkers. By then, all the hawkers will be sited in this area.' Sir, since then, a full calendar year has elapsed, and the plan has not been carried out. Although the site has been cleared, I shall be grateful if the Minister will enlighten me on whether such a market or hawkers' centre will be built in the near future.

May I, Mr Speaker, Sir, reply to the point raised by the Member for Mountbatten as regards the number of markets that will be built for the sum of $76,500 which is down for next year? This is really in respect of balances to be paid for three markets that have been in the course of construction during this year. The balance to complete Tuas Market is $12,400, and for Jurong I Market is $28,600. The other sum of $35,500 which has been entered for the 1968 vote has actually been settled and this is in respect of Bukit Ho Swee Market, Phase IV. That accounts for the sum of $76,500. I must say that in my reply to the Member for River Valley, when he brought up the subject of the vote for markets in last year's Development Estimates, I indicated that there had been a change in Government policy to erect markets and that it was the Housing and Development Board which would then undertake the building of markets in areas where there were new buildings or where urban renewal was taking place. Therefore, there is no provision for the building of any new markets for 1968 out of Government funds and the building of new markets, if any, hereafter, will be shown in the Housing and Development Board plans. The Member for Mountbatten has drawn attention to the fact that my Parliamentary Secretary has indicated to him that a hawker centre would be built off Mountbatten Road. I am afraid I am not in a position to indicate the building plans of the Housing and Development Board, because it comes under a different Ministry. I do not think it is necessary to ask my colleague, the Minister for National Develop, ment, to stand up to answer. I have tried to get an answer, and this has been obtained by telephone from our Ministry to the Housing and Development Board. There is a proposal for future development which I take it is for next year. I am in no position to say whether it is for 1968 or 1969 for a hawker centre around Mountbatten Road to look after 168 stalls. I presume that this is the hawker centre mentioned by my Parliamentary Secretary - was it a year ago? I hope it is not that long - and I will undertake to get more information for the Member for Mount-batten after today's sitting. 4.00 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I am greatly disappointed with the answer given by the Hon. Minister. The point is this: here, on the one hand, we are trying to clear slums and move the people into new Housing Board flats; yet, on the other hand, when they get into the flats, they have no way of earning a livelihood but to resort to hawking. The problem is this: we are now creating a modern slum. So unless the problem is resolved expeditiously, I think this undesirable state of affairs will continue to exist. We are trying our best to build a modern metropolitan city, and yet we have failed in this hawker problem.

I am sorry that the Member for Mountbatten is so depressed over the answer I have given him. I think he has to be a little more realistic about trying to resolve the hawker problem. This is a problem of long standing. It involves the livelihood of 40,000 to 50,000 hawkers, which in turn affects the lives of perhaps 200,000 to 300,000 people. So i will take some time before the problem of the hawkers can be resolved. I must say that it is the aim of the Housing and Development Board to ensure that their housing estates, which cost very large sums of public money, do not change the situation of the present slums to concrete slums. That is why they have asked for powers from the Ministry of Health to control the hawker problem within the estates, and this has been conceded. There has been an amendment to the Local Government Integration Ordinance to give them powers to deal with hawkers, and in this respect the powers were transferred to the Housing and Development Board on the 1st of December this year. I think it is only reasonable and fair to allow some time for the Housing and Development Board to organise itself to tackle this problem, but in the meantime their officers are being trained by the Hawkers Department of the Ministry of Health. We have already made a move to resolve the hawker problem, and we ourselves think that it will take quite some time before we can tackle the whole of Singapore. So to be fair to the Housing Board, they should also be given adequate time to control this problem.

Mr Ng, I take it you are withdrawing your amendment?

Yes, Sir. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The sum of $1,215,810 for Head 31 ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. Head 32 -

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the total sum to be allocated for Head 32 be reduced by $100. Sir, under this head, I find that a sum of $117,020 has been provided for the year 1968. But there is no provision for a mobile dental clinic. To my mind, this mobile dental clinic is very important as it can better serve the rural people. So I wonder whether the Minister has taken into consideration a plan to provide such mobile dental services. If there is no provision now, perhaps he can put it forward in supplementary development estimates in the near future.

I would like to assure the Member for Changi that there are three mobile dental clinics in existence. They are meant for the treatment of young children and school children for whom free dental services are being provided. But I am sure the Member for Changi is probably thinking in terms of a mobile dental clinic for adults.

Yes, that is right.

If that is his wish, I am afraid it will take a very long time before it can be fulfilled. As things stand, with the funds made available to the Ministry of Health, all that we can do at the moment is to concentrate really on what are known as priority groups, which include school children, pregnant women, and those nursing mothers in need of dental care, and lastly adults. As for adults, the only place for them to get Governmental dental care at very low cost is at the Dental Clinic of the Outram Road General Hospital, which is also used as part of the Dental Teaching Hospital. I think it will be very dangerous for me to accept the Member for Changi's suggestion that perhaps I make an application for a supplementary vote for a mobile dental clinic. Maybe I can give him a little indication as to how he can get what he wants, not through Government offices, but perhaps by an appeal to members of the public. I do feel that there is a lot of room for the tapping of donations from members of the public. For example, very recently the Rotary Club donated a mobile blood bank, costing probably $40,000, which is being fully used at the moment. And there is a philanthropist who wants to donate another mobile blood bank, but, unfortunately, we do not have the staff to man this mobile blood bank if it is made available to us. We are trying to interest this philanthropist into doing something else. So it will not be too much to suggest to the Member for Changi that if he can really make a very good appeal, then this mobile dental clinic will be forthcoming to meet his needs. Perhaps if he could ginger up some charitable organisation or philanthropist - not this particular one but other philanthropists - they would be at hand to meet his needs.

Sir, I assure the Minister that I will try my very best. In view of his explanation, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The sum of $117,020 for Head 32 ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. Head 40 -

May I here point out again that we cannot debate the day-to-day running of the statutory boards which are receiving funds under this Head?

On a point of clarification, Mr Speaker, Sir. Since we had no opportunity whatsoever to debate the policy and day-to-day running of these statutory boards during the consideration of the Ordinary Estimates, perhaps you can relax the rule and allow us this opportunity to do so.

The position is this. There are rules governing debates on matters pertaining to statutory boards. But Members have ample opportunity in the way of Questions and Adjourn ment Debates for these matters to be debated. If I were to allow free rein on this topic, we would encroach on time allocated for other matters which should rightly be debated. Subject to that, the Chair will see how far it can accommodate any Member who wants to speak.

(In Malay): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 40 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead l02.* * The same amendment also stood in the names of Mr. S. V. Lingam and Mr. Ng Yeow Chong. Sir, if I am not mistaken, the Public Utilities Board has received a loan from the World Bank after it has made out a convincing case to the World Bank for a loan. And besides getting this loan from the World Bank, the P.U.B. has also received a loan of $20 million from the Government. In spite of all this, the P.U.B. has increased its water rates. Can the Minister advice the P.U.B. to reduce their water rates?

Mr Lingam?

I am not speaking.

Sir, I beg your indulgence to mention a little complaint, since the Deputy Prime Minister is here, and I will be very glad if he can help me out. This is an ordinary complaint by the man in the street. Mr Speaker, Sir, the loan of $20 million to the Public Utilities Board is, as I understand it, to finance public utility projects so that the people of Singapore can enjoy the services of water, gas and electricity. The services provided by the P.U.B. are of a very high standard as compared with those of any other city in South-east Asia. In our highly urbanised society, practically every household is provided with water, electricity or gas, and even waterborne sewage.

Mr Ng, this is hardly a complaint!

I will come now to my complaint. Even our rural dwellers are provided with these essential services. So you will agree that the task undertaken by the P.U.B. in improving these essential services to cope up with urban redevelopment is indeed a gigantic one. However, there is a little complaint I wish to make. This concerns the billing of service charges to the consumers. The consumers, particularly flat dwellers in Housing Board estates, are very dissatisfied with the manner in which their con solidated accounts are rendered. In some instances, they are overcharged for the services supplied. I have a few complaints of this nature. When complaints are taken up with the appropriate department, they are rectified and the consumers are credited with the overcharge. In other instances, the consumers are usually debited with excessive amounts, many times their normal charges. When queries are made, they are often told that they were undercharged in the previous bills, and the surcharge covers a period of 10 to 12 months. When I examined all their old bills, I discovered that estimated charges were entered in all these old bills. Sir, I really do not understand why meter readings are not taken every month, so that the consumers are fairly charged for the actual consumption. 4.15 p.m. Is it due to a shortage of meter readers and, if so, why has action not been taken to recruit more people to do the job of meter reading? Sir, this is now being drawn to the attention of the authorities concerned. I earnestly hope the Minister will urge the Public Utilities Board to improve the situation so that this undesirable state of affairs will be eradicated. Surely this is not the kind of efficiency that the people of Singapore can expect.

Mr Speaker, Sir, in answer to the question raised by the Member for Kampong Kembangan, I would like to inform him that the P.U.B. has permitted itself to spend $140.32 million for 1968. This sum of money will be spent as follows: $57.1 million for the Jurong Power Station; $54.8 million for a system to distribute electricity; $3.9 million for the Gas Department; $9.6 million to enlarge the Seletar Reservoir and, at the same time, to increase the filter at Woodleigh; and $6.7 million to create a distribution system for the increase of water supply from Woodleigh. Of this capital expenditure, the P.U.B can only finance $45.66 million from its own funds. It has obtained a loan of $50.59 million from the World Bank to finance its power and water capital works and, at the same time, on deferred payment credit it has obtained a loan of $24.07 million. This total sum does not come up to the required capital of $104.32 million and, therefore, the P.U.B, has to apply to the Government for a sum of $20 million in order to fulfil the capital works for next year. As for the increase in the water charges, I can only remind Members of the House that the price of water charged to consumers had remained static since 1954, and for the last 13 years there has been no increase at all in the price of water although the cost of production has gone up. For example, in 1962 the cost of producing a thousand gallons of water was 72.94 cents and in 1966 it was 72.14 cents. In 1967 this year it is estimated to increase to 78.42 cents, and for next year the cost is going to rise to as much as 87.4 cents per thousand gallons. This, of course, means that somebody has got to bear the losses and up to date, until the P.U.B. raised this water tariff, the cost has been borne by the Public Utilities Board. The result, of course, is that the P.U.B. has found itself in very difficult circumstances, and in order for it to obtain a loan from the World Bank, it has to increase its tariff charges on water especially, in order to guarantee that the sum returned will be able to meet the interest on the capital borrowed as well as to return the principal sum. I think that will satisfy the query of the Member for Kampong Kembangan. As for the complaints raised by the Member for Mountbatten, I can only say that there are 660,000 meters involving 230,000 bills which are dealt with by the P.U.B. each month. On the average, it has been found that 12,000 meters cannot be read per month. That is, 1.8 per cent of the total number of meters have not been accessible to the P.U.B. meter readers for one reason or another. Some of these reasons are that the houses were locked and the meter readers could not have access to the meters, or the meters were faulty or the dials were blurred and the meter readers could not read and, therefore, had to await changes in the meters. Or there may be obstructions where the meters are placed. Somebody may have placed a table, a box or a pile of firewood next to the meter and the result, of course, is that it is impossible for the meter reader to have access to the meter at all. These are some of the reasons why 1.8 per cent of meters are not read per month and, therefore, some estimates of charges will have to be inserted into the monthly consolidated account. These are based on the average consumption per month. The complaints which the Member for Mountbatten has mentioned just now amount to only about 100 a month. There are 230,000 accounts and 100 complaints a month from these bills, amounting to 0.04 per cent. I think, all in all, the complaints are not excessive and I believe the accounting system is working well. So probably the Member for Mountbatten has come across specific individual cases and these have been brought to his attention. But it is not a general complaint among P.U.B. consumers. On the whole, I do not think there is any inefficiency or overcharging by P.U.B. accountants. In any case, when meters are finally checked, any overpayments are credited to the consumers' account, and if there have been under payments then, of course, the consumers have to pay the balance.

(In Malay): I beg leave to withdraw. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Amendment No. (2)*, Mr Ng Yeow Chong. * The same amendment also stood in the names of Inche Mohd. Ariff bin Suradi and Mr. Bernard Rodrigues.

I am not moving.

Mr Lingam.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 40 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 103.* * The same amendment also stood in the names of Inche Mohd. Ariff bin Suradi and Mr. Bernard Rodrigues. Sir, like the Member for Mountbatten, I also wish to crave your indulgence to say a few words on the Housing Board. The main point I wish to raise under this head is about the one-room flats. In a block, the passage-way between the units opposite to each other is very narrow. Added to this difficulty, the doors of the unit opposite to each other are in the same line. Because of this, when the dwellers of the opposite units keep their doors open, one can see what is happening in the other house. This reduces the privacy of these flat dwellers. Can the Minister remedy this defect by changing the design of future blocks? My second point is about the home ownership plan. I understand that some of the present tenants have been given the option of buying the flats in which they live now. Since the Board is asking them to buy the flats all of a sudden, they may not be in a position to raise enough money for a down-payment, though they would be happy to buy the flat. So I request the Minister to waive the down-payment and extend the period of loan in such cases. My third point is that there are many housing estates without community centres, and it seems that there will be none in certain cases. Will the Minister consider providing the residents of such estates with a community hall or a similar facility so that they can get together? Incidentally, I wish to point out that there are very few amenities for the children living in those estates. I have come across a lot of open spaces in the Housing and Development Board estates, such as Queenstown, Kallang, Tanjong Rhu, and Macpherson. Some of these open spaces can be turned into better use for the children as well as adults.

Inche Mohd. Ariff.

I am not speaking, Sir.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I only want to touch on the allocation of the flats, if I may. There are applications for Housing Board flats where the applicants have applied for Housing Estate A but have been offered flats in Housing Estate B, while there are other applicants who have applied for Housing Estate B and have been given Housing Estate A. This seems to be an administrative fault, and I only want an explanation from the Minister why there is such an administrative difficulty.

Sir, may I first say that our efforts at housing the population do not appear to be appreciated by Members of this House? But they have been appreciated all over the world.

Order. Mr Barker, you were not here when I asked Backbenchers not to spend their time praising the Government but to make use of the time as Opposition time.

My point is this, Sir,In Singapore we have housed one-quarter of our population. My predecessor, the former Minister for National Development, was awarded the Magsaysay Award for his efforts at housing and community work. But all we hear in this House is "I want flat A. You have given me flat B. The passages are too narrow. You can see through your neighbour's door." Members of this House cannot distinguish the wood from the trees. We are in a happy position today where we have housed one-quarter of our population in Housing Board flats. An hon. Member: Well done!

I am not expecting praise. This is more the work of my predecessor and of the Housing Board itself. But all we hear are grumbles about one room and two rooms. "When you sell a house, give it free," they say. But to deal with the specific complaints of the Member for Aljunied. He says the staircases are too narrow and the doors are on the opposite side of each other. But one-room flats are one-room flats. They are not very big. Neither is the room big nor the staircase or the corridors in between. But if the doors are opposite to each other, I will ask my housing experts to look into the complaint and try to satisfy the Member for Aljunied. As for the down-payments, it is our policy to accept 20 per cent of the purchase price. But we must have some sort of deposit, and in many cases the 20 per cent deposit has been reduced to 10 per cent. In fact, there is no problem about the flats at Tiong Bahru. All have been bought. Those who have refused to buy for reasons of their own have been transferred to other accommodation. Then again the Member for Aljunied grumbles about the lack of facilities in Housing Board Estates. He says there are no community centres and no community halls. They are not completely absent. There is a community hall at Queenstown and we are building two community halls at Toa Payoh. An hon. Member: How about Macpherson Estate?

Macpherson Estate is already up and the constituents of Aljunied should consider themselves lucky to have a roof over their heads. You cannot expect the Government to give you everything. 4.30 p.m. All you have to do is to go round South-east Asia and you can see that there are millions of people without homes. We are in a happy position. We supply you with houses, electricity, water and comfortable accommodation.

The people are paying for them.

You are paying part. The Government is subsidising the other part.

But the money belongs to the people.

The money does belong to the people. Hence the subsidy. But elsewhere you do not have these houses. I challenge you to name one country in South-east Asia which can come anywhere near us in respect of housing. An hon. Member: Singapore.

Obviously Singapore. As for open spaces for children, wherever there are open spaces available, if only the M.P. for the area approaches the Housing Board and makes a suggestion to convert an open space into a field or playground, I can assure you that the Housing Board will give it every consideration. The Member for Telok Blangah grumbles about tenant A asking for flat B and getting another flat and someone asking for flat A and instead getting flat B. There are many reasons why this can happen. One possible explanation is that the applicant for estate A may have been far behind in the waiting list and hence was given another flat which was lower down as far as priority is con cerned. But if the Member for Telok Blangah knows of two tenants, one living in, say, flat A and the other living in flat B and both are unhappy about it and wish to do an exchange, this will be granted readily, provided, of course, the rents are the same. This has been done. There are thousands of flats being allocated. Sometimes these things happen. If you live in a flat in Tiong Bahru and you do not like it, and you have a friend who likes Tiong Bahru and is prepared to give up his flat for yours, we say good luck to you both. But tenants of Housing Board estates are very fussy, as I pointed out yesterday. They not only want a particular estate, but they want a particular room on a particular floor in a particular block. And we cannot accommodate everybody.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the Minister said that he was not expecting praise. He was not. He demanded it. While we are in the happy position of accommodating a quarter of our population in Housing Board flats, for which I think the Government deserve lavish praise, I wonder whether the Minister will look into the proposition of building better flats now that our society is getting more affluent, instead of just building one-room units.

Are there any other Members who wish to speak on this head before I call the Minister? Hon Members indicated dissent.

Mr Barker.

I do not come to this House for praise. What I am trying to point out to Members is that they do not realise the position. They grumble about one-room flats and narrow passages and doors through which tenants can look at each other. Their constituents are lucky that they have rooms over their heads. That is the point and for which I take no credit. I have only recently joined the Ministry. My predecessors take all the credit. To deal with the specific point raised by the Member for Choa Chu Kang, he says build better flats. We are doing so. We have built four-room flats in Henderson Road. We thought of putting them up for sale, but then we changed our minds and agreed to let these flats out. At the moment, unfortunately, only about half of these flats have been let out. But we hope in a month or two all will be taken up. There are, roughly, a little less than 400 flats at Henderson Road. One reason might be that the rent is too high. It is $120 for a month with conservancy charges of about $6.

50. And should these flats not be taken up, we will either have to reduce the rent to suit everyone's pocket or, in the final analysis, sell the flats to those who want to buy.

I am withdrawing, Sir. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

(In Mandarin): Sir, I beg to move, That the total sum to be allocated for Head 40 be reduced by $100. Under this head, the total estimated expenditure is $119,007,000 which will be mainly used to provide loans to the Housing Board of $50 million, to the Public Utilities Board of $20 million, and to the Jurong Industrial Estate of $20 million. I would like to put forward two suggestions under this topic. Firstly, I would like to point out to the Minister that the policy of house ownership for the people has been well received, but this policy has been confined only to certain areas. I would like to ask him whether he will consider selling all the Housing Board flats to the tenants because this will be welcomed by the people. Secondly, last year I suggested to the House that the Housing Board should employ lift attendants for the flats. The Minister seems not to have listened to what I said. I believe that the expenses for such lift attendants will be willingly borne by the tenants. There are three advantages to this. Firstly, more job opportunities will be created. Secondly, the lifts will be kept clean. Thirdly, the tenants' safety can be well taken care of.

Mr Barker, we have two and a half minutes.

Shortly, in answer to the Member for Sembawang, our policy is to sell as many flats as possible. We want to encourage home ownership in Singapore. But not everybody can afford to buy a flat. So I would suggest that the Member for Sembawang gets his facts right before he asks me to sell all Housing Board flats in Singapore. Rented houses are subsidised and houses which are purchased are not. And besides it is because of lack of finance that many a tenant cannot buy his flat. As for the question of lifts, he alleges that I was not listening to him last year. I can assure him that I did. I did listen Land surveys have been carried out asking tenants whether they want lift attendants. Surveys were conducted in Queens-town and MacPherson estates. But the xesponse to these surveys showed a very negligible percentage of tenants who are in favour of an additional charge in rder to pay for these lift attendants. The last survey was carried out in MacPherson estate, resulting in 3.6 per cent who agreed in principle to pay the :additional charge of $2.50 per month, 19.5 per cent were not in favour, and 76 per cent did not bother to reply. So this is the reason why I suggest to the Member that he gets his facts right.

Mr Teong, I take it you are withdrawing the amendment.

(In Mandarin): I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The sum of $119,007,000 for Head 40 ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. Head 52 -

Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 52 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 101. I fully support the vote for $646,900 for the establishment of a branch library at Queenstown. My only complaint is that there is no provision for establishing branch libraries in other satellite towns, e.g., at Toa Payoh which is being built now and will soon be populated.

Briefly, Sir, I am glad to note that the Member for Choa Chu Kang has expressed his opinion which is in line with the thinking of the Ministry of Culture. I will not go into the details of the Queenstown Branch Library -

Mr Fong, we are extremely short of time.

Sir, the absence of provision for more branch libraries to be built in other areas such as Toa Payoh and Jurong, as suggested by the hon. Member, is well taken care of by the Ministry of Culture. In fact, we recognise the need for more permanent branch libraries to be built in densely populated areas such as satellite towns. But I hope the Member will appreciate that merely by building a branch library is not all the problem. It will involve the acquisition of books and the training of library officers. However, we still intend to build more branch libraries in densely populated areas when the need arises. 4.45 p.m.

Order. I am afraid we have reached guillotine time for this head. Mr Tang.

I withdraw, Sir. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The time allotted for Head 52 having expired, the following amendment, standing in the name of Mr Teong Eng Siong, was not proceeded with: That the fotal sum to be allocated for Head 52 be reduced by $100. The sum of $646,900 for Head 52 ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. Head 53 -

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 53 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead l0l*. * The same amendment also stood in the name of Mr S. V. Lingam Sir, has the Minister any plans to organise or renovate the Museum to make it more interesting for the public and in particular for the tourists? Mr Speaker, Sir, there has been much talk by the Government about attracting tourists to Singapore. The Museum is one of the main tourist attractions. I am not so sure whether the Minister has been to the Museum recently. If not, I suggest he pays it a visit. Finally, I suggest that a notice be placed at the gate of the Museum, "Not for Tourists", in order to save the tourists dollars.

The Question is, "That the sum to be allocated for Head 53 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 101." Mr Lingam is not speaking.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I have only a few words to say.

Madam Chan, the Chair will take you very literally when you say, "I have only a few words to say."

I will only take one minute, Sir,I have another point to raise. The captions in the National Museum should be in four languages in line with our multi-lingual policy so that people - especially the students - in all the four streams can gain historical knowledge.

Sir, it is acknowledged that there is a need to reorganise and modernise the National Museum. In fact, this was pointed out as early as 1957 by Dr Van der Hoogh who was then a temporary museum adviser to U.N.E.S.C.O. when he led a mission to Singapore. In his report, he pointed out that while the Museum was rich in its collections and centrally located, it was none the less outmoded and gave an old-fashioned impression. He suggested ways in which the Museum could be modernised to fulfil the functions required and expected of a modern museum. We have studied the matter in conjunction with the recom mendations made in the same direction by the Science and Industry Museum Committee in its report to the Minister for Education in 1961. Plans are in hand to reorganise and modernise the National Museum, and I assure Members of the House that their opinions have already been considered in our planning. I shall not go into details on how the money is to be spent in view of the shortage of time. May I finally touch on the suggestion by the Member for Delta that the, exhibits should be written in four languages? This is the ideal thing to do, in view of the fact that there are four official languages in Singapore, but there are one or two snags which the Member will appreciate. Difficulty is experienced in expressing some technical terms, particularly in Malay - perhaps this can be achieved in time - and even in Chinese. As Members know, the exhibits in the National Museum are of scientific, archaelogical and historical value and' sometimes it is very difficult to assign a proper translation to them into the, other languages except in English. Even some of the objects are in Latin.

I beg leave to withdraw. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Mr Teong, amendment (2)*. There is hardly any time unless you want to lose time on Head 54.

(In Mandarin): Sir, I beg to move, That the total sum to be allocated for Head 53 be reduced by $100.* Sir, I have a question to ask: how many historical exhibits are there in the Museum?

I must apologise to the Member for Sembawang for not being able to give him the actual number of exhibits ---

Mr Fong, you require notice for the answer.

I can only give. him a round figure, Sir, but not the exact figure. There are two broad' categories of specimens - zoologica1 and ethnological objects.

Mr Fong, is this information not available in the Annual Report?

It is available, Sir, but I am afraid the Member for Sembawang might not have read it.

Mr Fong, I am afraid it is not fair to the other Members that readily available and easily accessible information should take up the time of the House in a debate on Estimates. Mr Teong, are you prepared to withdraw the amendment?

(In Mandarin): Yes. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The sum of $125,000 for Head 53 ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. Head 54 -

(In Malay): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the total sum to be allocated for Head 54 be reduced by $100. The estimate for this Head is $825,000 for the year 1968. A sum of $200,000 is provided for Works and Buildings for the Junior Approved School and a sum of $500,000 is provided for the Home for the Aged, and so on. I suggest that the Government should build homes for handicapped children. At the moment, I know that such homes arc provided by charitable organisations and not by Government. May I know when the Home for the Aged will be ready?

(In Malay): Mr Speaker. Sir, on the question of the Home for the Aged, I think we have enough of such homes. There are three at the moment: one is Bushey Park Home, one is Woodstock Home, and there is a third one at Woodlands. With regard to homes for handicapped children, we have at the moment nine voluntary organisations looking after them. So there is no need for the Government to build more of such homes. But we will certainly assist the voluntary organisations in whatever way we can.

(In Malay): Mr Speaker, Sir, there is an allocation of $500,000 for a Home for the Aged. I cannot understand why the Parliamentary Secretary has said that there is no need for more Homes for the Aged.

(In Malay): This Home for the Aged will be built in Clenienti Road in 1969. But we are not prepared to build more. Mr Teong Eng Siong rose - 4.55 p.m.

We have reached guillotine time. Mr Teong, do you wish to withdraw the amendment?

(In Malay): I beg leave to withdraw. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The sum of $825,000 for Head 54 ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. Head 55 - The following amendment stood in the name of Madam Chan Choy Siong - That the sum to be allocacd for Head 55 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 103.

I am not moving. The following amendment stood in the names of Madam Chan Choy Siong and Inche Mohd. Ariff Bin Suradi - That the sum to be allocated for Head 55 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 104.

I am not moving.

Inche Mohd. Ariff is not here. Mr Ng Kah Ting, amendment (3) *

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 55 be reduced by the whole sum in respect of subhead 104.* Sir, I would like the Minister or his Parliamentary Secretary to inform the House of the number of children's playgrounds that have been built this year and the number that will be built next year. Why is there a necessity for a revote of $40,400? I have a suggestion to make. Is it not possible to include some playgrounds in community centres if there is enough space?

Mr Speaker, Sir, the Member for Punggol has asked for the number of playgrounds. I do not have the information now because we have so many playgrounds in Singapore. But if he needs it, I will go back to the Ministry and send him a list of the playgrounds. On the question of the revote raised by the hon. Member, we are using it for one playground in Geylang Serai and one playground in Jalan Padang.

Sir, the Parliamentary Secretary has answered only one point of the three points I have raised. I want to know the number of playgrounds built this year and the number that will be built next year. But if he can provide supplementary information at a later stage, I will be grateful to him. He has not answered my question as to whether it will be possible to include a children's playground in a community centre if there is enough space.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I think the playgrounds near community centres will definitely be under the charge of the People's Association. This matter does not come within the portfolio of the Ministry of Social Affairs. An hon. Member: You are passing the buck!

I am not passing the buck. In case there is 'land, the Member for Punggol can certainly write to the People's Association which will consider his request. 5.00 p.m.

I think the Parliamentary Secretary is very confused over my suggestion. I was saying that suppose a community centre has some vacant space, would his department consider putting up a playground there? The problem that I can foresee is probably the question of ownership of that ground. Then the Parliamentary Secretary might say, "Look, if the Social Affairs Department puts a playground there and also looks after it, then it is the property of the Social Affairs Department." But I say: for the benefit of the community, fqrget these little technicalities, and grant these facilities.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I do not think there is any ,confusion. If there is empty ground near the community centre, definitely the People's Association can look into it. If he has any empty space, and he wants the Ministry to look into it, he can write in and we will consider it.

I think that is as far as we can take the matter now.

Sir, I beg leave to withdraw. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The sum of $481,300 for Head 55 ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.

I think this is a convenient point of time to suspend the sitting. Thereupon Mr Speaker left the Chair of the Committee and took the Chair of the House.

Order. I suspend the sitting now and shall take the Chair again at 5.20 p.m. Sitting accordingly suspended at 5.02 p.m. until 5.20 p.m. Sitting resumed at 5.20 p.m.

Debate in Committee of Supply resumed.

Head 56 - The following amendment stood in the name of Mr Ng Yeow Chong - That the sum to be allocated for Head 56 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 101.

I am not moving.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 56 be reduced by the whole sum in respect of subhead 301*. * The same amendment also stood in the name of Mr Tang See Chim Sir, this item is for a water fountain to be installed in a lake. I would like to know where this fountain is to be located. Firstly, I would have thought that there are no lakes in Singapore, but we do have ponds and reservoirs. Secondly, why is it necessary to build such a costly fountain? Would it serve as a tourist attraction? And would not the amount of $138,000 be better utilised for the benefit of the community?

Mr Speaker, Sir, I fully support the sentiments of my colleague, the Member for Punggol, when he said that it is a waste of money building a fountain in the lake in the Botanic Gardens, and that this money could be better spent elsewhere. There is also the question of aesthetic taste to be considered. I think the Botanic Gardens in its natural surroundings is a very beautiful place and its beauty will not be enhanced one little bit with the building of a fountain in the lake. It will only disturb the fish and frighten the swans. Furthermore, Sir, I wonder whether a very good fountain can be built for $138,000. I remember, during last year's debate on the building of a floating fountain at the MacRitchie Reservoir, the Minister for Law and National Development quoted the cryptic remark of the Finance Minister. I quote, Sir, this is in Hansard Vol. 25, No. 6, col. 385: '"Better to have two or three lavish fountains than to have a large number of scraggy ones."'. I wonder whether this fountain to be built will be a scraggy one. And even if it were to be a lavish one, I do not suppose we can compete with cities that are renowned for their fountains, for example, the Tivoli Fountains of Rome Mr Speaker, Sir, I know there are fountains in the Western hemisphere which are so lavish that they can throw patterns for one full hour in jets of water without repeating any of those patterns. If this is one of the schemes, to attract tourists, I think it is a very mis- conceived scheme. I think the money can be better used elsewhere. For example, $138,000 will bring water to Yew Tee Village in Choa Chu Kang, for which over hundreds of families will be very grateful. But with the fountain, we please no one, Sir.

Mr Speaker, Sir, it is rather regrettable that this fountain is not to be put up in Punggol or in Choa Chu Kang. I must also clear this point that it is not the Member for Tanglin (the Minister for National Development) who suggested building a fountain in his area. In fact, it was the Prime Minister who suggested in 1966 that a gyrating water fountain be installed in the Garden lake.

The Prime Minister was wrong.

The Director of Public Works was consulted on this matter and he recommended the installation of a floating fountain with underwater coloured floodlights at a cost of $38,000. However, this proposal was considered not suitable because (a) the fountain proposed was not of a gyrating type, and (b) it was not possible to site such a fountain in the heavily silted water of the lake. The present scheme submitted by the Senior Electrical Engineer consists of a composite set of three fountains at a total cost of $138,000. This increased cost is due to the following factors: (1) the fountains recommended are of a gyrating type as originally suggested by the Prime Minister. (2) A filtration plant will need to be installed so that the fountain can filter the silted water of the lake; and (3) this fountain will be provided with floodlights, as steps are being taken to have the Garden open to the public at night. Mr Speaker, Sir, if there is time, I would like to give breakdown figures of the estimated cost of the project. For a set of three fountains which cost about $25,000 each, and totalling $75,000, 36 floodlights at $500 each, and totalling about $18,000, pumping equipment for a storage well for water supply to the fountain set costing about $5,000, plant room storage well, fountain piping, etc., cost about $2,000 -

Mr Speaker, Sir, may I raise a point of clarification? I wonder whether the Parliamentary Secretary can answer our question of priorities rather than giving us a list of all the details. If he wishes to give us the details, we will take them in a memorandum.

Mr Speaker, Sir, this is connected with the question that the Member for Choa Chu Kang is asking. In fact, he talked about how beautiful the fountain heads of other countries are and all that sort of thing. In fact, we are determined to build Singapore as a Garden City. We have to have some beauty in our own country. As for the idea of the Member for Choa Chu Kang to supply more water, in fact, it is now the rainy season and there is a lot of water. Does he want more water in his area or does he want more pipes in his area? We have to beautify our country definitely.

I suppose the answer to the question that Mr Ng asks is that the lake is in the Botanic Gardens? 5.30 p.m.

Can I say a few words?

I am dealing now with one point. When I finish, I will call you, Madam Chan. Mr Chan Chee Seng. I suppose the answer to Mr Ng's question is that the lake is in the Botanic Gardens?

Yes, Sir.

Madam Chan.

Having heard from the Parliamentary Secretary, it would seem that after the water fountains have been built, the Botanic Gardens will be open during the night. My understanding is that the Botanic Gardens will shut by 7.00 p.m. Perhaps the Parliamentary Secretary is trying to help romantic couples go in and enjoy themselves! This would damage the dignity of the Gardens. I feel it should be a place for students to go and study. If it is to be open even during the night after the fountains have been built, then there is no way to prevent courting couples from going in. It may not then be of use to other persons. For instance, students who wish to go to the Botanic Gardens to study or do some research or even to enjoy the scenery, may be offended by the romantic sights they see around them. The Parliamentary Secretary should consider the point whether the Botanic Gardens should be open during the night. Mr Ng Yeow Chong rose -

Mr Ng, you are not going to suggest floodlighting the place at night, are you?

Not at all. I have something else in mind. In every country there is a national park and they feel proud of it. If you travel to other countries the national park is one of the many spots you will visit. Can the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Social Affairs enlighten this House on whether there is a plan to build a national park or to enlarge the Botanic Gardens into a national park?

(In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, the Member for Delta has said just now that the fountains to be built in the Botanic Gardens may draw a lot of courting couples into the Gardens. In actual fact, Singapore is a young country. I think it would be a good thing. Every young couple should go through this stage! If they cannot go to the Botanic Gardens, they can go elsewhere and make friends. Since we have seen so many couples along the beaches, we must not think that when young couples go to the Botanic Gardens they will act indecently. I think members of the public should have the right to go in. It is now under consideration only. We have not come to the final stage yet. As regards the time when the Botanic Gardens will remain open, this has yet to be decided. It may depend on whether or not there are incidents such as robbery, and so on which may happen in the Botanic Gardens. The security of the people there should be taken into consideration. They should have a sense of security when they visit the Botanic Gardens. Talking about a national park, the suggestion by the Member for Mountbatten is a good one. I think the Ministry can consider this point. But there are other considerations to bear in mind. It is not so simple to have a national park. According to my understanding, a national park may involve a lot of artificial structures such as we can see in the national parks in other countries. Even zoos are included in the national park. Some types of plants are also sold in the national parks. The question to be considered is whether artificial things put into the park will spoil the natural scenery or beauty.

The Parliamentary Secretary has just said, Sir, if you will permit me ---

You are supporting him, are you?

No. I disagree with all the points he has raised, except one, and that is to beautify Singapore. Yes, to beautify Singapore but to what extent of the public expenditure? Do you want to spend $138,000 on one fountain and when my colleague [Interruption] ---

Order, order.

When my colleague the Member for Choa Chu Kang pointed out that the Tivoli Fountains can be considered as one of the wonders of the world --- An hon. Member: Why cannot we build one ---

Do you want to sink so much money into one fountain when so many Ministers are getting up to say-

Order. Although we have not reached guillotine time, this head for which five minutes was allocated has already run into about 16 minutes.

I will take one minute to sum up.

Yes, Mr Ng, provided you end up withdrawing the amendment.

Agreed. I think it is a pure waste of public funds, since we have heard earlier in the day that certain Ministries are not able to obtain more funds.

Are you withdrawing the amendment, Mr Ng?

I beg leave to withdraw. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The sum of $303,600 for Head 56 ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. Head 58 -

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 58 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 301. Sir, I only want some information regarding wages. Is there a scheme of wages whereby the prisoners are paid for their work and their families are given part of their earnings for household expenses whilst the remaining wages are kept as savings until their release?

Sir, can I take up your valuable time to explain this vote of $170,510?

We are on Head 58 - Prisons.

Yes, Head 58, subhead 301.

The figure asked for is $250,000.

Yes, $250,000 was asked for the expansion of industries listed in the attached appendix. The approval warrant was delivered to this -

Mr Chan, the Member who moved the amendment has raised no question regarding this point. His question was about payments for work done by prisoners and provision for their families. Are you in a position to deal with that matter today?

Mr Speaker, Sir, prisoners who work in prison are given a nominal sum. In fact, if the Member for Mountbatten would like to know in detail, we can circularise the information to him.

I am certainly glad if I can have the information. In that case, I beg leave to withdraw. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The sum of $1,806,520 for Head 58 ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. Head 60 -

Mr Speaker,. Sir, I beg to move. That the sum to be allocated for Head 60 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 001*. * The same amendment also stood in the name of Mr Ng Yeow Chong Mr Speaker, Sir, in the Development Estimates this item is shown as "Improvement to Beaches". I suppose this is principally concerned with the cleaning of beaches. I am glad to see in' yesterday's papers that the Tourist Promotion Board is taking a hand in cleaning up our beaches which could be very beautiful but for the uncivic consciousness of some of our beach users. The beaches in Singapore have been littered with rubbish like beer cans and other things. I am also very glad to see that my colleague, the Member for Changi, also took a very active part in the campaign which was also helped by some very prominent businessmen in our Republic. I hope this will set an example which other people can follow. Here, Mr Speaker, Sir, may I make an appeal to our people to have more regard for other users of beaches and also to help keep our beaches clean? Apart from the tourist promotion point of view, it can also be very beneficial' to ourselves. In this regard, Sir, may I ask the Minister to look into the question of providing more bins properly labelled? For example, call a spade a spade; call a rubbish bin a rubbish bin and not a litter bin, because there can be a misunderstanding by tourists who are not English-educated. These tourists could put letters and postcards into those bins.

Sir, I believe the Member for Choa Chu Kang is referring to the beach-cleaning campaign last Sunday when about 100 or more civic-minded citizens of Singapore went to the beaches to carry out the campaign. Among them was a V.I.P. from this House, none other than the Member for Changi. The newspapers of all languages had given this campaign a lot of publicity. A tribute must be paid to all those who participated in the beach-cleaning campaign. Sir, I understand this is not the first time but rather the third time that a campaign of this sort was carried out. Sir, you will recall that when this House discussed the Development Estimates for 1967 on 20th December last year in Committee of Supply, I requested the Government to build beach resorts and recreational amenities near the seaside not only for the citizens of Singapore but also to attract tourists. This aspect of work has now been transferred to the Tourist Promotion Board this year. The Minister for Social Affairs said in this House - I quote from Hansard, col. 1015, No. 13 of Volume 25, dated 20-12-66: 'Sir, the need for better recreational facilities on our beaches is becoming urgent, and it is proposed to make a start at the Changi Beach which has proved extremely popular with the local population.' And he went on to say: 'If this pilot project [the pilot project means improvement to the beaches at Changi proves a success, plans will be made for further similar projects both at Changi Beach and other beaches on the Island.' Mr Speaker, Sir, a full year has elapsed and no beach resorts have been built as planned. Now that the improvement to beaches and their maintenance are placed in the charge of the Tourist Promotion Board, I expect the work wilt be speeded up. 5.45 p.m.

Mr Ng, we have one minute more for this head.

I am coming to the end now. It is, therefore, my fervent hope that the Minister will urge the Tourist Promotion Board to make full use of the vote of $100,000 provided for this purpose.

Mr Barker, 30 seconds left.

I think it is a little unfair if I have only 30 seconds to answer questions about why I do not develop beaches and all that. I think if Members of the House want answers from me, they should give me a little more time. Shortly, Sir, this item - improvement to beaches - was previously under the Parks and Recreation Division. In July this year Government decided that the Tourist Promotion Board be charged with this responsibility. The Board has drawn up schemes for the maintenance and improvement of beaches and for their development. The cleaning and maintenance by the Board will take effect from 1st of January next year. As regards development, several major as well as minor schemes to offer both simple and sophisticated seaside facilities have been prepared. They include land concessions, tenders for which have been drawn up and are ready for publication, and construction projects which will require capital investment, in some cases amounting to millions of dollars. These schemes, which are at present being studied, will, it is hoped, be finalised and announced shortly. Government has accepted responsibility for assisting with the infrastructure necessary to make these schemes possible. I assure the Member for Mountbatten and Members of this House that 1968 will see cleaner and more attractive beaches in Singapore provided, of course, ---

Order. Mr Tang. very quickly.

I withdraw, Sir. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

If Ministers and Backbenchers are equally unhappy with my enforcement of guillotine times, I shall be happy. The sum of $221,000 for Head 60 ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. Head 61 -

(In Malay): Sir I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 61 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 101. Sir, the former fire site at Kampong Eunos was acquired by Government way back in 1962. To date, the fire site has not been developed. I wish to know the area of the site acquired by Government, and also can the Government lease the site to the residents there for the purpose of building community projects?

Mr Speaker, Sir, in 1963 Government acquired about 44,650 square feet of land in Kampong Eunos affected by fire. The acquisition was undertaken in anticipation of future development of the area. The site, however, is too small to be developed independently. The Member for Kampong Kembangan wishes to use the site for a community centre or a centre for his Citizens' Consultative Committee. The People's Association appear to have completed their development programme for community centres, which may account for the fact that no applications have been received by the Land Office for the use of this site as a community centre. I can assure the Member that the land will be released to the People's Association if it is prepared to undertake the construction, maintenance and manage ment of a community centre there. But taking into consideration the fact that there is another community centre in Jalan Pengaga which is about a quarter of a mile away from the fire site, it is not unlikely that the People's Association may feel that another community centre in such close proximity may not be justified. But that is a matter for the People's Association. Providing land for Citizens' Consultative Committees is an entirely different matter. There are about 51 such corninittees on the island, and giving one means meeting demands from others. I think we should have a policy decision from Government before Government land or State land is made available to Citizens' Consultative Committees.

(In Malay): I beg leave to withdraw. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The sum of $7,000,000 for Head 61 ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. Head 62 -

Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 62 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 201. Sir, I wish the Minister can explain why the $300,000 has to be revoted for when there was none last year or this year, and the number of car parks that will be built and their locations.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the provision of $300,000 for 1968 is earmarked for the proposed underground car park at St. Andrew's Cathedral grounds. The total cost for the project will be in the region of $1 million. The section of North Bridge Road from Stamford Road to Elgin Bridge is one of the busiest in Singapore, forming the main thoroughfare of the central business district, and it carries about 35,000 vehicles daily and 2,740 vehicles per hour at peak hours. Over 75,000 vehicles a'ppear daily at the intersections at the same time because of obstructions caused by cars parked in front of the shops flanking both sides of the road. This section is the scene of almost continuous traffic jams and delays blocking up entirely the road and intersections. From the financial point of view, this project is also very advantageous. The estimated cost of the project is SI million and there will be about 250 parking lots and the net income is expected to be about $300,000 per year. It will, in addition, as I have mentioned, give enormous advantages from the traffic point of view.

Mr Ng, I take it that you are withdrawing the amendment?

Sir, I thank the Minister for his reply and I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 62 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (002) of subhead 301. Sir, under this vote there is a sum of $240,000 provided for land acquisition and ex gratia payments in connection with the East Coast foreshore reclamation scheme. May I seek information from the Hon. Minister for Law and National Development as to whether T.O.L. holders will be compensated for making improvements to the foreshore such as a jetty, a pier or a swimming pool? The T.O.L. holders are not only deprived of access to the sea but they have also to face the loss of their foreshore improvements which they built at some cost.

Sir, in the case of improvements to the foreshore made by T.O.L. holders, due compensation will be made if they are affected by clearance. But under land acquisition, no ex gratia payment is made if that is what the Member for Mountbatten is thinking of. Compensation, yes. As the Member is well aware, compensation is paid under the Land Acquisition Act, and if the compensation is considered madequate, there is provision in the Act for appeals to the Appeals Board which has only recently begun sittings and has heard, I think, about six appeals up to date. In connection with resettlement, it has been the practice to award compensation to settlers and squatters who have no legal title to the land, provided they are in occupation when such land is required or cleared for development purposes. Compensation is calculated on the basis of improvements found on the land according to a fixed scale which has been in force for some time. And the reason for paying compensation is to minimise the hardships caused by the dislocation of settlers and squatters.

I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. A mendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 62 be reduced by the whole sum in respect of item (003) of subhead 310. To put it very shortly, Sir, I wish to know why this item is in the Develop, ment Estimates and not in the Ordinary Estimates. My remark also applies to amendment No. (5)* standing in my name which I shall not be moving. * Amendment No. (5) reads as follows: That the sum to be allocated for Head 62 be reduced by the whole sum in respect of subhead 406.

Sir, only these projects are let out on contract. Administration fees still have to be charged for supervisory works carried out. These expenses include supervisory staff, telephones and postages, printing, stationery and office supplies, office equipment and furniture, advertising of tenders and notices and legal fees. The above expenses are incurred by the Housing and Development Board acting as agents for the Government in administering the projects.

I beg leave to withdraw, Sir. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The following amendment stood in the name of Mr Ho See Beng -

Amendment No. (4) , Mr Ho See Beng is not here. Mr Tang See Chim is not moving amendment No. (5) . Mr Ng Yeow Chong, amendment No. (6) .

Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 62 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 501+. + The same amendment also stood in the name of Madam Chan Choy Siong. Sir, I wish to seek clarification from the Hon. Minister on the policy of rehousing displaced trades such as workshops, tinsmiths and charcoal shops. As the present position stands, these obnoxious trades are not offered alternative accommodation in the Housing and Development Board's housing estates. For instance, 17 workshops affected by the "Golden Mile" Scheme were not offered Board's accommodation. The charcoal shops from the urban renewal areas were also told to change their trade because it was not possible to relocate them to Housing Board shop-houses in view of the nature of their trade. 6.00 p.m. The resettlement officers maintain that it is very difficult for this type of trade to survive in Housing and Development Board housing estates because the Board's flats are supplied with essential utilities. Here, Sir, I have a representation from the Singapore Charcoal Dealers' Association which is in my constituency. The charcoal dealers have been in this trade for more than 20 years, dating as far back as pre-war days. About 20.000 persons are directly or indirectly dependent on the trade for their livelihood. It is easy for our Government officials to suggest to them that they should change their trade,, but they do not realise the difficulties that will confront these charcoal dealers. The Singapore Charcoal Dealers' Association contend that charcoal dealers should be allowed to carry on with their business in the Board's shop-houses until such time as they are able to adapt themselves to other trades, otherwise if they cannot find suitable alternative accommodation, they will have to close down their business. Of course, this is a very obnoxious trade and so are the workshops and machine-shops. Sir, I hope the Minister will be kind enough to urge the Housing and Development Board to look for a solution to this problem.

(In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to touch on the expenditure for resettlement. I hope the sum allotted will be used properly so that adequate cornpensation can be paid in resettlement cases. Sometimes the land in question belongs to the Housing Board and not to private owners or the Land Office. The question arises whether compensation will be paid to families affected by resettlement. With regard to the vote for resettlement, what areas does the Minister have in mind? Will it be used for areas like North Bridge Road or South Bridge Road in the urban areas or for other areas? These two areas are marked as Urban North and Urban South. Can the Minister enlighten me on whether the compensation is in respect of private investment or public housing? The Member for Mountbatten has touched on the question of small merchants and businessmen. Yesterday, the Minister said that he would not like to make recommendations to the Minister for Finance regarding compensation to these small traders. I feel that the resettled small traders should be well looked after so that they will not be unemployed.

I will deal first with the Member for Mountbatten who agrees that the charcoal trade is an obnoxious trade. He has asked my Ministry to find accommodation for such trades in Housing and Development Board shop-, houses. If this is done, it will lead to protests by residents of Housing Board' flats. The only solution appears to me to be that these traders should find their' own accommodation. But I am not aware that the Housing Board has ad-vised them to change their trades. I do not think they have done so.

There was an instance.

If there was an instance, I think the Member should give me the particulars by way of a letter or quote a letter from the Housing Board so that I can look into it. I do not think it is the Board's duty to ask people to change, their trades or occupations. Mr Ng Yeow Chong rose - Mr Barker resumed his seat.

There was a particular instance in which a resettled person was advised to change his trade. It is all stated in the letter. The resettle'ment officer went to the extent of say.ing that the change of trade was well received, particularly by the charcoal dealers themselves. I wonder how he could have formed such an opinion!

I suggest that the Member should send me a copy of the letter so that proper investigations can be carried out. With regard to the Member for Delta, I did not say yesterday that we do not help shop-keepers at all. What I said yesterday was that the Government is :subsidising housing and that it cannot subsidise businesses. But we do give preferential treatment to shop-keepers under clearance. In fact, they are given priority for Board shops at concessional rents without going through the normal tender system. The concessional rents take the form of a scheme known as the rising rental system, that is to say, paying less for the first year and gradually rising year by year for three years until the rents reach the market rents.

Mr Speaker, Sir, on a point of clarification. Mr Barker resumed his seat.

(In Mandarin): I would like to clarify one point. The Minister has said that these resettled merchants and traders have been given concessional rents without going ahrough the normal system of tendering. I think this is a mistake, because they have to go through this procedure to obtain shop accommodation.

If you want a shop, you have to apply for it. But preferential treatment is given to shop-keepers under clearance. The Member for Delta also wanted to know whether the vote of $5 million for 1968 is for Urban South or Urban North. I think it would be better if I told her the exact clearance areas for which this vote is intended. The areas are (1) Upper Changi area and Kallang Basin Reclamation; (2) Jurong industrial development; (3) Tiong Bahru, Queenstown extension and Telok Blangah housing projects; and (4) minor sites required by the P.W.D. for its projects such as schools, roads, sewerage and other essential services. Perhaps it would satisfy the Member if I gave her some figures of the amounts of compensation paid to families affected by clearances from 1961. In 1961, 294 families were paid $273,000 as compensation. In 1962, 817 families were paid $883,000. In 1963, 1,181 families were paid $1,700,000. In 1964, 3,643 families were paid $3,200,000. In 1965, about 6,500 families were paid $5½ million. In 1966, about 6,000 families were paid $5,100,000. I am only hoping, Sir, that the provision for this year will be adequate and that I will not have to come back to this House to ask for a supplementary vote.

I beg leave to withdraw. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The following amendment stood in the names of Madam Chan Choy Siong and Mr Ng Yeow Chong - That the sum to be allocated for Head 62 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 601.

I am not moving.

I am not moving. The following amendment stood in the name of Madam Chan Choy Siong - That the total sum to be allocated for Head 62 be reduced by $100.

I am not moving. The sum of $42,840,020 for Head 62 ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. Head 63 -

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 63 be reduced by the whole sum in respect of subhead 104. Sir, I would also like to range over amendment (2)* which stands in my name. * Amendment No. (2) reads as follows: That the sum to be allocated for Head 63 be reduced by the whole sum in respect of subhead 105. Sir, while I am in full agreement that the Central Abattoir in Jurong is needed for the slaughtering of animals for the meat canning factory there, I shall be grateful if the Minister for Law and National Development will look into the inconvenience caused to butchers in the rural areas who have to go all the way to Jurong to have their animals slaughtered, especially pigs. This will result in extra expenditure which will have to be borne by the consumer. 6.15 p.m. Under subhead 105, Rural Abattoirs, a provision of a token vote of $10 is made. I would urge the Minister to make full use of this token vote to press for the building of rural abattoirs. Sir, in rural areas or constituencies like Upper Serangoon, Changi, Tampines, or, for that matter, Punggol - Paya Lebar to be included, Sir - the butchers face much difficulty. This is the point we must understand, and where a token vote is provided for, we should make full use of it. Much representation has been made by the butchers, especially those in Punggol and Upper Serangoon. but I am sad to say that they seem to have fallen on deaf ears. With this token vote for rural abattoirs, I hope the Minister will press that there is a need ---

On a point of order, Sir, I do not think there is a quorum. An hon. Member: There are only 12 Members.

There is, in fact, a quorum according to my count.

Thank you, Sir,I hope that next time when I speak, my friend the Member for Choa Chu Kang will not care to interrupt. This cuts jif a lot of time. While Members are complaining that they have no time and Ministers too have no time to reply, one Member here stands up and says,. "No quorum." Thank you very much, Sir, for saying that there is a quorum. Coming back to my point - rural abattoirs. I am making a special appeal in this House for the consideration of the Minister to construct rural abattoirs in certain rural areas where they can be located for the convenience of the' butchers. In the markets, probably the butchers could sell a few pigs a day.. But if you have to travel all the way to the Central Abattoir in Jurong, which actually is meant for meat canning - do you get the services you want? I do not know, but this is an important point that I want to press home.

Mr Speaker, Sir, shortly, the Central Abattoir at Jurong was built not only for the slaughter of livestock for local needs but also for export. However, the facilities that the abattoir provides may not be made use of by residents in rural areas remote from Jurong. Their needs are fully appreciated, and accordingly it is proposed to build three rural abattoirs of smaller units in the rural areas. These would provide convenient slaughtering facili -ties for the people in the rural areas, enable the implementation of veterinary public health measures to be carried out effectively in the supply of wholesale meat, and reduce illegal slaughter. The vote of $10 is only nominal. The reason is this: these three projects can only be implemented after the new Jurong abattoir has been in full operation, so that a full assessment of the needs of subsidiary rural abattoirs can be made, after which we can decide whether or not to have these rural abattoirs and where to build them. We have not chosen the sites yet and I am afraid the Member for Punggol will have to wait.

Sir, there is no doubt that the $10 token vote is there, but as I have pointed out just now, I appeal to the Minister to convince his colleague the Minister for Finance to provide the necessary funds for the building of abattoirs in the rural areas. Until the Jurong Abattoir has been completed, the residents living in areas remote from Jurong in the meantime will be suffering and how can we relieve them?

Mr Speaker, Sir, if they have been suffering, they must have been suffering for many a year! Were there rural abattoirs which we have demolished? Surely not. All I ask the Member is to be patient. We are aware of these problems. We do not expect Jurong to satisfy the needs of the whole island. The only reason, as I have said, for the $10 vote is that we do not have immediate plans to build these abattoirs, but we certainly have not forgotten the need for such abattoirs.

Mr Ng, I take it you are withdrawing your amendment?

Yes, Sir. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The following amendment stood in the name of Mr Ng Kah Ting -

Amendment No. (2) . Mr Ng is not moving. Amendment No. (3), Mr Tang.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 63 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 201. I just wish to know, Mr Speaker, Sir, what are the functions of these Agricultural Extension Centres, for which there is a token vote of $10. My remarks also apply to amendments Nos. (4)* and (5)+ which stand in my name, and which I shall not be moving. * Amendment No. (4) reads as follows: That the sum to be allocated for Head 63 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 202. + Amendment No. (5) reads as follows: That the sum to be allocated for Head 63 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 203. I come from the rural constituency of Choa Chu Kang. Sir, and these centres and schemes are hardly felt there. Perhaps the Minister can let the House know what are the centres and schemes going to do and also to give it the widest publicity so that the rural people who are engaged in agriculture will have the benefit of any schemes that are being established.

Sir, first, the $10 vote for Agriculture Extension Centres. There are 10 Agriculture and Veterinary Centres at present in various parts of the rural areas in Singapore where there are large concentrations of farming communities. Workers from the Primary Production Department operate from these centres. However, there is quite a large number of smaller concentrations of farming communities quite remote from existing centres where farmers cannot regularly obtain the services of the Primary Production Department. The department, therefore, proposes to set up smaller extension centres, each comprising a house-cum-office where an extension centre worker will be permanently based in these remote farming communities, so that the farmers there will also benefit from the services provided by the Primary Production Department. The second item - Intensive Farm Improvement Schemes. In order to find ways and means of increasing the agricultural productivity of existing farms in Singapore and to improve the fertility of swamp land reclaimed for agricultural use, the Primary Production Department proposes to establish facilities for research in soil and fertilisers, plant breeding and selection of seeds, insecticides and control of plant diseases. The establishment of this proposed soil and fertiliser laboratory is complementary to the schemes for re claiming swamp land for agricultural use and improving and intensifying the production of vegetable crops from existing farms. The Member for Choa Chu Kang may be interested to know that a U.N, team was invited to Singapore in 1965 to make a feasibility study of reclamation of tidal swamps for agricultural use. The mission recommended, inter alia, soil surveys and physical and chemical analysis of soil samples taken from swamp land as well as experiments in cover crops, vegetable crop selection and rotation, soil improvement and fertilisation. Farming in Singapore is extremely intensive in that a wide variety of crops, mainly vegetables, are grown in small plots of land about an acre per farm. Due to perennial planting and in the absence of seasons, soil fertility, crop varieties, and pests and disease control play an important part in sustaining the economic returns from the land. The proposed laboratory, therefore, has an important role to play. The third item, Sir - Factory Farming Pilot Scheme. In view of the limited land area in Singapore, farming must of necessity be of an intensive nature so that farmers can carry out their activities in the minimum area of land to achieve maximum production. This is as the Member for Choa Chu Kang has advised. He thinks that it is particularly desirable, and so do we. In live stock production, animals or poultry can be reared in livestock houses and cages, so that the minimum area of land is required. It is the intention of the department to carry out a series of experiments on livestock husbandry with particular emphasis on intensive housing for livestock. We hope such methods will achieve some measure of success and that they will be introduced by the farmer subsequently for general application.

I beg leave to withdraw, Sir. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

*Amendments Nos. (4) and (5) are not being moved. Amendment No. (6), Mr Sim Boon Woo. * Amendment No. (4) reads as follows: That the sum to be allocated for Head 63 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 202. Amendment No. (5) reads as follows: That the sum to be allocated for Head 63 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 203.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move. That the sum to be allocated for Head 63 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 204. Sir, can I also speak on amendment No. (7)+ too, as they are connected? + Amendment No. (7), standing in the names of Mr. Sim Boon Woo and Mr. Ng Yeow Chong, reads as follows: That the sum to be allocated for Head 63 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 205.

Yes, Mr Sim.

Sir, it is very much regretted that only a token sum of $10 is provided for 1968 for agricultural development of Pulau Ubin and Pulau Tekong.

6.29 p.m. The Minister for National Development himself has visited Pulau Tekong and he knows exactly the poverty of the island. I remember sometime ago a research committee was formed to do a special research of the island and it recommended to the Government to utilise the land around our islands for agricultural purposes. Can the Minister enlighten this House on the result of the research committee's work and whether its recommendations can be implemented immediately so that the people in the islands will be better off? 6.30 p.m. Here again in subhead 205, I wonder whether the Minister has overlooked the importance of the "Research Services and Marketing Organisation for Export of Orchids and Horticultural products." There is only a provision of $10 for 1968. I think this organisation is quite important for the export of orchid blooms to Europe and the United States. I have here with me the Asia Magazine dated 22nd October, 1967. At page 6, column 4, line 23, I quote: 'In l960 Singapore growers exported a relatively insignificant US$37,600 worth of cut orchid blooms to florists in Europe and the United States. By 1965 this figure had been tripled. Last year, that is 1966 the exports soared to US$250,000; and, with demand rapidly snowballing, few doubt that Singapore's orchid industry will pass the million-dollar mark before long.' In 1966 we earned US$250,000, that is to say, the amount that was declared. But I think it is well over US$250,000. From this little effort by backyard orchid growers and four or five big orchid growers, we can get such a big amount of foreign exchange. If there is proper organisation and research, I, think the orchid industry can assist our economy to a certain extent. I would like to make this suggestion to the Minister for his consideration. Since our climate is very suitable for orchid growing and we have what I would call a natural greenhouse, would he consider the establishment immediately of an orchid institute like the Rubber Research Institute of Malaysia, and lease out suitable agricultural land to orchid growers who are interested in the study of orchids, and build an orchid nursery subject to the requirements of the authorities?

Sir, in order to make maximum utilisation of whatever land resources we have in Singapore, the Government realises that it is necessary for us to investigate into lands which are not yet fully utilised. Though we are a small island, we have smaller islands around us, three of which are in Changi - i.e., Pulau Ubin, Pulau Tekong Besar and Pulau Tekong Kehil. The two biggest islands are Pulau Ubin and Pulau Tekong. They have areas of approximately 2,500 acres and 4,500 acres respectively. The populations are small, about 2,000 in Ubin and about 6,000 in Tekong.

They are very poor.

They are poor, as the Member for Changi has pointed out. I did visit these islands not very long ago and I myself felt that there was scope for the lands to be put to use. My Ministry has carried out a survey of the possibilities which these two islands may have to offer. The survey has been completed and the recommendations have been made to Government. According to preliminary information, the lands on both islands are most suitable for intensive agricultural use. We have as yet not acted on these recommendations, but I can assure the Member for Changi that the matter is well in hand and Government will soon act on the recommendations of the report. Next, the Member dealt with the question of orchids. As the Minister for Finance pointed out the other day, we have little land in Singapore and perhaps the most economic way of using the little land we have is to cultivate orchids, sell them abroad and bring in a lot of foreign exchange. The Member for Changi has pointed out that we only have a $10 vote. But I can assure him that the Primary Production Department has recognised the importance of the annual export of orchids which, as the Member has pointed out, amounts to about US$250,000 per year, and the Department has taken steps to encourage more farmers to grow more orchids. Pamphlets and bulletins are distributed to farmers for the purpose of instructing them on the technical as pects of growing orchids. In fact, the Department is planning a larger orchid nursery than the one that it has now. It is envisaged that more orchid saplings will be propagated and sold to farmers at a nominal charge. The question of selling orchids abroad, of course, is another matter. The Government does not sell orchids. It is the private sector which does that, and it is the private sector that has its contacts abroad. We have done nothing in this respect and, if we do, perhaps objections will be raised on the ground that we are helping private persons to make money. We can do a little by way of the Tourist Promotion Board advertising Singapore abroad - "Singapore is the land for orchids." The Land Office has favourably considered applications for temporary occupation licences from orchid growers and I can assure the Member that in this respect there have been no delays by the Land Office as alleged by some other Members. We are definitely behind the campaign to grow more orchids and sell them abroad. We will make available whatever land we have for the propagation of orchids.

6.37 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, at least I have a supporter in this House in my appeal to the Government to explore markets for our orchids. In fact, I stressed this in my debate on the Budget statement on 14th December, 1967. Orchid growing at the present moment is confined to a few private growers who from time to time make use of the Botanic Gardens. That is why I suggested to the Ministry of Social Affairs yesterday that the re search work, the breeding and growing of orchids, should be transferred to the Primary Production Department. If I remember correctly, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Social Affairs said yesterday that if the research work was transferred to the Primary Production Department, there would be a duplication of work. In this case, I am inclined to agree with him because there is already a token vote provided in the Development Estimates under Primary Production. Here again in the Main Estimates we find some provision put down also for research work. All I want to know from the Minister is whether he will agree that this is really a duplication of work and, if so, will he consider which department is the proper department to do this kind of work? Another point I wish to stress is this. Orchid growing should be widely cornmercialised so that our farmers can benefit. Our national wealth should be widely distribu'ted instead of its being confined to a few nursery growers.

From the estimates before me, though subhead 205 comes under Primary Production, no vote appears throughout the years. But as the Member for Mountbatten has pointed out, the Botanic Gardens does research in orchids and the botanists there are really interested in improving our species of orchids and crossing orchids. The Primary Production Department also has a nursery, but I can assure the Member that there is no du plication of work. In fact, the Botanic Gardens will be transferred from the Ministry of Social Affairs to the Ministry of National Development very soon. This would mean that orchid research by the Botanic Gardens could be tied up with orchid research by the Primary Production Department.

In view of the assurance given by the Minister, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. 6.45 p.m. The time allotted for Head 63 having expired, the following amendments were not proceeded with: Mr Sim Boon Woo: Mr Ng Yeow Chong: (7) That the sum to be allocated for Head 63 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 205. Mr Ng Yeow Chong: Mr Tang See Chim: (8) That the sum to be allocated for Head 63 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 301. Mr Ng Kah Ting: (9) That the sum to be allocated for Head 63 be reduced by the whole sum in respect of subhead 301. Mr Ho See Beng: (10) That the sum to be allocated for Head 63 be reduced by the whole sum in respect of subhead 302. Mr Tang See Chim: (11) That the sum to be allocated for Head 63 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 305. (12) That the sum to be allocated for Head 63 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 901.

The chimes of the clock also tell us that we have reached guillotine time for Head 63. The sum of $3,987,670 for Head 63 ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. Head 64 -

Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 64 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (006) of subhead 201. Sir, I also intend to take my amendments Nos. (2)* and (3)+ together. * Amendment No. (2), reads as follows: That the sum to be allocated for Head 64 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (007) of subhead 201. + Amendment No. (3), reads as follows: That the sum to be allocated for Head 64 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (001) of subhead 205.

Yes, please proceed.

Sir, items (006) and (007) of subhead 201 and item (001) of subhead 205 relate to my constituency. While welcoming the expansion and widening of the roads in question, I wish to know whether any houses or buildings are affected by these schemes. Can the Minister give me detailed information on this?

Mr Speaker, Sir, to come to the point, the gyratory system at Woodsville Circus will only affect one building, a cane factory. No other families or squatters will be involved. In fact, clearance action is in progress. The affected property has been acquired by Government. The owner of the factory will be offered alternative land not to exceed one-quarter acre in a resettlement area. The second project is for the widening and extension of Jalan Kolam Ayer. About 83 squatter families have been affected. Of these, 60 families, including a family occupying a shop, have been accommodated in Housing and Development Board flats. About 18 families have found their own accommodation. One shopkeeper has done the same. They have also been paid cornpensation. There are five other squatter cases. The total amount of compensation so far paid is in the region of $55,000. The third scheme is widening of Upper Serangoon Road to Paya Lebar Road. Twenty-two huts have been affected and 65 squatter families disturbed. Of these, 14 have taken up Housing and Development Board accommodation. Twenty-four families have found their own alternative accommodation. Twenty families were only partly affected and therefore were not required to vacate the site. Seven families still remain on the site but we hope to clear them soon. They will be offered alternative accommodation in Housing Board flats and they will be paid compensation of about $5,000. In all, in this third case, compensation amounting to about $15,000 has been paid. So there really is no problem and the Member for Aijunied will not have so much trouble for the next elections.

Mr Lingam, after the Minister's explanation, you must withdraw your amendment!

I beg leave to withdraw. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Amendments Nos. (2)* and (3)* are not being moved. Amendment No. (4)++, Mr Rodrigues. * Amendment No. (2) reads as follows: That the sum to be allocated for Head 64 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (007) of subhead 201. Amendment No. (3) reads as follows: That the sum to be allocated for Head 64 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (001) of subhead 205.

Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 64 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 306++. ++ The same amendment also stood in hte names of Inche Mohd. Ariff bin Suradi and Mr S. V. Lingam. Sir, I am conscious of the fact that overhead bridges can be white elephants as far as pedestrians in Singapore are concerned. I have observed that many pedestrians do not make use of the bridge at Collyer Quay. Instead they cross the road by cutting through the traffic. I have also observed that construction work is being carried out on the road divider at Collyer Quay which appears to be designed for the purpose of inducing pedestrians to use the overhead bridges. This is very timely and useful. But the erection of physical obstacles to compel pedestrians to use overhead bridges where available for crossing roads is rather an expensive way of popularising overhead bridges and underpasses. A more suitable remedy, I think, is to obtain legal sanction against pedestrians crossing the roads at their whim and fancy instead of using overhead bridges where these are available. The remedy is to legis late against jay-waiking by pedestrians as it has been done in many other countries. I am no motorist myself but I think it is only fair that pedestrians should be made to observe, as the other road users, the same set of rules that are designed to protect life and limb and to promote the smooth flow of traffic. In the absence of any legislation, it appears to be a waste of time to erect more overhead bridges. It is an expenditure of money which pedestrians do not appreciate and which do not materially benefit the other road users. The provision of overhead bridges merely strives to remedy the symptoms without removing the cause of the problem of the kamikaze attitude of Singapore residents. I should think that the money set aside for overhead bridges and under-passes will be more fruitfully devoted to the education of road users, including pedestrians, and to bring home to them the point that by failing to observe traffic rules, they are not only risking their lives and the lives of other road users, but they are also guilty of social indiscipline.

Inche Mohd. Ariff.

I am not speaking, Sir.

Sir, the answer to the questions posed by the Member for Telok Blangah is to educate the public. We must educate them not only not to dirty our beaches; we must even educate them on how to cross roads. If we do not build pedestrian bridges in Singapore, we will be criticised because anyone trying to cross Finlayson Green/Collyer Quay at rush hours without the use of a pedestrian bridge will be attempting to commit suicide. But we build the bridges in the interest of pedestrians to enable them to cross roads safely. And these bridges should help to reduce traffic accidents and provide for a smoother and faster flow of vehicular traffic. If the pedestrians do not want to use them and are prepared to risk their lives and limbs, perhaps sometimes through sheer laziness, then I do not see how a set of rules could serve to force these people to do so. However, my Ministry has not been idle. We are not prepared to watch these people just risk their lives trying to cross roads. So we have built safety fences along the centre divider and on the edge of the footpaths to deter these people from crossing the road and to encourage them to use the overhead bridges. But if some high jumper decides to take a jump over that fence, I say let him do it. The position is continually under review and it is hoped that, in conjunction with the assistance of the traffic police, more effective measures will be taken to ensure that all pedestrians will eventually use the available overhead crossings. But, as I have pointed out earlier, this is a matter of education.

Sir, I would like to dwell on this topic - pedestrian overhead bridges and underpasses. I fully agree with what the Minister has said. But I have another point here and that is two pedestrian crossings were obliterated at Upper Serangoon Road 6¼ m.s. An overhead bridge was constructed near one of them. But over on the other side, away from Tampines Circus where traffic lights have just been installed, the pedestrian crossing has been obliterated by the Public Works Department. I did point out to the traffic police and the P.W.D, that they should have studied the case first before removing such a crossing, since this has caused a lot of inconvenience to the public in that the pedestrian crossing happened to be used mostly by the residents in Punggol and those living around that area. Although that pedestrian crossing has been removed, people are still treating it as if there is still a pedestrian crossing there and crossing the road at random, and on many occasions I had to slow down my car in order to enable the pedestrians to cross. On this note, will the Minister kindly look into this matter regarding the obliteration of the pedestrian crossing at Upper Serangoon Road 6¼ m.s.?

Mr Sim, do you have any remarks on this subhead?

No, Sir.

Sir, I am well aware of the position at 6¼ m.s. Upper Serangoon Road. Previously there was no overhead pedestrian bridge. There was a zebra crossing and people using the crossing interfered with the traffic. In compliance with popular demand headed by the Member for Upper Serangoon, we built a pedestrian bridge and we took away one of the pedestrian crossings. 7.00 p.m. But if people do not choose to use the overhead bridge but prefer to cross the road where the pedestrian crossing was and no longer is, what can my Ministry do? I say again that it is a matter of education. We can block the centre. We can prevent people crossing the road by building this safety device about four or five feet right along the central divider. But even that will not prevent them. They are in a hurry to get across to do whatever they want to do. But basically, Sir, I say once again that we have to educate our people.

Sir, I would like to ask the Minister whether it cannot be made law that a pedestrian must use the overhead bridges otherwise he will be committing a traffic offence. I per sonally think it is a waste of funds to build more overhead bridges if people do not use them.

This law can be passed. but it will probably be a very unpopular law. I feel it is better to encourage people to use the bridges perhaps by placing traffic policemen at strategic spots and getting the policemen to ask them to use the bridges. At this stage when pedestrian bridges are somewhat new to the island. I myself would not favour laws forcing people to use these bridges. I would much rather persuade them to use them.

I beg leave to withdraw. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The following amendment stood in the name of Mr Ng Kah Ting - That the sum to be allocated for Head 64 be reduced by the whole sum in respect of subhead 310.

Mr Ng Kah Ting is not moving. Mr Sim Boon Woo, amendment No. (6)*.

Sir, in view of the time factor, I would like to ask only two questions. Sir, I beg to move, That the total sum to be allocated for Head 64 be reduced by $100.* Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to refer to subhead 101 - Special Study on Traffic Planning and Mass Transit System. Can the Minister say who are the people undergoing this study and why is there such a big increase of expenditure for 1968? Sir, subhead 102 refers to "Implementation of Traffic Management Measures". In 1967, $316,000 has been spent. May I know what has been implemented so far?

Mr Speaker, Sir, before the implementation of any mass transit or transportation system, a careful and detailed study is essential. The P.W.D, is now carrying out the study with the assistance of the United Nations Development Programme Special Fund. A special unit was formed in September this year and its aim is to formulate long-term comprehensive guiding concepts for the development of the Republic in the fields of transportation, urban renewal and redevelopment and even in industrial development. But a comprehensive transportation study forms an important component of all these projects and is aimed at producing a long-range plan for the most efficient transportation system possible within the limitations of our financial resources. The first phase of the scheme comprises a series of traffic surveys to collect data on the nature and pattern of the distribution of people and goods on the island of Singapore. This data, when collected, will provide the basis for traffic forecasting which is necessary for the preparation of road network and mass transportation plans. In October and November this year, pilot surveys were carried out. A pilot survey was carried out also on taxi-passengers and the main surveys are scheduled to be launched within the next few months and are expected to be completed by August 1968. Following this, the data collected will be processed and work on planning of the transportation system will then follow. The whole project is expected to be completed within three or four years, but the surveys and experts cost money. Hence the provision.

I beg leave to withdraw. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The sum of $14,155,920 for Head 64 ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. Head 65 - The following amendment stood in the name of Mr Ng Kah Ting - That the sum to be allocated for Head 65 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 106.

I am not moving.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 65 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 109. Sir, flooding in Singapore is not uncommon even in the dry season. All we need is a heavy downfall coinciding with the high tide, and low-lying areas in Singapore are flooded. Flood alleviation schemes have been carried out in the areas affected, but looking at the Estimates for next year, I feel that priorities have not been carefully considered. My colleagues whose consti tuencies are also affected by flooding may not agree with me. Nevertheless, I wish to bring this matter up not on the ground of inconvenience caused to the people by flooding, but on the grounds of the suffering that people undergo when the areas in which they live are flooded. For instance, Bukit Timah Road has been flooded ever since I can remember. Sir, how much misery has it caused to the people other than its being a temporary inconvenience? Although Bukit Timah Road is a trunk road to the city, all you have to do is to by.pass it if it is flooded or wait until the flood subsides. Sir, flooding in other areas cannot be treated as lightly as that which occurs in Bukit Timah. Flooding in areas such as Lorong Kinchir or Lorong Chuan, which is in the Serangoon Gardens Constituency, and even those bordering Braddell Road, is not only an inconvenience to the people in the area, but it also destroys all the vegetables which they have toiled from morning to night to cultivate, and their chickens and pigs which cannot swim. Sir, the majority of the people of Singapore who live in urban areas do not probably realise how much toil and sweat is put into the growing of vegetables or the rearing of pigs. I can assure them that it is no picnic and that if they tried it they would not even get to first base, because from experience I know what it is like. The farmers in Singapore are a tough breed, but I do not think the Government should take it for granted that just because they are tough they can withstand misfortunes forever. I therefore appeal to the Minister to review the expenditure under this head and to give more priority to areas more deserving than those which have more sums allocated to them in the Estimates for just concrete lining. To mention a few, for such subheads as 102, 107, and 108.

Order. Mr Gonzales, if you want the Minister to reply, you will have to finish now.

Yes, Sir. All I say is that if there is a fairer allocation of priorities, the people will be very much happier.

Sir, subhead 109 refers to the extension of Sungei Kallang. This scheme is one of the schemes under the Development Estimates. During the First Five-Year Development Plan prior to 1966, Sungei Kallang between Braddell Road and Upper Serangoon was realigned, straightened, widened and deepened. As a result, flooding at Potong Pasir has been greatly reduced. In 1966, the improvement in realignment of Sungei Kallang was extended beyond Braddell Road by 2,500 feet towards Peirce Reservoir to alleviate flooding of the low-lying Lorong Chuan area. This year the improvement was extended further from 2,000 feet upstream of Braddell Road to 5,900 feet. In 1968, it will be extended by another 3,000 feet. So we are not neglecting Upper Serangoon, as it were. The flooding in Bukit Timah has been neglected for the last ten years. In my view, it should have been done in 1955 or 1957, because the floods along the main trunk road between Singapore and Johore Bahru lead to utter chaos on the island. During the last floods, school children had to be rescued and it was fortunate for us that, when these areas were flooded a few days ago, the schools were having their holidays. But the effect of floods along Bukit Timah Road is to cause traffic diversion to Holland Road --- 7.10 p.m.

Order. Mr Barker, I think you have established your case on priorities, which is what the Member for Serangoon Gardens was complaining about. Mr Gonzales, I take it that the amendment is withdrawn?

I beg leave to withdraw, Sir. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The sum of $5,267,010 for Head 65 ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. Head 66 -

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 66 be reduced by the whole sum in respect of subhead 104. Sir, I notice that this subhead refers to sewerage in Serangoon. As Punggol is next to Serangoon, I wonder whether the sewerage system can be extended to that part of Punggol which is quite well developed. As for the rest of Punggol, the Minister will probably turn round and say that it is a rural area with a low population density.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I am well aware that Punggol adjoins Serangoon and Upper Serangoon. But I regret to inform the Member for Punggol that there is as yet no concrete plan for sewage facilities in his constituency, which is essentially a rural area with a low population density! Priority on the basis of economic feasibility has to be taken into consideration for phasing out the overall sewage schemes. In view of this, no site for a sewage pumping station or sewage treatment work has been selected for this area. But in the long term, I am sure sewage facilities will reach Punggol. 7.15 p.m.

Mr Ng, I take it you are withdrawing your amendment?

Yes, Sir. In fact, I anticipated this answer and that is why I beg leave to withdraw. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The sum of $9,975,060 for Head 66 ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. Head 67 -

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 67 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 208. Sir, because of the onerous duties you have to perform, I do not know how much time you have to watch TV. You may, however, have seen flashes which appear from time to time on TV advising motorists not to have "One for the road", and generally to drive more carefully. All the posters put up and all the appeals made on TV are for the sole purpose of saving life and to reduce the number of accidents on the road. On the one hand, Sir ---

Order. Mr Gonzales, is it possible that there is a clerical error here, that you have filed the amendment under the wrong Head? You should be speaking ---

Sorry, Sir. Subhead 208.

--- which is "Stores and Equipment" under Public Works (General).

Yes, Sir, I am coming to that. This question of Stores and Equipment is involved in this ---

I thought you were making a speech against drunken driving!

No, Sir. On the one hand, you have TV appeals to motorists to drive more carefully, and, on the other hand, there is .this question of certain Government departments, especially the P.W.D., which carry out road repairs, resurfacing of roads and so forth, all over the island. Generally, Sir, if you go round Singapore, you will find that roads are being dug up, materials for resurfacing of roads are piled up on the roads, and all without the usual customary red lights and caution notices that road repairs are being carried out. Sir, this is actually criminal, as far as the P.W.D. is concerned. And not only the P.W.D., but possibly the P.U.B. and the Telephone Board whose men go out and dig up the roads, and in their anxiety to get home by 5 o'clock, leave the holes uncovered. If you go to the insurance companies, I think you will be surprised to find that many people have been seriously injured, especially motor cyclists riding at night, by riding over bumps, breaking their arms and so forth. I would like to appeal to the Minister, where the question of Stores and Equipment comes in, to provide more lights and caution signs, and insist that Government departments, especially the P.W.D., carry out road repairs, and to use these signs ---

Order. The Question is, "That the sum to be allocated for Head 67 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 208." Mr Barker, in reply?

Sir, I am glad that the Member has pointed out that it is not only the P.W.D. but also the P.U.B. and the Singapore Telephone Board that use our roads. But I understand why he feels very strongly about this is because his motor-car was badly damaged as a result of its running into earthen stones that had been heaped up, according to him, right in the middle of the road. He has my sympathies and I would advise him to see an advocate and solicitor and sue the Government for damages! But, strictly speaking, instructions have been issued to the P.W.D. that whenever road repairs, sewage, and other works are undertaken, suitable warning signs to be lighted at night should be set up to warn motorists and pedestrians. But should the Member for Serangoon Gardens come across other obstacles or danger spots without any warning signs, I shall be grateful if he will inform the Director of the P.W.D., so that precautionary measures can be taken and other road users will not follow in his footsteps and be without their motor-cars for about two weeks.

I beg leave to withdraw. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The sum of $30,622,800 for Head 67 ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. Head 68 - The following amendment stood in the name of Mr S. V. Lingam -

Amendment No. (1) , Mr Lingam. He is not moving.

(In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir,I beg to move, That the total sum to be allocated for Head 68 be reduced by $l00*. * The same amendment also stood in the names of Inche Mohd. Ariff Bin Suradi, Mr. Ho Kah Leong, Mr. Ng Kah Ting, and Mr. Teong Eng Siong.

7.23 p.m. Sir, under this Head, I would like to ask several questions. We all know that every year the Urban and Rural Services Committee is allotted large sums of money to be distributed to various constituencies. But in some constituencies the money is not fully used or even used, and in certain rural areas the sums allotted are not sufficient for their use. So will the Urban and Rural Services Committee consider re-allotting those sums of money which are not made use of to other constituencies which are urgently in need of more money? In some areas, not a single cent was spent out of the vote given to them, while in my constituency Paya Lebar, two years have already elapsed without the necessary funds being approved for the construction of a drain. $60,000 is required for the building of the drain, and yet only $2,000 is allotted each year. Sir, I would like to ask the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for National Development whether he will consider transferring the unspent sums to needy areas for such development projects. Sir, there is another question I would like to ask the Parliamentary Secretary regarding the neighbourhood of Housing Board estates in certain constituencies. It usually happens that when a new housing estate is being built, the roads are made up and street lamps are provided. I wonder whether in such cases the balance of the vote for these constituencies can be transferred to the rural constituencies to be used. The next question I would like to ask is about the principle and basis of allotment. 95 per cent of the Paya Lebar area is rural and the rest is suburban. We are getting less funds now for the improvement of this area. What I mean to say is this. There are some constituencies where one-quarter or one-eighth of the area is rural or urban. I would like to ask the Parliamentary Secretary whether he can adjust his allotment so that the overall development of the constituencies is fair.

(In Malay): Sir, it is a pity that the time allotted for this Head is limited. Services for the urban and rural areas are very important, particularly for the constituency of Kampong Kembangan. I have often placed the question of conditions in Kampong Kembangan before the House. I am sure the House is tired of listening to my complaints, but the voters in my constituency continue to make complaints and representations to me asking me to forward them to the Government. I am their elected representative, and it is my duty to forward their representations to the Government in this House, even if it is tired of listening to them. Officials of the U.R.S.C. from the Katong District have visited my area, and have investigated its conditions. Pictures taken of the visit were shown over TV. I myself have put forward representations to the Minister, but his reply is that the money is in the hands of the Minister for Finance who, when he spoke on the 11th instant, in his capacity as Member for Kreta Ayer, said that not a single cent had been spent on development in Kreta Ayer. May I ask, if he has ever strolled in Kampong Kembangan, and whether he is aware of the conditions of the drains there? On the other hand, I have been to Kreta Ayer. The Minister for National Development once passed through one of the areas in Kampong Kembangan and he was in sympathy with me. He has only visited one particular place, and he is not, therefore, aware of the conditions of other areas in the constituency. 7.30 p.m. In order that the Minister for Finance and the Minister for National Development may know the true conditions in Kampong Kembangan, I wish to table some photographs showing the conditions there. I ask you, Sir, to hand over these photographs to the Ministers so that they will know the bad conditions of the drainage in Kampong Kernbangan. Photographs handed in.

(In Mandarin): Sir, the Member for Paya Lebar has just now touched on the allotment of funds by the U.R.S.C. in respect of the various constituencies. On this matter of allocation, I would like to air my views. I remember this matter was brought up in last year's debate on the Development Estimates in this House. At that time the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for National Development said that the allocation of funds was based on the population density as well as the area of the constituency concerned. The allocation is based on the principle that the money of the ratepayers is allotted to the con stituencies in a fair and just way. But what result do we get under this princi, pie of allocation? The Member for Paya Lebar has just mentioned it. In some constituencies the funds allocated have not been made use of because they have already been developed to an advanced stage. They have all the modern facilities and amenities, and they do not have to use these funds. For instance, Delta Constituency, Havelock Constituency, Moulmein Constituency and Rochore Constituency have not made use of a single cent of the sums allocated to them. On the other hand, some rural constituencies, which are in need of funds, do not receive enough funds. For instance, Changi, Choa Chu Kang and Paya Lebar Constituencies are badly in need of more funds to spend on development.

7.35 p.m. Generally speaking, these rural areas do not have modern facilities. We know that if you want to construct metalled roads in these areas or connect pipe-lines, the sum required would be in the region of thousands of dollars. But according to the principle of allocation, each constituency can only get a few thousand dollars. The situation is such that when a constituency requires a pipe-line to be laid, there will not be enough funds to carry out other projects. Can the Parliamentary Secretary tell us whether the principle of allocation can be changed or adjusted? That is, do not base the allocation on the density of population, the size of the constituency or the locality, lt should be based on the stage of development of each constituency. For instance, if a constituency does not require any funds for development, then this sum of money should be allotted to other less developed areas in order that they may have enough funds for development. For instance, the rural areas should get more funds so that in future they can make better use of the sums allocated to them for development purposes.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I share the sentiments of the Member for Paya Lebar and the Member for Jurong. My own constituency is not actually a rural area. But I would like to say a few words on behalf of the rural constituencies. Rural constituencies are normally very large in area. Therefore, there are more projects to be carried out there. They therefore require more money to carry out these projects. I have a suggestion to make. Can the Parliamentary Secre tary consider whether in next year's estimates it is possible to transfer part of the vote belonging to the urban area to the rural areas? In this way the rural areas will have more funds to carry on with their development projects and thus provide more amenities to the people there.

Mr Speaker, Sir, as an M.P. from the rural area I have to dwell on the urban and rural services. I notice that in 1966 and 1967 there was an estimated expenditure of some $2.78 million, but for next year it is only $2.2 million. That is a big slice of about half a million dollars less for the provision of such services. I would say that instead of provision for urban and rural services, it should be provision for rural services. I take in particular item 001, for which $700,000 is provided. There is a big cut of more than $600,000. I fully subscribe to what my colleagues from the rural areas have stated; that is, give a little bit to the urban areas, just a token provision, as what has been listed in many items in the Development Estimates. If there is a project which warrants a particular sum of expenditure, then the Urban and Rural Services Committee would decide whether that money should be spent. The funds to be proportionately allocated to the constituencies should take into consideration the fact that the rural constituencies need these funds most. The rural folks lack a lot of social amenities. For example, you can see under item 011, extension of water supply, that the vote has been increased to $600,000. Many motions on the adjournment have been made in this House pertaining to the needs of the rural folks in these constituencies. I am happy to note that the provisions have been increased for certain items. However, in the case of agricultural and kampong roads, there is a big cut. I hope with this $2.256 million the Parlia mentary Secretary to the Minister for National Development will take into consideration the fact that when the U.R.S.C. meet and decide what to do with the requests from the various constituencies, it will not be necessary just to say, "All right, we have expended the provision under the particular item; therefore, nothing can be done further." So, on that note I hope the rural constituencies will benefit more as a result of the many requests made by my colleagues, the Members of Parliament representing the rural areas, and also as a result of the motions on the adjourn, ment put before the House sometime this year.

The amendment also stands in the name of Mr Teong Eng Siong.

I am not moving.

Mr Ho.

(In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, having heard the Members of Parliament of the rural constituencies vent their grievances here, I can sum up by saying that they are merely asking for more sums of money to be allocated to the rural constituencies for development projects. They want the Urban and Rural Services Committee to allot more funds to them. I sympathise with the situation of these Members of Parliament. But sometimes when I consider this matter 1 could not sympathise with them. Thc reasons are that at the beginning of September this year, when there was still a substantial amount of funds in the Urban and Rural Services Committee, my Minister wrote a letter to Members of Parliament of the rural constituencies, requesting that if there were any projects in the rural areas which needed to be completed within this year, then they should, within one month, put their suggestions to the Urban and Rural Services Committee. This was a good opportunity for them and yet they missed --- Mr Ho Kah Leong rose --- Mr Ho Cheng Choon remained standing.

Mr Ho is not prepared to give way.

(In Mandarin): But they missed this opportunity. We gave it to them because we wanted to accommodate them and in order to reduce some of their troubles. We also approached the Ministry of Finance on this matter. Yet these Members of Parliament did not make use of this opportunity given to them. Now they want to ask for more funds. When we offered them this sum of money which they needed, they did not want to take it, and now they turn round and ask for more funds. Let me quote an incident. This year Sembawang could make use of $75,000 and yet only five projects were suggested. It made use of only $55,000, thereby saving $20,000. In the case of Paya Lebar, we gave them more funds than they needed to complete their projects. Paya Lebar completed only $35,000 worth of projects. They were allotted $56,000 and yet they spent only $35,000 on their projects. The Members have claimed more money under these circumstances. If they could only redouble their efforts and be more efficient in carrying out the various projects, I think they would go a long way towards getting more funds. Let me quote an example in Choa Chu Kang Constituency. This year --- 7.45 p.m. Mr Lim Guan Hoo rose --- Mr Ho Cheng Choon remained standing.

Order. Mr Lim, Mr Ho is not prepared to give way. You have not spoken. He is not replying to you. So there is less reason why he should give way to you.

(In Mandarin): For instance, 30 miles of agricultural road have been built this year in the Choa Chu Kang Constituency under the planning of the Member concerned and the Citizens' Consultative Committee. If this work had been undertaken by the Government, it would not have been completed within one year. The expenditure for making up this 30 miles of road was very small. If other Members of Parliament can follovv this example, I believe it vvill go a long way towards reducing their own difficulties. And Members can also make use of this opportunity to have more contact with their electorate. The Members for Punggol and Thomson have also raised the question of transferring part of the vote allocated to the urban areas to the rural areas. I feel it is rather early for them to raise this matter but I think this suggestion merits some consideration. Perhaps when the Economic Planning Unit of the Ministry of Finance considers the allocation of funds to the 58 constituencies, I will ask them to consider this suggestion.

Sir, may I deal with one particular point which the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for National Development has pointed out? It is in regard to a circular his Minister sent out to all rural M.P.s asking them to come forward with their recommendations to utilise the surplus funds that vvere not expended. Sir, in one breath he stated that all the rural M.P.s did not do their job. Therefore, in refuting this I produce the Urban and Rural Services Committee's list showing the aniount of money approved by the U.R.S.C. and Projects Committee for urban and rural services for the year 1967. Let me trouble the House with a little bit of detail. Changi, for example, is a rural constituency. The revised allocation of funds stood at $87,969; the amount expended was $98,180. In other words, a debit amount of $10,211. Therefore, the M.P. has done his job. Similarly, Choa Chu Kang, which is a rural area, was allocated $77,500, and it expended $89,900; over-expenditure $12,000. Now let us come to Kampong Kembangan. Amount allocated was $44,100; amount expended was $68,420; amount over-expended was $24,350.

25. An hon. Member: What about Punggol?

Sir, I have to point out that the rural M.P.s did their job as a result of that circular. Pasir Panjang over-expended more than $3,000. Paya Lebar was allocated $35,000; it spent $56,000; overspent by $20,000. Punggol was allocated $78,247; it spent $88,383; overspent by $10,000. An hon. Member: Well done!

If others do not make use of the funds, we, the M.P.s in the rural areas, must ask that these funds be expended. Serangoon Gardens, for example, was given only $21,521. Amount expended - I think it is a shocking amount - was $143,931.

50. In other words, Serangoon Gardens has overspent -

Mr Ng, for my in formation and the information of other Members, what is the document you are referring to?

Sir, I have just mentioned it. I can table this in the House. It is a list showing the amounts of money approved by the U.R.S.C. and Projects Committee for urban and rural services for the year 1967. I was just going to establish the fact that the M.P.s in the rural areas are not sleeping. They are working and in some cases have already asked for more funds than necessary. I think it is not fair of the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for National Development in one breath to make it appear that all M.P.s in the rural areas are sleeping and not working.

Without my entering into the debate, this is a double-edged argument. It merely means that in some areas more money has been spent than should have been spent, and to use the Minister for Finance's words, "What is the Member for Kampong Kembangan complaining about?" Very shortly, Mr Ho Kah Leong.

(In Mandarin): Sir, just now the Parliamentary Secretary has said that the vote for this year has not been used up in some rural constituencies. He blames the Members concerned for not having done their duty. I think there are some inaccuracies in his speech, and, therefore, I would like to say a few words. I remember in an adjournment speech in this House sometime this year, the Member for Choa Chu Kang complained about going through complicated procedures before projects could be implemented. Approaches have to be made to various departments. Every application for a project takes more than six months to be processed before it can be implemented. Because of this complicated procedure, the projects were not tabled in time before the U.R.S.C. So it is not fair for the Parliamentary Secretary to say that Members are lazy just because funds are not being fully made use of.

(In Mandarin): Sir, I will specially touch on under expenditure of votes allocated. I would like to ---

I do not want to be unfair to you, Mr Lim, but can you make your point very shortly, because a number of important points have been made and I must call on Mr Ho to reply.

I shall be very brief, Sir. (In Mandarin): In fact, many projects had been proposed by Members of Parliament concerned, but were not approved by the U.R.S.C. Therefore, the funds were not being fully made use of. Secondly, either the Chairman of the U.R.S.C. or the Chairman of the Projects Committee was sleeping. Members of Parliament are not sleeping because several projects proposed to the U.R.S.C. years ago are still pending and Members are still being asked whether they support the projects. It is the Chairmen of these committees who are actually sleeping.

(In Mandarin): Sir, I did not mean to say that Members of Parliament of the rural constituencies are lazy. It is because they asked for more funds for their constituencies that I suggested to them to redouble their efforts and organise more work teams to implement all the projects and expend the votes allocated; and perhaps get more funds for their constituencies. Comparing of votes expended is not much of a criterion. The most important thing is for the projects to be approved so that funds will be provided. The Member for Bukit Merah has never mentioned to me what he has just said. My impression is that certain requests by Bukit Merah related to areas which the Housing and Development Board wanted to develop. Certain areas are affected by proposed development and, therefore, the requests have to be thoroughly investigated before Government allocates funds.

Mr Ho, can you please conclude your remarks very soon?

(In Mandarin): If an area is to be developed in two or three years' time, and if we are asked to provide this area with roads and street lamps and so on, it is a waste of funds. Therefore, the committees concerned cannot waste public funds on this request.

Order, order. Mr Tay Boon Too, I take it that you are withdrawing your amendment?

(In Mandarin): Sir, I am not satisfied with the answer given by the Parliamentary Secretary. But because of time --- 7.55 p.m.

Order. We have reached guillotine time.

Question on the amendment put, and negatived. The sum of $2,256,000 for Head 68 ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates.

The remaining heads of expenditure in respect of which no amendment stands on the Order Paper Supplement are heads 01, 03, 04, 05, 06, 23, 30, 33, 41, 50, 51, 57 and 90. I propose to take all these heads of expenditure en bloc.

Question, "That the sums stated for those heads of expenditure which appear in the last column of the Summary of Estimated Expenditure on pages 5 and 6 of Paper Cmd. 27 of 1967 stand part of the Development Estimates," put, and agreed to. Question, "That the sum of $296,772,162 shall be supplied to the Government under the heads of expenditure for the public services shown in the Development Estimates for the year 1968 contained in Paper Cmd. 27 of 1967," put, and agreed to. Resolution to be reported. There upon Mr Speaker left the Chair of the Committee and took the Chair of the House.

Sir, I beg to report that the Committee of Supply has come to a certain resolution. Resolution reported - That the sum of $296,772,162 shall be supplied to the Government under the heads of expenditure for the public services shown in the Development Estimates for the year 1968 contained in Paper Cmd. 27 of 1967.

Sir, I beg to move, "That Parliament doth agree with the Committee on the said resolution."

Question put, and agreed to. Resolution accordingly agreed to.

Before I call the Minister to move the adjournment, may I just say that, like the Minister for Finance with money, I have limited time at my disposal and I thank hon. Members for the indulgent way in which they have accepted my sometimes very harsh rulings on the question of time. And may I also take this opportunity to thank the Parliamentary staff for having, as occasion required, worked without a suspension.

Resolved, "That Parliament do now adjourn." - [Dr Goh Keng Swee]. Adjourned accordingly at Two minutes past Eight o'clock p.m.