Hansard, 1971-08-05

Under the provisions of clause 2 (d) sitting of Parliament today, the 5th of Article 30 of the Constitution of Singapore August, I have granted permission to Mr Lee Kuan Yew (Tanjong Pagar), Speaker, Prime Minister, to be absent from the sitting of Parliament today, the 5th August,1971. YEOH GHIM SENG Speaker, Parliament of Singapore

asked the Minister for Social Affairs if a national badminton team has been selected for training in preparation for the 1972 World Badminton Tournament.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the Singapore Badminton Association has been advised by the International Badminton Federation that the project to hold the World Badminton Tournament in 1972 has been postponed indefinitely, and will not be held in 1972 as envisaged. The Member may wish to know that active consideration is being given to a systematic and continuous training scheme to promote badminton in Singapore and to the training of a national badminton team.

Mr Speaker, Sir, can the Parliamentary Secretary say whether the National Sports Promotion Board has engaged a professional coach to train our national team?

Mr Speaker, Sir, the N.S.P.B. has not engaged a coach because the Singapore Badminton Association already has a corps of experienced coaches to train the national team. All these coaches are volunteers. It may be desirable for the Singapore Badminton Association to consider engaging a professional coach at a later stage in order to bring up the standard of the players who are selected for the national team. Meanwhile, the present corps of coaches is also engaged in training several squads of selected badminton players who have the potential to make the grade for selection in the national team.

asked the Minister for Social Affairs if consideration is being given to setting up creches in the various large housing estates, and if one will be set up in or near the Kallang Housing Estate.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the Social Welfare Department operates 11 creches at the moment. The Jurong Town Creches, which was officially opened on 19th June, 1971, is the first creches to be set up in a new township or housing estate. The Government has plans to set up creches in the other new towns, such as Toa Payoh, Queenstown, Telok Blangah and Woodlands, where the projected population justifies the setting up of a creches. There is, however, no plan at the moment to set up a creches in the Kallang Housing Estate as there is already a creches, the Lee Kuo Chuan Creches, at Guillemard Road nearby. Although the Lee Kuo Chuan Creches has accommodation for 80 children, its average attendance is only 55 and more children from the Kallang Housing Estate can be accepted for admission to this creches. As it is, already 22 children out of the 55 attending the creches are living in the Kallang Housing Estate. However, if there is a dire need to have a creches within the Kallang Housing Estate in the future when circumstances warrant it, consideration can always be given.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the Lee Kuo Chuan Creches is not in the Kallang Basin Housing Estate but in Kallang Park, which is miles away from my constituency. Does the Parliamentary Secretary agree that the circumstances in the Kallang Basin Housing Estate warrant the setting up of a creches, and, if so, whether he will consider providing one in the very near future?

I think so, Sir.

asked the Minister for Finance if he will ascertain from the Jurong Town Corporation whether shipyard and slipway owners will be offered short-term leasehold to replace the present Temporary Occupation Licences.

Mr Speaker, Sir, Temporary Occupation Licences have been issued to three shipyards in Jurong Town and 21 shipyards in Kallang Park Industrial Estate. In respect of the three shipyards in Jurong Town, leases of up to 30 years will be issued in due course. Of the 21 shipyards on Temporary Occupation Licences in the Kallang Park Industrial Estate, the offer of short-term leases to these shipyards is being considered. The final decision, however, cannot be reached until the type of crossing (low-level bridge, high-level bridge, drawbridge or tunnel) over the Kallang River and the future use of the Kallang Park and Tanjong Rhu areas have first been decided.

asked the Minister for Finance if he will consider waiving the proposed levy of property tax on Temporary Occupation Licences held by shipyard and slipway owners along the Geylang River in the Kallang Park Industrial Estate.

Mr Speaker, Sir, property tax is leviable on all land and improvements on land. Property tax is, therefore, payable on shipyards and slipways. Under the present arrangement between the Jurong Town Corporation and the owners of the shipyards and slipways, these owners pay the property tax through the Jurong Town Corporation. Any exemption or reduction of property tax is a hidden subsidy from the Government. The shipyards and slipways have been enjoying boom conditions in the past few years and there is no reason why they should be further subsidized by Government. The Government has, therefore, no intention of exempting shipyards and slipways from property tax.

2.37 p.m. Order read for resuming adjourned debate on Question [30th July, 1971], `That the following Address in reply to the speech of the President be agreed to : - "We, the Parliament of the Republic of Singapore, express our thanks to the President for the speech which he delivered on behalf of the Government at the opening of the Second Session of this Parliament.".'.-[Dr Chiang Hai Ding]. Question again proposed. 2.38 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, may 1 be allowed to make a few remarks in reply to some of the points raised by hon. Members in this House during the last few days, so far as these points relate to the Ministry of Finance. The Member for Whampoa raised the points of export promotion and finance. With the rapid industrial growth in Singapore and our emphasis on export-oriented industries, it follows that we should give emphasis to export promotion. As early as 1966, an Export Promotion Council was established with the objective of servicing the industrial and business communities by way of supplying them with commercial information as well as assisting them in the organisation of trade fairs and missions abroad. With the establishment of Intraco (International Trading Company) in 1968, the Export Promotion Council was transferred under its wings. Intraco's main task is the development, promotion and marketing of Singapore-manufactured goods throughout the world. It now has overseas representatives in Indonesia, the U.S.S.R., Australia, West Germany, Holland, South Vietnam and Cambodia all this with the aim of helping to promote and sell Singapore-made goods. There is also an Export Promotion Advisory Committee in the Trade Division of the Ministry of Finance. Representatives from the joint Chambers of Commerce, the Singapore Manufacturers' Association, Intraco, and the Economic Development Board, sit on this Committee, the main function of which is to advise on participation by Singapore manufacturers and exporters in international fairs overseas. With the encouragement and assistance given by the Trade Division, our manufacturers participated in the Jetro Fair held in Tokyo in April this year, and at the present moment are participating in the Djakarta Fair. The manufacturers will also be taking part in the "Partners for Progress Exhibition" to be held in Berlin in October this year. The Member for Whampoa himself led a large mission to Tokyo in connection with the Jetro Fair last April. From experience gained in the participation of trade fairs and missions abroad, action is now being taken to expand the Export Promotion Advisory Committee so that it will be better able to serve the promotion and sale of our goods abroad. Export financing is intimately tied up with export promotion. At present, a great deal of export financing is through short-term trade bills financed by our commercial banks. A careful study was made on an Export Guarantee Scheme by my Ministry some time ago but its introduction was found to be inadvisable at the moment. At present, short-term financing is not a serious problem but when we start exporting more sophisticated goods and capital equipment, long-term finance would then become more urgent. My Ministry is keeping .a close watch on this matter and we are exercising our minds in devising a solution. The Member for Whampoa also asked whether the Government will help to identify limited areas where local capital and enterprise can be encouraged to go into. My Ministry will give consideration to this suggestion. Where the market is entirely local, there appears to be justification in trying to obtain at least a share for local capital and enterprise. The Member also complained that the 10 per cent tax on P.U.B, bills is a regressive tax. It may interest him to know, however, that more than 115,000 out of a total of 320,000 accounts do not pay the 10 per cent tax because they consume less than $13 a month. These represent some 36 per cent of the total number of accounts. The Member for Sembawang raised the question of cement shortage. My Ministry is aware of the situation and has requested Intraco to import 60,000 metric tons of cement, the first shipment of which is scheduled to arrive in about a week's time, and the second shipment of 10,000 tons by about the end of this month. Further, the three cement manufacturers have been requested to maintain minimum levels of production to ensure adequate future supply. We are keeping a close watch on the situation, and, if it warrants, further imports by Intraco will be made. The Member for Sembawang, together with the Member for Bukit Ho Swee, also raised the question of price increases. This subject was thoroughly debated during the budget debate in March this year. During that debate, Members were informed that, because of the openness of our economy and because we import almost everything we use and consume, we are very much dependent upon world prices, and that in recent years there has been worldwide inflation, especially in the developed countries. What we can do to help is to ensure that there is an efficient port and that competition in Singapore is free, so that we could import at the cheapest price, and that there is no monopoly which could artificially manipulate prices to the detriment of the consuming public. Since then, a Consumers' Association has been formed, and this Association, which works very closely with the Trade Division of my Ministry, has been able to exert considerable influence on the price level. The Trade Division on its part has been giving considerable encouragement and help to the Consumers' Association and has been sending out inspectors to check on prices whenever there is report of any unjustifiable price increase. The Government, however, would like to emphasise the positive side of encouraging competition and fair prices rather than the negative side of regulation and control. One of the ways of encouraging traders to sell at fair prices is to give these traders maximum publicity. This we hope to do by enlisting the help of hon. Members of this House. This is what we are going to do: The Inspectorate of the Trade Division, in their rounds of price checking, have come across many shopkeepers who sell at fair prices. In fact, it can be said that unscrupulous traders who are out to make a fast buck is the exception rather than the rule. This is also confirmed by the Consumers' Association. What we are going to do is to publicise the names of these traders who sell at fair and reasonable prices by putting their names on a notice board in the community centres of the areas concerned. And hon. Members can help by giving the fullest publicity to what we are going to do. This free publicity will give fair and reasonable traders a competitive edge over the others, and will encourage other traders to follow suit. The consumer himself can help in maintaining stable prices. He should keep himself informed and see whether there are substitutes for what he wants to buy. I think an example will make this clear. When the Public Utilities Board announced some time ago that there would be a possibility of water rationing, people rushed to buy plastic tubs for the storage of water. Because of this rush, the price of plastic tubs went up two to three times overnight. The rush, however, was entirely unnecessary because the P.U.B, did say that ample notice would be given before the imposition of water rationing. Furthermore, people should have found out whether there were substitutes for plastic tubs for the storage of water. If people had not rushed all at once to buy plastic tubs, or if they had looked for substitutes, then the price of plastic tubs would not have gone up, at least would not have gone up two or three times overnight. The price of plastic tubs has now dropped back to its original level because the demand for them has eased. Those who panicked and rushed to buy plastic tubs at exorbitant prices had only themselves to blame. In the final analysis, Mr Speaker, Sir, the Government believes that with a well-informed consuming public and efficient port services and free competition in Singapore, we would be able to maintain a stable price level for the benefit of us all. Mr Speaker, Sir, I am happy to associate myself with the motion thanking the President for the speech which he delivered on behalf of the Government at the opening of the Second Session of this Parliament. 2.49 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of the motion standing in the name of the hon. Member for Ulu Pandan, and proposing a vote of thanks to the President for the speech that he has delivered on behalf of the Government. A worker in Singapore, whether a citizen or otherwise, can exert considerable influence, for better or for worse, on matters pertaining to the well-being of the nation at large. In order, therefore, for him to earn a fair share of the fruits of prosperity, he has to exert himself to contribute to the achievement of the optimum economic growth as a condition precedent for any prosperity. In 1968, the Employment Act was enacted in order to create a favourable investment climate for Singapore, in anticipation of and preparation for the crucial years ahead. We in the National Trades Union Congress have accepted the unpleasant conclusion that if Singapore did not become economically viable, the bells will toll first for the organised labour. Although we detested certain features of the Employment Act as restrictive, nonetheless we accepted the underlying objectives of the Act,, that is, the curbing of malpractices and the creation of a more favourable industrial relations climate to attract foreign investments. The consequences of any other alternative would not only be more painful, but also disastrous. Subsequent events proved that, on the whole, it was a right decision taken by the N.T.U.C, leaders in accepting the Employment Act as inevitable and infinitely more desirable than the chaos that would have resulted if the problems of growing unemployment had not been checked in 1968 before they posed a serious threat to Singapore's survival. Not only were a general economic depression and massive unemployment averted, but an extraordinary industrial development was also generated, giving rise to boom conditions and a serious labour shortage in the Republic. Parallel with, and equally as impressive as, the economic development is the significant social progress that has taken place in Singapore during the past six years. Social progress is not automatically a consequence of economic growth, even when the rate of such growth is exceptionally high. Despite favourable growth records, many countries in Asia have greater unemployment now than a decade ago, and millions of their citizens still lack educational opportunities, despite heavy investment in educational facilities. These problems are compounded by the rapid growth in population which in itself is swallowing a vast amount of the additional capital generated by economic development. Millions live in poverty and do not even enjoy the minimum degree of well-being and security compatible with human dignity. On the other hand, Singapore has not only brought population growth under control, but has also achieved a situation of nearly full employment. Our social amenities such as low-cost housing, educational and medical facilities, and communication services are among the best in the region and comparable to any part of the world. Our educational system, after decades of colonial inertia, has now been oriented and geared to our manpower needs. There are parks and gardens to make for a more gracious living. We may yet attain in the near future, as the Prime Minister himself has so wished, a gracious way of life. As it is, a combination of so many factors has been responsible for our relative economic affluence, social order and political stability at present. No less important than any factor is the part played by labour in the success of our socio-economic progress. We in the N.T.U.C, made it clear in 1968, when accepting the Employment Act, that we did so not for the purpose of enriching the pockets of employers, but for the purpose of ensuring the success of our industrial expansion; first, to overcome the growing unemployment situation, and then to raise the standard of living of our workers. I am pleased to note that the Government is conscious of the sacrifices and contributions made by labour to rapid economic growth and has urged employers making exceptional profits to give better bonuses to their workers. The announcement by the Government to review the prevailing wage policy, after the full effects of the run-down of the British bases have been assessed, is also a welcome move. While not doubting the sincerity of the Government's intention to improve the general wage level in the best possible way at the right time, I cannot help' having a strong suspicion that some employers may not take kindly to such a move and will do their best to thwart it under one pretext and another. It is, most conceivable that such employers will attempt to equate any upward revision of the wage level with terms like "inflation", and advance the argument that "prohibitive labour costs" would damage Singapore's congenial climate for foreign investment. A very recent example of such an unhealthy attitude of some employers, is the atavistic reaction of their representatives in the International Chamber of Commerce and the Singapore Employers' Federation to the Government's, proposal to set up a national wage council as reported in the Straits Times on 14th July, 1971. One of them re-marked that the Government had its, own idea of the council. By that remark,. I take it to mean that he had a different idea of what the council should be. Another employers' representative piously remarked that "If the wage increases were kept in hand, there would be no inflationary effect." Before even considering what constitute fair wage increases, they are already sounding a warning on the inflationary effects of wage increases. In yesterday's Straits Times, a spokesman of the International Chamber of Commerce was reported to have said that the proposed telephone rental increase would only tend to "narrow the area of manoeuvre for wage increases". Both the International Chamber of Commerce and the Singapore Employers' Federation represent some of the most successful employers in the Republic, many of whom are not Singapore-incorporated firms. Their reactions and remarks are significant in that they betray the reluctance of some employers to grant a fair share of their substantial profits to their employees. The irony of it all is that even if the trade unions manage to squeeze an additional one or two months' salary from such employers, the latter would have no hesitation in passing the bill to the consumers, who include the workers. As a matter of fact, wage increases can be easily met out of the substantial profits of the employers even without steps being taken to streamline and modernise the prevailing set-up and operations of the various enterprises. It goes without saying, of course, that a prudent employer would be expected to take all the necessary steps to reduce production and operation costs. It is meaningless for workers to regard themselves as partners with the Government and employers in Singapore's progress and prosperity when the employers make it a point to preclude them from having a fair share of the fruits of the prosperity to which they have greatly contributed. The problem today is one of educating some of our tight-fisted employers to realise the folly of their persistent refusal to see beyond their nose that their true interest must necessarily lie in the fair treatment of their workers. With economic growth, some degree of inflationary effect is inevitable. What is important is that the rate of inflation should be kept to the lowest level possible. Inflation in our Republic thus far, unlike inflation in the highly developed countries of the world, is not due to wage increases. Wage levels in Singapore have remained remarkably stable over a considerable period of time. On the other hand, the same comment cannot be made of the price levels in Singapore. In the past few months, there have been rampant increases in the prices of consumer goods, which are very often unjustified price-hikes and profiteering by some unscrupulous traders and shopkeepers. These runaway price increases are bound to upset not only wage stability, but also cause genuine hardships, particularly to families in the low-income group. We must not forget that there are some 120,000 workers employed both in the private and public sectors whose take-home pay per month is between $100 and $200, and many of them have families to support. They are the persons most affected by any increase in the cost of living, no matter how slight. And these persons form the bulk of our factory workers, without whom our industrial growth would not have been possible; our Division IV civil servants and our public daily-rated employees, without whom our streets would not be clean, and the Public Utilities Board and the Housing and Development Board would not function efficiently. It seems to me, therefore, that one of the urgent tasks before the Government is to uplift the social conditions of the low-income group of workers. I hope that after assessing the effects of the British run-down in May 1972, the Government will pay particular attention to them in the general review of the wage policy. Apart from any general wage increases for them, active steps must be taken to initiate schemes to improve and upgrade their skills in order to enlarge their earning capacity. The hawkers and taxi drivers also make up the lower strata of our society. Unless they find a stake in Singapore's prosperity, they are likely to pose a social problem in the years to come. The Government must be congratulated on proposing steps recently to improve the lot of such persons. I refer to the proposal to allocate $5 million for the acquisition of land in a pilot scheme to build clean and attractive footstall complexes for renting out on a subsidised basis. Apart from providing cheap and wholesome meals, the hawkers can look forward to better business in view of their cleaner and more attractive stalls. The support given by the Government to the N.T.U.C, has enabled it to run a transport co-operative (COMFORT) with the purchase of some 1,000 taxis and 200 mini-buses for our taxi-drivers and mini-bus drivers. The COMFORT taxis and mini-buses not only help to provide improved transport services, but also enable the respective operators to be owners of the taxis and mini-buses. I now come to the question of the shortage of labour. The importation of foreign labour to meet the labour shortage is fraught with all kinds of implications and may be inimical to the long-term interests of Singapore. Though I accept the rationale that the present shortage of labour being experienced by our factories, if not counteracted as speedily as possible, would slacken the pace of our industrial expansion, I am of the view that we should not be contented now that the importation of foreign labour seems to have resolved the labour shortage problem. The present shortage of labour should serve as a timely reminder to us of the urgent need to make constructive plans for the future regarding the maximum utilisation of our own human resources for our manpower requirements. The importation of foreign labour is at best a short-term solution. Perhaps some scheme may be devised for the employment of a greater number of women, especially housewives, in factories. The validity of the old saying, "A woman's place is in the home", has already been disputed by the women's liberation movement. In industrially advanced countries, women have abandoned the chores of housework and taken to employment in the offices and factories. The departure from the traditional concept of the role of women is in keeping with the concept of "fraternity, liberty, equality (with man)", and is also rewarding in terms of enhancing the family income. In Singapore, we find many of our married women working in offices, schools, hospitals, and so on, but they come largely from the middle-income or upper middle-income groups. They are usually well-educated as their jobs demand that of them. They get domestic help to do the chores of housework and the caring of their children. The position of the housewives from the lower income homes, however, is different. They cannot afford to hire domestic help. With many clean factories now sited in housing estates providing job opportunities, steps should be taken to encourage the housewives living nearby to seek employment in the factories. One such step is the building of more creches in housing estates. Perhaps tax incentives could be given to factories requiring large numbers of female workers to encourage them to build creches. Some of our more enterprising Singaporeans should be encouraged to establish laundrettes in housing estates to provide cheap laundry services with the use of washing machines. With the creches to look after their children and laundry services to look after their laundry, many housewives will be freed from their household chores and enabled to find suitable employment in nearby factories. By doing so, they will help to increase the income of their families and improve the standard of living of their families. At the same time, they are making a useful contribution to the economic development of the country. I also hope that the Government, as an employer, will not forget the civil service in its review of the wage policy next year. The role of the civil service in the socio-economic development of Singapore has been both significant and vital. With regard to the problem of brain drain from the civil service to the private sector because of greater rewards offered, perhaps the Government can take one positive measure to counter the attraction of the private sector, that is, a home-ownership scheme of Government-built houses. With the Government's considerable experience in housing programmes, I am sure that Government can build comparatively cheap houses and sell them to deserving civil servants at cost as an inducement to them to remain in the civil service. Finally, I wish to comment, from my own personal observation, that the various Government Ministries and departments seem to be poorly served in the field of public relations. The sum total of public relations efforts of Government Ministries and departments seems to be the employment of a public relations officer whose sole function seems to be the drafting of replies to letters of complaints in the press. Surely public relations, which constitute an important aspect of modern and efficient management and organisation, should be conducted on a more constructive and effective basis. This is all the more important from the point of view of the Government in that it is both desirable and necessary to obtain the support of the public for the policies of the Government through the better understanding of such policies. It is vital that Government should give more attention and make efforts to improving its public relations activities, as what is at stake is the public image of the Ministries, departments or statutory boards concerned. It is not my intention to cast any aspersion or slur on the fine work done by the serving public relations officers in the various Ministries. What I am suggesting is that more funds should be allocated for public relations work so that the necessary staff and facilities can be obtained for effective public relations efforts. 3.05p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, our Republic, like all countries new and old, has to face problems of rapid change. Singapore has made great progress since its independence six years ago. We are happy and proud of our considerable progress in the spheres of economy, politics, social welfare, trade and industry. Without a stable government and a strong economy we will not be able to make the progress which we have now achieved. We might then be in serious trouble, faced with a growing young population, rising unemployment and social unrest. But with fast progress come the problems of rapid change, and our people have to face various inconveniences, such as being cleared from sites required for redevelopment, for example, schools, hospitals, new roads, impounding reservoirs and airport extension. People have to be uprooted from their homes and moved to new satellite towns. They have to adapt themselves quickly to the new environment and mode of living. The petty traders and part-time farmers have to change their professions and trades in order to fit into the new environment. But, nevertheless, all these changes are made for the good of the country. None of us would like to see a backward Singapore. We all want a progressive and flourishing Singapore. To achieve this, we all have to put in effort and make sacrifices. Tampines Constituency is now very much affected by the Paya Lebar Airport extension programme for the jumbo jets and the complete British pull-out at the end of 1971. The Government, though firm in its policy, has also shown humanity in enforcing it. The affected families of my Tampines constituents fully realise the importance of development in a country seeking to progress. This is evidenced by the development of slum areas into modern housing estates and industrial sites. Those of my constituents who are affected by redevelopment are very grateful to the Government for its generous compensation and ex gratia payments under the new revised rates as announced by the Minister for National Development on 20th July, 1971. The constituents of Tampines know that there is no alternative but to extend Paya Lebar Airport. They hope that by their little contribution in clearing from their homes, Paya Lebar Airport, when fully developed, could form an important link in the chain of major airports around the world. Approximately 3,500 families are affected by the Airport extension project, expected to be completed by 1975. Some families have taken the opportunity to purchase Housing Board flats in the Kallang Basin and Toa Payoh with the compensation ex gratia payment and transport allowance received, in keeping with Government's home-ownership scheme. The Housing and Development Board, I understand, will be building about 2,000 units of flats and industrial workshops for light industries at the 7th milestone, Tampines Road. I am positive that the Housing and Development Board will complete construction of the flats well before the target date so that the displaced persons can get their alternative accommodation in time. A good government always has the welfare of its citizens at heart. Though our Government is engaged in affairs of state and in the strengthening of our industrial sinews, it has not forgotten for one moment the welfare of its citizens, in particular the rural folk. The Urban and Rural Services Committee and the Projects Committee have been set up to provide facilities, amenities and services to all the constituencies. Large sums of money have been spent on essential facilities like supplying electricity direct to individual homes in the rural areas, making up of roads to kampong standard, installation of water-mains in order that clean pipe water can reach all the houses, erection of bridges, construction and repair of drains to prevent flooding, and building of jetties for the islanders. As I have said, all these projects and services have cost the Government many millions of dollars, but they have succeeded in bringing a brighter life and much convenience to the villagers. However, there are many more laterite roads to be metalled and repaired in the rural areas and numerous kampongs to be lighted up, and a large sum of money is needed to do this. The rural tracks cannot just be metalled within a short time, so the villagers will have to put up with this temporary inconvenience until more funds are available to accomplish this objective. Sir, in conclusion, I would like to say that nowadays we are prone to jump on the civil service for whatever offences they are alleged to have committed. The civil servants are always at the receiving end. In fairness and in justice to them, let us first make certain of our information before we point an accusing finger at our loyal civil service which is, as a matter of fact, one of the most efficient in this region. They have acquitted themselves very well in the past and it is my hope and belief that they will maintain their high standard of discipline and efficiency in the future. Just as there are a few black sheep in every flock, so it is not unusual to find some in the civil service. Let us weed them out, but let not the civil service as a whole be branded because of the misdeeds of a few. 3.15 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like at the outset to congratulate the President on his realistic appraisal of the situation which this nation can expect to face in the coming years ahead in his speech to the Members of this House. After six years of hard work by our people and our Government to ensure the viability of this nation, we have on record proof of commendable achievements in almost every sphere of our nation's development. We have also succeeded even to the extent of over-achieving in some spheres, especially in economic development and tackling unemployment. In the six years since our independence, the nation's Gross Domestic Product has jumped from $3,043 million in 1965 to $5,564.5 million in 1970, while the birth rate has been severely checked and population growth has greatly slowed down. Our annual economic growth rate stands at 15 per cent since the last count in 1970, which is well above the generally accepted take-off rate of 10 per cent, which indicates an economy as having succeeded in achieving developing status. In 1965, Singapore had an unemployment figure of some 65,000. Today, we are in the realm of full employment with labour shortage in certain industries in spite of the issue of some 55,800 work permits to allow non-citizens to work in Singapore. Sir, our achievement in the past, which has brought this nation its present stability and affluence, is no guarantee of a rosy future. Singapore is and will be as vulnerable as it was six years ago if new and serious problems confronting it from within and without are not tackled effectively. Singaporeans should not be gullible and soft-headed in respect of these problems. The Singapore Government of late has had to take certain hard-headed and unpleasant measures in dealing with some of these problems. Singaporeans should rightly take their cue from this policy and intensify their own efforts in combating the destructive forces from within and without by containing and isolating them. In the meantime, no effort should be spared in promoting other positive measures to enhance the self-reliance and cohesiveness of our people. Mr Speaker, Sir, we know that of late there has been an insidious campaign by certain mass media and racialists to create unrest and instability, through exploitation of race and language issues and the promotion of destructive forms of Western permissive philosophies. One English newspaper during the last months of its existence did in fact succeed to a certain extent in arousing emotionally the feelings of a small section of our people over inconclusive issues like freedom, rights of the newspapers, and a host of other abstractions related to decadent Western permissiveness. Sir, while the recent steps taken by the Government have undoubtedly thwarted the growth of this cankerous development, some scathing criticisms have been made of the ruling party by individuals or groups representing a small section of the opposition to the effect that the P.A.P, has become dictatorial and that the Republic has become a one-party state and intolerant of any opposition. However, the common man, who periodically reviews his early decision and continues to send the P.A.P, to Parliament, is unlikely to hesitate to question the motives of this motley crowd, who represent none but themselves in airing such views with no relevance to reality. There is indeed a touch of humour when we are informed that those who forfeit deposits in general elections and by-elections despatch memoranda to Buckingham Palace complaining of the alleged absence of democracy in Singapore. It might perhaps provide merriment to Her Majesty over the breakfast table to read such amusing messages from one of her ex-colonial possessions, especially when most of John Bull's previous possessions are steadily resorting to one-man rule through not infrequent coup d'etats. Those who are vociferously expressing their "displeasure" in the emergence of "dictatorship" in Singapore basically consist of three groups. In the first category, you can spot the individuals who have been defeated in general elections and thus deprived of the opportunity to warm the seats of Parliament. The second group are those who do not subscribe to democracy but believe in their own concept of "people's democracy", which obviously refers to a one-party state. The last group applies to those who, while hesitating to step forward to meet the challenges of democracy, content themselves by giving frequent advice to all and sundry on how to conduct themselves, while completely ignoring their own responsibility to society and the nation. They are the "escapists" who live in a world of their own creation while not hesitating to provide frequent "intellectual" solutions to the political and economic ills of the nation. If a few pertinent questions are directed towards this minority group, it would thoroughly expose them as men with ambition but with no substantial support from any section of the population. What exactly do they expect from the P.A.P.? Are they suggesting for a moment that those who are defeated in elections and others who hesitate to face the electorate should be invited to take their seats in Parliament? Do they demand constitutional changes to that effect? If not, in what other manner do they seek accommodation in our political set-up? Further, how best do they expect the P.A.P, to assist another political organisation within our democratic framework, especially when that party has expressed no belief in true democracy? Sir, I would also like to touch on the Education Ministry. Despite the commendable proposals of the Ministry contained in the addendum to the President's speech to improve the quality of education through increased emphasis on bilingualism, technical training and a more flexible system to meet individual student needs, I remain unconvinced that these noble objectives can be achieved without an efficient and highly motivated teaching force. The bulk of our teachers today are far from motivated, a good number of them far from efficient, and will remain so if they are not adequately rewarded for the important and arduous role which they are expected to play in educating the young of our society. The Ministry of Education seems to have realised this problem by its recent attempt to revise the salaries of teachers, although by some mysterious act, it has not mentioned this in the addendum to the President's speech. Perhaps it fights shy of the fact that its proposed wage revision scheme is ineffectual and no more than a mere token. Sir, an analysis of the wage revision for teachers by the Education Ministry would reveal that there is no immediate incentive whatsoever conducive to attracting and promoting higher standards of performance in the ranks of the teaching profession, especially in respect of the ordinary teachers. What should be given to these teachers should be immediate benefits in the form of higher salaries comparable to the best in other Government establishments and not marginal increases in their maximum pay over an increased timescale period,, which is the main characteristic of the Education Ministry's so-called salary revision scheme. Sir, I am also particularly perturbed by the illogical distribution of remuneration in this salary revision wherein the small group of senior assistants and principals are given immediate salary increases while the bulk of the ordinary teachers, especially those in the primary schools, are not given an additional cent. This is indeed ironical when we realise that it is the rank and file teachers who really perform the actual function of teaching, while the senior assistants and principals are mere arm-chair administrators, and that it is the teaching standard of the ordinary teachers that we seek to improve. In view of this, I submit that the Education Ministry should re-study its proposed salary revision scheme so as to provide a more equitable and effective salary structure to generate a higher standard of performance among the teachers directly responsible for the education of our young. Sir, I wish also to touch on other problems confronting Singapore which, if not effectively handled, will seriously threaten the stability and progress of our society. It is true that the Government's urban renewal programme has inflicted considerable economic and social hardships on those sections of our people who have been affected by it. A large proportion of these people are small businessmen, workers, petty traders and farmers who find their livelihood and traditional environment threatened by the upheaval of urban renewal. However, while I believe that a certain amount of sacrifice for the good of the country should be forthcoming from these people, I feel that the Government is duty bound to act judicially in the interest of these people. I must commend the Government for its intention to increase the rate of compensation to property owners affected by urban renewal schemes. I wish, however, to bring to the Government's attention the plight `of the tenant shopkeepers and the petty traders who find themselves gradually pushed out of the streets where their source of livelihood comes from. As these people are considerable in number, especially in the city areas, I am in favour of the Government setting up a permanent body to look after the resettlement problems of these people. Hitherto, the piecemeal efforts of different Government departments like the H.D.B., the Hawkers' Department, etc., to resettle these people have been far from satisfactory, as complaints of high rentals or alternative Government accommodation and other problems abound. Among the matters which this proposed body can look into are more `economic rentals for the poorer classes in H.D.B, flats and a longer period of rent subsidies for tenant shopkeepers provided with alternative H.D.B. accommodation for their shops. This body can also seriously look into the possibility of providing alternative employment and controlled hawking sites for those petty hawkers who are gradually taken off the streets as a result of urban renewal. Sir, in short, I am for the establishment of a permanent body to minimise the hardship of those affected by our urban renewal programme in whatever way the Government can afford to do. Such a body, I believe, can more effectively handle the present and future resettlement problems of the people. Sir, I would also like to touch on the very important issues of defence and foreign policies. I am in agreement with the Foreign Affairs addendum that our foreign policy in the past has been relatively inward-looking out of necessity to ensure domestic stability and to aid Singapore's economic and industrial development. I do agree that we should in the future be more outward-looking by reacting more consciously and realistically to bigger power and super-power manoeuvres in the Pacific region. Perhaps we may have already begun in this direction by our efforts in promoting regional co-operation through ASEAN and the Five-Nation Defence Pact. However, Mr Speaker, Sir, while foreign diplomacy is an important weapon in ensuring our sovereignty, it is my belief that in the ultimate analysis reliance on our own ability to defend ourselves will be the decisive factor in deciding whether we keep or lose our sovereignty, in this respect, there is much for us to learn from the recent development in relations between Washington and Peking and in the revelations from the Pentagon Papers Affair. Although the Taiwanese and Vietnamese today have their own Governments, they do not have sovereignty over themselves, as they are not in a position to decide what their future will be. They lack the ultimate weapon of self-reliance, and their future will be decided between Washington and Peking in accordance with the convenience of these two super powers. Singaporeans must realise that Singapore should not be trapped in a similar situation if they wish to continue to live with respect and dignity in the future. They should ensure that we have our own defence force capable of ultimately defending our own sovereignty, and not allow some other foreign powers to take charge. We should not expect any foreign powers to intervene on our behalf in the case of any armed conflict. No foreign power will be in the least interested to help us unless its own interest is at stake. Some Members in this House may have read about the Pentagon Papers in the June 28th issue of Time magazine. For the benefit of those who have not, they may be surprised to learn that a top U.S. official in the Johnson Administration was quoted as having expressed U.S, objectives in the Vietnam War in the following order: "70 per cent -X to avoid a humiliating U.S, defeat, 20 per cent -to keep South Vietnam territory from Chinese hands, and 10 per cent - to permit the people of South Vietnam to enjoy a better, freer way of life." This, Mr Speaker, Sir, serves to sum up the moral of my argument, that self-reliance should underlie our defence and foreign policies. 3.34 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of the motion moved by the Member for Ulu Pandan in thanking the President for his speech delivered at the opening of the Second Session of the Second Parliament recently. Mr Speaker, Sir, I do not want to speak on subjects that my colleagues here have already touched on. What I would like to talk about today is some aspects of urban living in Singapore that may tend to escape our more immediate notice. More than half of our people will be living in high-rise flats by 1975. During the family planning campaign organised last year by the Family Planning Board, I had the opportunity of observing life in several of the Housing and Development Board estates. I noticed that nearly all the large families living in H.D.B, flats were from the lower income level, in the H.D.B. one-room flats, for example, the number of occupants averaged, strangely enough, some six to eight people. Most of these people were either resettled families affected by clearance schemes or those dependent for their livelihood on hawking or other low-paid jobs such as manual labour and lorry driving. If we do not want to see our H.D.B, estates degenerate into slums because of this kind of overcrowding, our people must be made to understand the vital importance of family planning, the need to keep a family small in order to maintain a high standard of living. We must therefore eradicate the old concept that large families are a sign of prosperity. Large families, more often than not, mean low family income, with the parents having to work extra hard to supplement their finances. This will automatically mean that very little attention is paid to the children, and this could lead to a drop in the quality of education, at a time when education is all-important to a young and vigorous Republic determined to speed ahead. Adapting to life in high-rise flats -which has become the order of the day-- is but one aspect of adapting to urbanisation and modernisation, which is inevitable in our society. Traditional practices which hinder progress have to be discarded and new achievement-orientated values imbued, especially in our young. All citizens should be motivated to reach the top. To press purposefully on to our goals, it is imperative that we infuse a spirit of oneness, a sense of cohesiveness, in our people. Working for a common objective will help create the harmonious society we are striving for. "Sacrifice" is the key word in this context. Those people who have been affected by reclamation schemes have to sacrifice for the sake of the whole population. The Government is quite aware of the hardship and difficulties posed by resettlement. These are being minimised as far as possible. The rate for resettlement compensation has been increased, for instance. But we cannot please everybody. Some of the people will always have to sacrifice something for the sake of the common good. Singaporeans have to be outward looking, not inward-looking. We must not become too Singapore-centred. We should strive to be aware of situations in other countries. Comparing standards of living, Singaporeans should be thankful for what they have. True leadership, not only political leadership but leadership at all levels, can greatly facilitate the process of modernisation. Singapore leaders must be problem-solvers and reformers, understanding the problems around them and helping the people reorientate their thinking and adopt correct attitudes to new ways of living. Grass-roots organisations like the Citizens' Consultative Committees and the community centres can help a great deal in this respect, for they serve as a very useful and profitable liaison between the Government and the people. Once we accept the fact that modernisation is inevitable and adaptation is our only course of action, we will really begin our progress. 3.40 p.m.

Mr Speaker. Sir, the President rightly said in his policy speech on the 21st of July that most of our people have accepted the realities of life in present-day Singapore and that their approach to problems is generally practical and tolerant. Sir, we, the people of Singapore, are indeed glad to hear these most encouraging and rewarding words. Tributes are due to our people for their understanding, tolerance and support without which no government, however efficient it is, can successfully implement its policies. The sacrifices of our people for the sake of the country's progress and well-being are enormous. It is appropriate now that we should place on record the tremendous contribution that our people have made to our present-day prosperity. During the last six years of our independence, we have shown, beyond any doubt to the world, that although we are a small nation, we have the capacity and determination to live as a people, survive and continue to prosper. We set down our aim to transform our once disparate community into a modern and industrialised nation. This is by no means an easy task, and yet we have achieved in these six years what it took some advanced countries half a century or more to attain. From now on, we have to set our aims even higher. To achieve this, it is imperative that we should be viable in defence and stable in our internal security. This is critically necessary for we are only assured of stability and security for a few more years under the Commonwealth Five-Power Defence arrangement. After this, we will be by ourselves. We should always remain alert politically, and invulnerable in our defence. No subversion from within or aggression from without can ever rend us asunder. We either survive or disintegrate. Our choice is to survive. Sir, may I now turn to our water resources which affect our very survival. It is heartening to note that the Public Utilities Board will be taking measures to develop our water resources. Short of this effort, we will not be able to cope up with demand of the growing population. I endorse the views of my two colleagues, the Members for Anson and Bukit Panjang, who earlier in the House suggested to open up new reservoirs, or to enlarge the existing ones. I would go further to suggest that more catchments should be created to collect rainfall that goes into our network of drainage in the city area. The rain water so collected can then be pumped and drawn through pipes into reservoirs. Mr Speaker, Sir, you are aware that most of the rainfall has fallen underground through bare soil in the rural areas. We should therefore look into the feasibility of tapping water resources that can be found in abundant supply underground. We can open up wells on a large scale and draw up the spring water to supplement our shortage of water. Sir, the retrenched civilian employees have become a problem which needs our immediate attention in the next few months. I understand that the Government has taken steps to absorb them into alternative employment in the various Government departments. There is the problem of finding them jobs of equivalent posts with pay similar to what they received during employment with the British military establishments. Most of these employees have reached their mid-forties and have still to support their minor children. Lesser pay in their new jobs will create financial hardship. One solution to assist them to earn more money would be to allow them to do part-time work outside their jobs. This is normally not allowed if they are taken into Government departments. Sir, the P.U.B, is now facing a shortage of meter readers, and employment of more meter readers will inevitably increase their operational costs. May I suggest that the P.U.B, consider a proposal of offering these retrenched civilian employees part-time work in meter reading. 1 am sure some of them will he willing to earn extra income to make up the deficit in their earnings. I do not wish to attempt to work out how the scheme should be carried out, and I shall leave it to the PUB, to consider its feasibility. Perhaps such part-time work can be carried out on weekends and in the area near the homes of the part-time workers. Sir, I conclude by expressing my full support and appreciation of the policy speech by our President. 3.45 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, before the P.A.P. took office in 1959, there were only 300,000 children in schools, and the privilege of education was limited only to a lucky few. In less than a decade, this Government has ensured every child a place in school and 10 years of education. Today, the question is no longer the provision of sufficient places in school for children, hut the emphasis is on the improvement of the quality of education. As stated in the addendum to the President's speech at the opening of this Parliament, this Government will concentrate its efforts on developing a more flexible education system and curriculum, with particular emphasis on language teaching. I believe the Member for Jurong has certain reservations about this, and I would like to take this opportunity to clarify a few points. First of all, let me assure him and the House that the emphasis on language teaching does not necessarily mean it will be done at the expense of other subjects. On the other hand, the teaching of other subjects is to supplement the teaching of language. What we try to achieve is to have all lessons being considered as language lessons. All these changes that have been taking place in the revision of the curriculum have been done in the closest consultation with the Teachers' Union and those in the teaching profession. 1 can assure the House, especially the Members in the teaching service, that there will be continuous and close consultations with them. The Member for Bras Basah raised the question of the salary structure for the teaching service. Mr Speaker, Sir, I could hardly disagree with him on the importance of a motivated teaching force. But 1 wonder if financial remuneration is the only criterion for motivation in the teaching profession. I would like to refer him to the very successful seminar organised this year by the Singapore Teachers' Union. I think it is the general consensus that the bargaining power of the teaching profession is in the display of their professional expertise, and not in the constant moaning of self-pity. The negotiations between the Ministry and the unions are on the restructuring of the salary scales to iron out certain anomalies. I fail to understand what gave him the impression that only a certain selected group of senior assistants and principals are being promoted. The principle of the new salary scale is to enable teachers to be promoted within their own ranks. In fact, I could hardly answer any more of his questions because the negotiations have not yet been finalised. I believe the Member for Jurong also raised the question of the long queues at schools. Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to take this opportunity to emphasise two facts: (1) There are more Primary 1 places than are required. For 1972, there will he over 60,000 Primary I places for the estimated 51,000 children seeking admission. (2) For last year, 95 per cent of the parents obtained places for their children in schools of their own choice. There is therefore no reason for him to believe that it will be any worse this year. These facts have been reported by most of the local newspapers recently, and it is most amazing how the Member for Jurong, who is the President of the Singapore Chinese Middle School Teachers' Union and a teacher himself, could be ignorant of these facts. Perhaps the temptation for sensationalism and publicity is irresistible. Mr Speaker, Sir, the fact that there are long queues at the schools for registering children in Primary I classes is the most perplexing phenomenon. Let me quote an example. Last year. after parents had queued for many days to get places in Primary 1 classes for their children at the Raffles Girls' School, an established Government English primary school, there were still 12 vacancies remaining at the end of the registration exercise. Perhaps the Member for Jurong would like to send his sympathies to those who had queued up for the seven days. At the same time, for the other established schools, such as Chong Pun Girls' School, which has an average of 96 per cent P.S.L.E, passes for many years, and, for that matter, Nan Chiau School, there are hardly any queues at all. An analysis of the background of the primary schools attended by this year's President's scholars could be very interesting. Of the nine scholars, seven received their primary education in Singapore, of whom three are from Government schools, and four from Government-aided schools. Of these four, three are from Government-aided Chinese schools, and one from a Government-aided English school. This school and another Chinese school are the only schools in the list having long queues. Mr Speaker, Sir, this phenomenon of queuing up for registration at the schools is not a new one. It has occurred year after year. We are considering various alternatives, such as registration by balloting, and registration limited only to children living in the neighbourhood of the schools. But we believe that whatever measure we take cannot do better than satisfy 95 per cent of the people. 3.53 p.m.

And so, Mr Speaker, Sir, this debate has arrived at a point when I rise to make a few comments on the President's speech in support of the motion standing in the name of the Member for Ulu Pandan. 1 believe I am the last speaker, Sir, but I certainly hope not the least. This debate on the President's speech at this time is opportune, for our plans to stabilise our nation in the future are being made at a point which allows us an honest appreciation of our successes and shortcomings in the past decade of the `60s, and a vision of the challenges and the prospects which the new decade of the `70s hold for us. In suggesting our political, economic and social efforts for the `70s, hon. Members have ranged expansively over the addenda to the President's speech and dealt with refinements of foreign policy, hospitals and public utilities, employment, hawkers and education, daily-rated workers, cost of living and our psychedellistic youth, quality control, black ops and community centres, industrialisation, profitable recreation and price hikes, land acquisition, occupational diseases and family planning, and a host of other matters including the freedom of the press, all of which our responsible Government must necessarily and successfully manage for the benefit of the people of the country. I am sure that anyone who has followed this session through the five days of debate will agree with me that we have quite a job to do. But the leadership of the People's Action Party will not be found wanting. In the `60s, there was the task of establishing the basis of our economy and security. We have done that. In the `70s, there is the task of shaping our country and people into a strong, coherent, sovereign nation. We will do it. Members speaking before me have made thorough analyses of the political, economic and social situations which confront us. I do not wish to add yet another. But I wish to underline two imperatives which, in the last analysis, will determine the outcome of all our efforts. The first imperative is the collective commitment of the people to nation building. It is highly imperative that every single body in the Republic make a contribution to the common good - from the business tycoon to the busmen; from the company director to the charwalla; from the historiographer to the hawker. The contribution should be by constructive action, or even by constructive inaction, such as not using water unnecessarily. The decade before us must not recede into history without singular achievement on our part. To that segment of our disinclined youth I say the biggest and grandest happening in the country is nation building. Why not be in with it? The second imperative is silent but implicit in the voluminous addenda to the President's speech. It is the quality of our human resources upon which the achievement of all the plans that it describes is contingent. Seven score and ten years ago, our forefathers came to this little island, dedicated to the proposition that nobody owes anybody a living, and the good life is got out of sheer toil and tenacity of purpose. The world then was less complicated. Today we are a sovereign nation in a community of sovereign nations whose interaction between and among themselves is determined by multiword considerations, the least of which is our national welfare. We, the descendants of our forefathers, stand upon the conviction today that no nation owes us a living. The prospect of a good life for ourselves and our children therefore depends on the quality of our physical and moral strength. Thus, Mr Speaker, Sir, as I see it, the years ahead will demand of us, the people of Singapore, unfailing stamina, ready competence, grim determination, unflinching courage, re1iabIX shrewdness and endearing compassion if we are to measure up to the task and dangers which await us in the future. Putting it all more colloquially but bluntly, we must have the four Gs, namely, the Go, the Grit, the Guts and the Goodness. We have shown in the past that we have these qualities and we must continue to manifest these qualities to succeed in the future. But we will succeed, Sir, because we can succeed, because we must succeed and we shall succeed. 4.00 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, it was so refreshing listening to the last speaker that I think 1 need hardly wind up this debate. But if I choose to remain silent, Members will go away with no replies to their questions on the Ministry of National Development. First, may I, as Leader of the House, thank all Members who have taken part in this debate, especially the Backbenchers. Some of their criticisms were constructive, some were not so constructive, but none were destructive. As usual, as the last speaker has pointed out, the debate ranged over a wide range of matters concerning all Ministries. Several issues were repeated by several Members and, as usual, the Ministry of National Development attracted the most attention. I will now attempt to reply to some, but not all, of the points raised. If I choose to reply to all of them, Members will be here the whole night. My replies will not satisfy all Members of Parliament, but if there is some particular problem in his constituency which remains unresolved, the M.P, is free to raise the matter further directly with me or with my Parliamentary Secretary. If I may refer to the Member for Toa Payoh first. He suggested that special priority for public housing should be given to occupiers of homes who are evicted by private developers. I believe he went on to say that though these people were compensated, there were those amongst them who received only token sums and, therefore, should be given special consideration or priority for public housing similar to those affected by Government urban renewal schemes or those whose homes have been burnt down by fire. The Member is aware that there is an Act called the Control of Rent Ordinance in Singapore. This Act does not apply to State land. Under the Act, controlled premises are those built before 7th September, 1947. The result of control means that not only the rents are controlled but also the tenants of controlled premises cannot be evicted by the landlord. In the result, the landlord has to pay compensation to the tenant if he desires him to move out. There is no need for the tenant to move out unless he considers the compensation adequate. In fact, some tenants have held their landlords to ransom. If the tenant accepts such compensation, then he has been well paid and he should not ask the Housing Board for special priority. He is not debarred from applying for accommodation in public housing, but he does not deserve to jump the queue. In the same way, tenants of controlled premises living in the Golden Shoe area are paid compensation under the Control of Rent (Special Provisions) Act by those landlords who desire to evict these tenants and rebuild. Some of these affected tenants, after being paid compensation, have applied to my Ministry to be allowed to jump the queue for Housing Board accommodation. Their requests have been refused because the Housing Board can find no justification to give them priority. Their circumstances are certainly not on all fours with those of fire victims or those evicted under the urban renewal schemes, because, as I have said before, State land is not bound by the Control of Rent Ordinance and different rates of compensation are paid for resettlement therefrom. Members may be interested to know the figures in respect of housing applicants as at the 31st July last month. They are as follows. There are a total of 18,912 applications to rent, of which about 8,705 applicants want one-room flats. For applications to purchase, there are in all 29,420. About 18,000 of them want three-room flats and another 517 want three-room point block flats. About 7,900 applicants want four-room flats and about 2,800 want five-room flats. In addition, there are about 1,323 applicants who want to purchase existing flats. In all, therefore, we have more than 30,000 applicants who desire to buy, and nearly 19,000 who want to rent. In these circumstances, if the Board were to grant priority to tenants of private property who are required to move out by private developers, the list would be even longer and those already in the queue would howl. If I may come to the question of resettlement, Sir. The Member for Jurong has complained, and rightly so, that the Resettlement Department team in Jurong is under strength. We have recruited young people to serve as resettlement officers. Unfortunately, they in turn have been "recruited" or conscripted into national service. When we train more, more have been conscripted! But the delay in the payment of resettlement compensation is not mainly due to the shortage of staff. Although there are vacancies in the department, the situation there is not any worse off than in any other Government department. The delay in the payment of resettlement compensation is mainly due to the delay in resettlement cases accepting alternative accommodation or disputing the quantum of compensation. I think the Member is aware that payment of compensation to the settlers can only take place when they have accepted alternative accommodation or are about to vacate the site. Several Members have asked why the Housing and Development Board does not sell its shops to the occupiers. The Board has not sold shops and is not at the moment in favour of selling them for the following reasons: Firstly, the policy of the Government is to subsidise the rental and even selling prices of flats to enable the lower income group to live in decent housing. However, non-residential accommodation, such as shops, factories and godowns, is not entitled to public subsidy and, therefore, such shops are normally rented out at market rentals. Secondly, if the shops are to be offered for sale, they will have to be sold at market prices. In fact, the Board did conduct a small survey last year and the result has revealed that the majority of shopkeepers are not in favour of purchasing shops at market prices. Thirdly, the sale of shops will lead to the loss of control over their use. Members are aware that in all shopping centres in our housing estates, the Board has always maintained a diversity of trade so as to provide a complete service to the residents. If shops are to be sold, they can be sold again, and those trades which can afford to pay higher rentals, such as banks and finance companies, may squeeze out the smaller trades like stationery and barber shops from the shopping centre. If this happens, then in the end our residents will not be provided with full services in the shopping centres. The present policy of the Board in renting out shop premises has worked out quite satisfactorily, and it appears that there is no valid reason to revise it. For resettlement cases, the Government is now granting rental concessions for five years, starting with a 50 per cent rental for the first year, and it is only in the sixth year that the resettlement cases pay the normal rent. I believe the Member for Tiong Bahru raised two particular points amongst others - namely, that in resettlement cases, people have been offered shops even if they do not want them, and when they find alternative premises of their own, the Planning Department takes enforcement action on unauthorised change of use. Sir, when a census is taken by the Resettlement Department on the clearance of shops, shopkeepers are requested to indicate the locality they would prefer. However, it is not physically possible to offer alternative shops in the selected localities, in order to facilitate early resettlement, the shopkeepers are in fact offered alternative shops in various localities. Some of them accept the offer while others decline it. But the Housing arid Development Board has not at any time forced any shopkeeper to accept any offer which he does not like. As for those who find alternative accommodation of their own, they would be well advised to consult the Planning Department before establishing their businesses elsewhere. As Members know, there is zoning under the Master Plan in Singapore, and where the use is contrary to the zoning under the Master Plan, the Planning Department has no alternative but to take enforcement action. Otherwise we would have to scrap the Master Plan. The Member for Tiong Bahru also complained of residents in one-room flats who have requested for transfer to 2-room or 3-room flats but have to wait for a long time. From the figures I have quoted, I think the Member has got his answer. But perhaps the Member could encourage some of his constituents to purchase Housing Board flats instead of renting them. The rent for a 2-room flat is $40 per month, and that for a 3-room flat is $60 per month. The instalment for the purchase of a 3-room improved flat for a duration of 20 years is only $47 per month. Therefore, it would not be too difficult for those who are in a position to rent either a 2-room or a 3-room flat to purchase a flat. The Member for Bukit Ho Swee asked why we do not build more flats. The target is 100,000 units for the next five years. He asked, "Why do you not increase this number to, say 125,000 units?" I wish we could. At present, the building industry is already overloaded. Shortages in both skilled and unskilled workers and building materials, including cement, on which Members touched, have occurred from time to time and are becoming a more common occurrence. Any further increase in the building programme of the Housing and Development Board will only worsen the situation and accelerate the pace of inflation of construction costs. However. Members perhaps can take a little satisfaction when I say that after 1973, when a substantial number of office buildings and hotels will have been completed and if there is a decline in the building activity in the Republic, consideration will certainly be given to increasing or accelerating the building programme of the Housing and Development Board. As from the 1st of July, the Government allowed the income group of $1,200 to go up to $1,500 per month in order to enable a wage-earner to purchase his own flat. I am asked why we do not extend this limit further. I think the answer is obvious. It would lead to an increase in the number of applicants already on the waiting list. The fact is that the demand for Housing Board flats considerably exceeds the supply. If I may go on to Tanjong Rhu, Sir. The Member for Katong complained that the Board has not provided parks or recreational facilities within the area. This is true. But the Member will be pleased to know that the Housing Board and the Planning Department are looking into the possibility of providing recreational facilities, including a swim-riling pool, on the vacant land opposite the Tanjong Rhu Housing Estate across Mountbatten Road. Back to the Member for Jurong who complained of the location of schools in respect of resettlement areas. This is really not a matter for my Ministry, bat one for the Ministry of Education. I understand that the location of schools is determined, amongst other factors, by the availability of suitable sites and, as far as possible, proximity to pockets of population centres. Resettlement in selected areas has resulted in changes and shifts in pockets of population, and it will not be possible to build a new school in every resettlement area, especially if schools already exist nearby. But in the planning of large resettlement estates, school sites have been provided, for instance, the Tai Chong School at Choa Chu Kang Road, the Loke Yang Public School and Kay Hwa School, First Branch, at Lim Chu Kang. A committee has been established, comprising officials from the Ministry of Finance, the Ministry of Education and officers from the Urban Renewal Department and Planning Department, to look into this question more comprehensively. The Member for Bukit Panjang hoped that Woodlands would be a better place than Queenstown or Toa Payoh. I think his sentiments are shared by the Member for Telok Blangah. The Housing Board has had more than 10 years of experience and has continually striven by trial and sometimes by error to improve the standard of public housing. For example, the Queenstown flats are better than those in Bukit Ho Swee. But the Member for Bukit Ho Swee is not to blame. And perhaps Toa Payoh is better than Queenstown. The Bukit Ho Swee housing estate was built in a hurry after the big fire. Hence the poor conditions in some parts of the estate. But the Member for Telok Blangah and the Member for Bukit Panjang can rest assured that the flats in Telok Blangah, which incidentally will look over the sea, and Woodlands, which will look over the causeway, will be even better than the existing ones. An hon. Member: Hear, hear!

Not only will there be better flats by way of design and comfort, but there will also be better facilities for recreation like parks, playgrounds, swimming pools and community centres. The buildings will also be spaced further apart from one another so that there will be more open green spaces in between. The Member for Bukit Panjang touched on our water problem. He can rest assured that the problem is being tackled on all fronts. Two schemes, the Kranji/Pandan and the Pierce extension, are at present being implemented and, when completed, should add Considerably to our water stocks. In addition, a reservoir at Bedok will be built by the Housing Board in conjunction with the Public Utilities Board in connection with the land reclamation scheme from Bedok to Tanah Merah. In order to obtain fill for the reclamation, we have to dig a hole. Why not turn that hole into a reservoir? Development of water resources in the off-shore islands is also being carefully examined, including the possibility of connecting the two ends of Pulau Ubin to the mainland and tapping rivers to fill the reservoir after the sea water has been pumped out. But there may he difficulties - difficulties of sea water seeping in again, difficulties in respect of the shipping lanes as they may hive to be diverted unless locks are constructed, and the diversion of shipping lanes will require the co-operation of neighbouring countries. May `I now turn to the question of conservation of water? Government has taken action to remove gradually all standpipes and is encouraging individual service connections so that in time of water rationing, it will be easier not only to devise a fair system of rationing but also avoid the considerable inconvenience and hardship to poorer persons who have to queue up at standpipes. As for desalinisation, the costs are at the moment prohibitive. As for using sea water for flushing toilets, there are also difficulties. Firstly, corrosion of pipes and fittings; secondly, the cost of construction of a second system of pipes for distribution; and, thirdly, the question of disposal of the waste after the sea water has been used. A separate sewage plant will have to be built unless the waste is to be dumped into the sea to pollute our sea shore and the waters surrounding us. Industrial water is already being used at Jurong where the plant has a treatment capacity of 10 million gallons per day. It is a pity that not all the 10 million gallons are being used every day and most of it goes down the Jurong River. This capacity can be stepped up and the surplus used for flushing of toilets. But here again a dual system of distribution would be required. Perhaps a pilot scheme can be introduced either at Jurong or the new towns in Woodlands and Telok Blangah to use industrial water for flushing of toilets. The difficulties are not insurmountable and the possibilities are being examined by my Ministry together with the Public Utilities Board and the Jurong Town Corporation. The Member for Whampoa, I believe, suggested that it would be desirable to introduce a step-tariff system. If I may explain, this is a system where the P.U.B, charges for the first block of units at a lower rate followed by the second and subsequent blocks at a higher rate. This would provide an incentive to consumers to reduce consumption. The Member for Whampoa is looking a little puzzled. I hope I have not misquoted him. Anyway, I think it is a good proposal but requires examination, as any tariff must be framed in such a manner as to avoid any possible lowering of the standard of cleanliness and hygiene. Sir, whilst on the question of water, may I join the Member for Bukit Panjang in thanking members of the public for their co-operation in saving water. Daily consumption has dropped from a maximum of 130 million gallons to about 95 million gallons and today hovers around 100 million gallons. The efforts of members of the public are commendable and show a healthy and favourable response to the exhortations of the P.U.B. If the consumption does not increase considerably, I think we can hold off water rationing until the rains come in early October or November. The Member for Bras Basah suggested that we form a permanent committee to look after the question of resettlement. We will consider this suggestion. But before I pass it to my experts, perhaps the Member will let me know whether this permanent committee to look into resettlement problems should confine its efforts to cases of Government resettlement only, or is it to include people resettled by the private sector'? The Member for Moulmein complained about Public Relations Officers. I think it is the practice of some Ministers to hide under the nom de plume of their P.R.O. The Member's suggestion is a good one but there are P.R.O.s who do much more than merely write letters to the press. As for houses for civil servants, this is a good idea. I think our civil servants should be paid more or given more perks, but the question is: how do we start and how do we allocate these flats? `There are a few thousand civil servants. Those with incomes under $1,500 per month can apply for Housing and Development Board accommodation now. The Housing and Development Board can build flats for civil servants, but unless we are to supply houses to all civil servants within a certain category, how do we allocate these flats? Do we say first come first served? Do we say the most efficient get priority? How do we decide who are the most efficient? Or do we merely ballot and they take their flats by chance? These are some of the difficulties that have been presented to us. We have not found a satisfactory solution, but the matter is being looked into. The Member for Sembawang is looking unhappy, perhaps because I have not replied to any of his queries. The Member inquired why there was no reference to rural development in the addendum of the Ministry of National Development. The addendum was a brief one and we could not touch on all points in the Ministry, but I understand that the Member wants more money for rural development. So do I. I hope he will help me in preparing a paper for the consideration of the Minister for Finance. In conclusion, Mr Speaker, Sir, I am sure all Members will agree with me when I say that the Republic of Singapore approaches its sixth National Day with increasing confidence. On that note, I join other Members in thanking the President for his speech.

Question put, and agreed to. Resolved, That the following Address in reply to the speech of the President be agreed to:- "We, the Parliament of the Republic of Singapore, express our thanks to the President for the speech which he delivered on behalf of the Government at the opening of the Second Session of this Parliament."

Resolved, "That Parliament do now adjourn to a date to be fixed."--[Mr Barker]. Adjourned accordingly at Thirty-five minutes past Four o'clock p.m, to a date to be fixed.