Hansard, 1972-03-27

The following Bills were assented to by the President of the Republic of Singapore on the date stated: 24th March, 1972 (i) Economic Development Board (Amendment) Bill; (ii) Tourist Promotion (Amendment) Bill; Board (iii) Accountants (Amendment) Bill. YEOH GHIM SENG, Speaker, Parliament of Singapore

asked the Minister for Culture what percentage of the total expenses of the Adult Education TV Production and Training Centre Project does his Ministry's share represent; what kind of programmes will be produced, for what audience and where; and what kind of personnel will be trained.

Mr Speaker, Sir, it is not possible at this initial stage to say precisely what percentage of the total expenses of the Adult Education TV Production and Training Centre Project (known as CEPTA TV) my Ministry's share represents. This is because the project will take three to four years before it becomes fully operational. However, an idea can be gauged from its financial commitment which is as follows : (i) Government will provide suitable building accommodation for CEPTA TV to house offices, equipment, service and other technical areas. The building is estimated to cost in the region of $1 million; (ii) Government will also provide 50 per cent of the annually recurrent operating costs of CEPTA TV, subject to a maximum of $900,000 per year; (iii) The Friedrich Ebert Stiftung of the Federal Republic of Germany will supply equipment and supporting facilities estimated at $6.5 million for CEPTA TV's operation; (iv) The Stiftung will also pay 50 per cent of the annually recurrent operating costs of CEPTA TV up to $900,000, plus anything in excess of the joint limit of $1.8 million. The amount of $500,000 provided under Head 51, subhead 103, of the 1972-73 Development Estimates is intended to meet the capital expenditure on the first stage of the building construction. CEPTA TV's activities will be carried out on a regional basis and the Centre will produce adult education programmes which will provide useful audio-visual support for national institutions in Asia engaged in the promotion of adult education through television and other audio-visual means. The programmes will be produced in Singapore, for use not only in Singapore, but also in other countries in Asia which participate in the project. The audiences, therefore, will be in Singapore and in the Asian countries that participate. The personnel who will be trained include television programmers, engineers, and other personnel in the adult education field. The training of personnel in specific areas of television production will be carried Out in conjunction with the Centre's programme production activities. Much of the training will be given on an on-the-job basis.

2.35p.m. Order read for resumed consideration in Committee of Supply [2nd Allotted Day].

Head 78 -

(In Malay): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 78 be reduced by $10 in respect of item 001 of subhead 101*. (* The same amendment also stood in the name of Mr Ng Kah Ting.) Sir, I have said in this Parliament a week ago that all the roads in the eastern sector have been made up under the Local Government Integration Act, except the roads in Kampong Pachitan, Lengkong Tiga and Kampong Eunos. Kampong Pachitan is private property, and the land is let out to the residents who are now occupying it. The roads there are mainly earth roads. When it rains, they become impassable because the mud turns soggy. Therefore, I would like to request the Minister concerned to make up the roads to kampong standard. Kampong Eunos is a reserve road. A community centre has been built by the residents themselves at the cost of $110,000, and it is operational. But because the existing roads are not constructed in accordance with the road reserve, therefore, Sir, I hope the authorities concerned can make up Kampong Eunos road under section 19 of the Local Government Integration Act. Otherwise the authorities have to divert the existing Kampong Eunos road, in accordance with the reserve road, so that the centre area can be extended and development work there can be carried out early. Mr Speaker, I refer to the kampong roads in Alsagoff Estate in Kampong Kembangan constituency. Only certain roads in that estate have been made up to kampong standards. A greater number has yet to be made up, and up to now they are still nothing but earth roads. So when it rains, the drain becomes clogged and overflows on to the roads, making the roads muddy. Sir, I would like to know why these roads have not been made up when applications have already been submitted to the Urban and Rural Services Committee many years ago, and when can they be made up according to kampong standards? Sir, applications for roads to be built have not been considered and applications to fill up pot-holes in the roads have not been entertained. It is strange but true, Sir, that although applications have been made to the U.R.S.C, to repair Jalan Ladang, including roadside drains, the sum approved to repair the road is up to a limit of $700 only. Despite the fact that repair work has commenced, the badly damaged roads have not been repaired. Instead the other roads which only require minor repairs have been attended to. I wish to know how this state of affairs can be allowed to go on, and whether applications to metal roads in Alsagoff Estate, Kampong Ubi and Kampong Kembangan constituencies can be approved this year.

Mr Speaker, Sir, first of all, with your permission, I would like to range my remarks over amendments* numbers (2) to (7) under this Head, so that I need not have to move them again. * The amendments, standing in the name of Mr Ng Kah Ting, read as follows: (2) That the sum to be allocated for Head 78 be reduced by $10 in respect of item 008 of subhead 101. (3) That the sum to he allocated for Head 78 be reduced by $10 in respect of item 010 of subhead 101. (4) That the sum to be allocated for Head 78 be reduced by $10 in respect of item 011 of subhead 101. (5) That the sum to be allocated for Head 78 be reduced by $10 in respect of item 012 of subhead 101. (6) That the sum to be allocated for Head 78 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 101. (7) That the total sum to be allocated for Head 78 be reduced by $100.

Yes.

Sir, may I first congratulate the Urban and Rural Services Committee, headed by the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Law and National Development, for providing various amenities in the rural areas, such as making up of kampong roads, water and electricity supplies, street lighting, etc. It is noted that the apportionment of this fund for the various constituencies varies considerably. Though much has been done in this respect, for which my constituents and I are indeed grateful, Sir, there is, however, still plenty of room for improvement. For example, in the Trafalgar Estate, which formerly housed the Trafalgar Receiving Station, there are a few hundred families, most of whom are farmers. There is no water supply there, though electricity supplies are available presently. Also in Track 6, off Punggol Road, the residents have requested for water supplies for a long time. I hope the Minister concerned, or his Parliamentary Secretary, will favourably consider my requests in this respect. There are other requests too, for example, electricity supplies, but I would not like to bother this House with details except to say that I hope such requests can be acceded to as soon as possible. Sir, I understand that the Public Utilities Board has been implementing rural electrification schemes costing about $2.65 million per annum. I wonder whether the Parliamentary Secretary is actually taking steps to expedite the implementation of such schemes. I say this because now and again we receive progress reports of such schemes being carried out, and it is noticed that in some of my areas implementation will not be carried out until a year or two later. Sir, another aspect that I wish to bring to the attention of the Minister concerned is street lighting in the rural areas. First of all, most of the street lights that have been put up are not bright enough, probably due to low wattage, and they get out of order every now and then. In this respect, I would urge the Minister concerned to look into the possibility of installing brighter and more durable lights. 2.45 p.m. Sir, another aspect I would like to touch on is the state of agricultural and kampong roads. Many agricultural and kampong roads have been constructed in the past few years, but I am afraid that by now most of them are in urgent need of repair. Therefore, may I once again request the Minister concerned to look into this matter. It is gratifying to note that this year's provision is $3.25 million. It shows a marked increase over last year's provision. I hope that the Urban and Rural Services Committee would be generous enough to entertain the requests of the rural constituencies.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I do not know whether or not it is proper for me to raise one question. Sir, before an overhead bridge is erected, the Citizens' Consultative Committee or the Member of Parliament of that constituency should be consulted. There is one overhead bridge in my constituency. It is near the Gan Eng Seng School. The children going to and from the school do not use this overhead bridge because they have to cross two other roads where there is more traffic, before they can come to this overhead bridge. But there are no overhead bridges for these two other roads where the traffic is very heavy. Therefore, the school children do not wish to utilise the overhead bridge near their school. I do not know whether or not the other Members of Parliament were consulted when an overhead bridge was built in their constituencies. But in this case, neither my Citizens' Consultative Committee nor myself was consulted. Last Sunday I drove through my constituency -

Order. Mr P. Govindaswamy, I am afraid we have crossed the bridge many days ago!

Sir, a lot of money is being spent on overhead bridges. Therefore they should be fully utilised by the people. We would be spending money unnecessarily if nobody is going to use the overhead bridges. Therefore, proper arrangements should be made to see that the overhead bridge near the Gan Eng Seng School is fully utilised. Will the Minister or his Parliamentary Secretary look into this matter? Sir, approval was given last year to put up lights in Palmer Road, which is also in my constituency. I was promised that it would be completed last September. However, six months have passed-and it is now March 1972- and yet no lights have been put up. I hope the Minister or his Parliamentary Secretary concerned will look into this matter.

(In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, since the Member for Punggol has been allowed to range over his other amendments, one of which stands in my name*, I wish to speak now so that I need not move my amendment later. * The amendment, standing in the names of Messrs Ho Kah Leong, Ng Kah Ting, Teong Eng Siong and Sim Boon Woo, reads as follows: (6)That the sum to be allocated for Head 78 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 101. Sir, I am in full agreement with what the Member for Punggol has said. The provision for rural services is $3.25 million, and although this is more than last year's provision, it is still not sufficient. If this provision were to be distributed to the various constituencies, each constituency will only get $10,000 or less. This amount Xs not even enough to metal a road. I think a provision of two or three times more than the present provision of $3.25 million should he allocated. Since we are making rapid progress in our economic development, more provision should be made so that the living conditions of the people in the rural areas can be improved. Mr Speaker, Sir, as a matter of fact, the requests made by the people in the rural areas are basically very simple. They want roads properly surfaced, drains to flow smoothly, and public utility services like water, electricity and street lighting. Water is their most urgent need. In the last few years the Government has extended the water mains to the various constituencies. However, there are many areas, especially in the more remote parts, which still do not have water supply. In these areas, the people have to dig wells for their water. Whether or not these wells are hygienic is another matter. In any case, during the dry spells the wells will dry up and they have to depend on Government delivery trucks which give only a limited supply of water. This is a great inconvenience to them. I know that many constituencies have requested for water supplies but their applications have not been approved. The authorities concerned have replied that it is uneconomic to extend the water mains to these remote areas. I hope they will not be too calculating in the analysis of cost and profit. I hope the people in these more remote areas will be provided with adequate water supplies. Mr Speaker, Sir, the people in the rural areas also want better roads. They would like to see all the present mud tracks properly metalled with tar. These mud tracks, which are used by the villagers every day, are uneven, and they hold many puddles of water. This is a great inconvenience to the villagers. The mud tracks in the villages can only last for a short time. In the case of laterite tracks, after a year or two of use, there will be many pot-holes which have to be repaired. During the dry season, the laterite tracks become very dusty, and when it rains they are very muddy. This has caused a lot of hardship especially to the primary school children, because their clean white shoes become dirty with red mud after walking on these laterite tracks. Moreover, these laterite tracks are not durable. Every two or three years they have to be repaired. The repair will cost a few thousand dollars. Mr Speaker, Sir, I know that it is impossible to metal all the tracks within six months or even a year. But I would like to see a greater provision made so that more laterite roads will be metalled. However, I hope that the provision of more metalled roads will not mean a deterioration in the quality of the roads. In my constituency, I notice that there are many metalled roads with a lot of pot-holes. As soon as one part of a road is repaired, potholes appear in another part. In less than two years the road seems like an old shirt with mendings everywhere. What is surprising to me is that some of these roads have pot-holes in less than six months after their construction. I have taken photographs showing the terrible condition of these roads, and I have shown them to the Parliamentary Secretary. I am not an engineer and, therefore, I am not familiar with the technical points involved in road construction. But the fact that these roads are easily damaged shows that the foundation of the road is not strong. Why cannot the relevant department first assess the maximum weight the road can support and then make the foundation accordingly. If this is not done, as soon as a road is constructed, repairs have to be carried out every now and again. This will be a waste of public funds. Moreover, some of these pot-holes are not mended in time. I hope the Parliamentary Secretary will look into this matter and provide better roads for the people in the rural areas. Mr Speaker, Sir, people in the rural areas also want the drains to flow smoothly. When the drains are clogged up, they are not only a breeding ground for mosquitoes, but they also give out a terrible stench. This is very unhygienic. Moreover, excessive water from the silted drain will erode the surface of the road. I hope the department concerned will organise teams of workmen to clear the major drains in every rural constituency at least once a year. The people in the rural areas also require electricity supply. The Public Utilities Board has said that it will provide rural electrification within one or two years. I hope the Board will keep its word. The people in the rural constituencies also want street lighting. Street lighting will make the road users feel much safer and thus more conducive to the maintenance of law and order. I hope all the rural areas will be provided with street lighting. Although there are not many rural constituencies in Singapore, their total areas are quite big. We do need a greater provision for rural services. I hope that in the next Budget the Parliamentary Secretary will request a bigger provision from the Minister for Finance for the development of these rural areas.

(In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I fully agree with my colleagues who have spoken on rural services. They are representatives of the people from the rural areas. This year a provision of $3.25 million is made for urban and rural services, and I appreciate that the Government has made a bigger provision than for last year. However, I agree with the Member for Jurong when he said that this increased provision is still not sufficient for many of the projects in the rural areas. For example, there is a very urgent need to provide for more rural roads. Although many applications have been made, not many roads have been constructed. The excuse given is that there is not enough provision. This shows that more provision is needed for the construction of roads in the rural areas. I would like to raise two points. First, the provision for the construction of roads is only $750,000. It seems to me that this sum is too small. There are many roads in my constituency which are yet to be constructed. Of course, there are also other areas like Jurong, Punggol and Chua Chu Kang (which is the constituency of the Minister of State for Finance), Nee Soon, Changi, Bukit Panjang, Jalan Kayu, etc. If we were to distribute the provision among these various constituencies, then the sum for each constituency will be very small and it will not be sufficient. Since we have a surplus budget this year, I think we can well afford to provide a few million dollars more for rural development. So I would ask the Minister concerned to consider increasing this provision. 3.00 p.m. The second point relates to the supply of water, which is a very important matter. In the past, we had many public standpipes. But the Government has been encouraging people to install their own water-pipes and there has been a decrease in the number of public standpipes. The provision of $1.5 million for the extension of water supply is insufficient and I hope that the Minister will consider increasing this amount. During a dry spell, perhaps the Minister of State for Finance may remember, the Government had to arrange for water wagons and lorries to supply water to the people in Chua Chu Kang and other rural constituencies. But in Sembawang, we are lucky because we can dig wells and the area is not too dry. So we are more fortunate. I hope the Minister will consider increasing the provision for the extension of water supply.

Mr Speaker. Sir, last year, under this subhead. I raised the question of insufficiency of funds allocated to the Urban and Rural Services Committee for making up agricultural and kampong roads. For 1972-73, there is an increase of $300,000, and I would like to thank the Minister for Law and National Development for giving full consideration to our plea. For the next financial year the provision for item 013 - Jetties - has been reduced by $25,000. I believe that this meagre sum of $50,000 is for the repair of jetties in the Southern Islands - Pulau Ubin. Pulau Tekong - and also other jetties on our main island. Sir, Members representing the constituencies such as Jurong, Telok Blangah and Pasir Panjang have got surrounding islands to look after. Therefore, I think you will agree with me that $50,000 will not be enough to repair the very bad condition of the jetty at Pulau Ubin. Sir, this year, I would like to plead again with the Minister to consider increasing the provision for this item.

(In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise to support the various Parliament representatives of the rural constituencies in regard to the provision of rural services. I have two questions to raise with the Minister. The first question relates to drains in rural constituencies. Up to this moment, I think there is no comprehensive plan to construct a good drainage system. In our Budget for 1972-73, there is no provision for the construction of drains. I would like to know whether Government is going to provide a special scheme for the construction of drains in the rural areas. The second question relates to the supply of electricity. In the last few years, the authorities concerned have done very well in this respect. Not only have they spent their own time visiting the rural areas, but they have also contacted the various Members of Parliament in order to do a better job, and I would like to thank the authorities concerned on this matter. But some Members just now mentioned that there are schemes for rural electrification which have not yet been carried out. I think this is not a question of inefficiency. It is more a question of getting enough contractors to carry out the projects so that the electrification of the rural areas could be carried out more efficiently.

Mr Speaker, Sir, in reply to the Member for Kampong Kembangan regarding Kampong Eunos, there is no plan at the moment to make up the stretch of road from Kampong Eunos to Jalan Yasin, as the area is heavily squattered. Improvement to the existing track may be considered if a request is made to the Urban and Rural Services Committee by the Citizens' Consultative Committee. As regards Alsagoff Estate, in fact, we have carried out quite a lot of improvements in the Kampong Kembangan, Kampong Ubi and Geylang Serai areas. For instance, we have extended Sims Avenue to Jalan Eunos, and constructed the Pan-Island Expressway from Paya Lebar Road to Jalan Eunos. We have also widened and improved Jalan Ubi and Jalan Eunos. With the two new major roads and the other two improved roads just mentioned, the improvement in the street lighting, drainage and foot-paths have contributed considerably to the convenience of the people living in the area. As Alsagoff Estate will eventually become a housing and industrial estate, it is unwise at this stage to make up all the side tracks in the area as this will in course of time be broken up, and it will be a waste of public funds. However, if it is necessary to carry out minor repairs, we will always meet the requests when they are received from time to time. The Public Works Department has no immediate plans to make up the portion of Jalan Ubi from Jalan Lada to Airport Road, as this would be affected by Housing Board development of this area which is still in the planning stage. In reply to the Member for Punggol, the Public Utilities Board has taken action to improve the servicing of street lamps in public and kampong roads, and the quality of lamps used will also be improved. Sir, in Punggol, three water-main laying schemes for the Trafalgar Estate in Punggol have been approved recently, and work will commence within the next three months. They are as follows: (1) Lorong Renjong from Lorong Buang Kok to Trafalgar Estate. The cost is $21,000. (2) Tracks in Trafalgar Estate. The cost is $55,000. (3) Tracks adjoining Trafalgar Estate. The cost is $12,500. The total cost will be $88,500. Another scheme for Track 6, Punggol Road, and many more water-main laying schemes for Punggol and for areas in other constituencies have been approved recently and work will be carried out soon. Regarding the rural electrification schemes, Sir, this provision of $50,000 is for the supply of electricity by generators to the off-shore islands, which cannot be reached by the Public Utilities Board's supply. Electrification schemes for the mainland are met from P.U.B, funds. For this year, the provision is $2.6 million. It was unfortunate that the Electricity Department of the P.U.B., due to factors beyond their control, could not implement approved electrification schemes within the time specified in the programme. For example, last year, owing to the floods in Calcutta, the factories under contract were unable to supply overhead materials. The floods in Malaysia also resulted in a shortage of wooden poles. Nevertheless, even with these setbacks, the P.U.B, carried out and completed 35 rural electrification schemes between April, 1971, and 22nd March, 1972, benefiting about 2,000 houses at a cost of $660,000 while 23 other schemes as at 22nd March, 1972, benefiting about 3,000 more houses and costing $1 million, are still in progress. Mr Speaker, Sir, both the Members for Jurong and Sembawang have asked for more money to be provided for the repair of agricultural and kampong roads. In fact, Jurong constituency, for instance, was allocated $77,000 for 1971-72, but $88,000 was committed. So for Jurong constituency, the provision was over-committed by $11,000. The provision for Sembawang constituency was $15,000, but $66,000 was committed. Similarly, Sembawang constituency was over-committed by $51,000. Sir, from a comparison of these figures, we have, in fact, spent more money in the rural constituencies. For 1972-73, the provision for roads and other services has been increased by one-third over the previous year's provision. Whether or not more funds will be provided in the coming years will depend on the number of requests for services and the amounts involved. However, the Members from the rural constituencies can be assured that if there is a balance of funds uncommitted in the other constituencies, it will ultimately be utilised for the rural constituencies. 3.15 p.m. Mr Speaker, Sir, in the last 11 years about $10 million out of a total expenditure of $37 million was spent on improvement of roads in the rural constituencies. Most of these roads have considerably improved. The Government has the immediate task of extending piped-water supplies to households in the rural areas. In the next few years we will step up the laying of water-mains in areas where the people are still dependent on well-water. In areas where the people are dependent on public standpipes, these standpipes will be removed when water-mains are laid. The areas which need water-mains are Bukit Panjang, Bukit Timah, Changi, Chua Chu Kang, Jalan Kayu, Jurong, Kampong Chai Chee, Nee Soon, Punggol, Tampines, and, of course, Sembawang. It is hoped that with the stepping up of this scheme, every household in the outlying areas would, in the next three or four years, be able to enjoy piped-water facilities. In reply to the Member for Changi, there is no proposal for the construction of new jetties. The provision of $50,000 for this year should be sufficient for the maintenance of existing jetties. However, if there is a need to construct new jetties, the U.R.S.C, will make a request to the Finance Ministry for more funds.

(In Mandarin): Sir, I would like to take this opportunity to thank the Parliamentary Secretary for doing his part in looking after the people in the rural areas. As he is the chairman of the Urban and Rural Services Committee, I am sure he appreciates the various requests made by the people in the rural areas. I hope this year, as in past years, he will do his utmost for the benefit of the people. I am sure the people will thank him for this.

(In Malay): Mr Speaker, Sir, my question regarding the making up of the road in Kampong Pachitan up to kampong standard has not been replied to. I do not deny that the construction of two roads under the Pan-Island Expressway scheme and the extension of Sims Avenue are good efforts. But what I am concerned with is the small earth-roads in Alsagoff Estate. It will not be appropriate if the Parliamentary Secretary should say that it is not proper for the Housing and Development Board to do these roads. If they were to wait for the Housing and Development Board to develop the area, it will not take place until the next few years, because the development is still in the planning stage. Therefore, are the residents in the affected areas forced to continue to face the problems which they have been experiencing all this while, such as mosquito-breeding, and flooding until this area is developed?

Mr Speaker, Sr. I have not yet heard any reply from the Parliamentary Secretary regarding the overhead bridge and the street lights in Palmer Road.

Sir, regarding the road in Kampong Pachitan, I am not aware of this request, but I presume the reason for not approving the request could be due to a lack of funds last year. Perhaps I might just give a rough idea of how much was spent on Kampong Kembangan. Out of an actual provision of $12,000 for last year, we only spent $8,300. The vote was under-spent by approximately $4,000. But the whole project may cost more than this amount. However, I would suggest to the Member to resubmit his application to the U.R.S.C, for consideration next month. I have taken note of the complaint raised by the Member for Anson. He has brought up the question of overhead bridges and street lighting, which I will certainly look into.

Thank you.

(In Malay): Sir, the allocation of $12,000 for Kampong Kembangan was just a small sum compared to the amount allocated for Sembawang. Therefore, I hope that when I submit the application for the improvement of Kampong Pachitan, the vote for Kampong Kembangan would be equal to, if not, at least half or three-quarters of last year's vote for Sembawang.

Sir, surely I cannot promise to allocate more funds for Kampong Kembangan or any other constituencies. Basically the principle of the allocation of funds is based on population and the size of the constituency. In any case the decision for the allocation rests with the Ministry of Finance. There is nothing much we can do for the Member for Kampong Kembangan in this respect.

(In Malay): Sir, although the assurance is not convincing enough to satisfy me, I beg leave to withdraw. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The sum of $3,250,000 for Head 78 ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. Head 81 -

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 81 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 109. Sir, in moving this amendment, I merely wish to raise one small point. It appears to me that last year nothing was spent on this item, and the provision of $10,000 for 1971-72 has been revoted for the next financial year. I hope this does not mean that rehabilitation activities for the hemiplegics and paraplegics at Mandalay Road, Tan Tock Seng Hospital, have come to a rest. Would the Minister for Health care to comment on the matter raised?

Sir, there has been some misunderstanding on the part of the Member for Punggol with regard to this vote. As a matter of fact, the original submission by the Ministry of Health for this item was an estimate of $42,000 for furniture and equipment required for the rehabilitation centre at Mandalay Road. This request was made in 1970, and Treasury had approved the project, in principle, by entering this request in the 1971-72 Development Estimates. However, a provision of only $10,000 was shown in the 1971-72 Development Estimates, as Treasury was of the view that we were unlikely to spend more than this sum in that financial year 1971-72. However, Treasury was requested to make the full provision of $42,000 for furniture and equipment in the 1972-73 Development Estimates. They have agreed, and this accounts for the present figure. Therefore, there is actually no increase in the cost of furniture or equipment. It has remained unchanged since 1970 at a total figure of $42,000 which was approved.

In view of the clarification by the Minister for Health, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 81 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 603. Sir, I hope this time I would not be corrected again. There was a provision of $1.5 million for last year to purchase some 37 refuse collection vehicles so as to step up public cleansing in the Republic. It is bad to note that only $600 has been spent, because there is still a revote of $1,499,400. Sir, I would have expected that because the provision was made, every opportunity would be taken to buy these vehicles as early as possible. However, apparently this has not been the case. I would like to know why these vehicles were not purchased, particularly when there have been complaints over the inadequacy of such vehicles to cope up with the ever-increasing volume of refuse. 3.30 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the explanation lies as follows. The release of funds under this vote is subject to the Development Planning Committee sanction. In this case, there have been some protracted negotiations between my Ministry and the Ministry of Finance with respect to the number and type of refuse collection vehicles required. When approval was finally obtained, it was unfortunately too late in the year to place orders and to pay for the vehicles. These special refuse collection vehicles cannot be bought off the shelf so to speak, like sundry goods. The delivery period is about six to 12 months. The funds were accordingly revoted. Tenders for the supply of these refuse collection vehicles have already been finalised and orders are being placed. I can assure the Member for Punggol that this money will be spent this year.

In the light of the Minister's reply, I beg leave to withdraw. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The following amendment stood in the names of Messrs Ng Yeow Chong and Ng Kah Ting -

I am not moving, Sir.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 81 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 605. Sir, there was a token provision of $10 for Refuse Treatment and Disposal Plants in the last financial year. This year there is a provision of $750,000. Hence, I think there must be something in the offing, and there must also be a shortage of land for dumping to warrant this vote. Sir, I wish to know from the Minister for Health what progress has been made with respect to the provision of Refuse Treatment and Disposal Plants. As stated by the Minister for Health in this House on the 26th of March last year, and I quote Hansard, Volume 30, col. 1420: `...there is a firm of consulting engineers who are doing a survey to ascertain the most suitable method or combination of methods for refuse disposal in Singapore. Their report is expected to be submitted on the 10th of April.' Sir, can the Minister inform this House what will be done with this provision for 1972-73?

Mr Speaker, Sir, there has been progress since then. The report by that firm of consulting engineers has already been received and has been considered. In fact, the report has recommended that a huge incinerator together with one or two compaction plants be built to take care of the refuse disposal for the whole of Singapore. The matter is in the hands of Treasury, who now has the task of raising enormous sums of money to purchase this huge incinerator, which incidentally will cost about $50 million, and also to purchase the compaction plant. The specific proposal is that this compaction plant has a capacity of 400 tons per day and the incineration plant can dispose about 1.200 tons per day. I agree with the Member for Punggol that this is a matter of urgency, because we are at the moment running short of swampland to dump our refuse, and the amount of refuse collected every day is increasing very rapidly.

Sir, in the light of his reply just now, may I know from the Minister for Health where will the two plants be sited and when will they commence operations?

As far as siting of the plants is concerned, there is no definite decision yet. I hope it is not going to be in the Punggol constituency. But with regard to date as to when they will be set up, let me say that this is not a small project. It takes some time to process the report and tenders have to be called. But before tenders are called, funds will have to be raised, perhaps through loans from banks or international organisations. Then only after it has been decided that a type of incineration plant is best suited for Singapore will the contract be awarded to build the incineration plant. So it seems that it will take at least another two years before work can commence.

Sir, I thank the Minister for his reply, and I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. In the absence of Mr Yeo Choo Kok, the following amendment, standing in his name, was not proceeded with -

Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 81 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 704. Sir, I notice that this provision is for the mechanisation of the Public Cleansing Services. I would like to request the Minister for Health to elaborate on this item.

Sir, as I have stated quite recently, there is a shortage of cleansing workers in Singapore, and therefore a start has got to be made to mechanise our cleansing work. Due to the high rate of turnover of cleansing workers who resign to take up more lucrative jobs in the industrial sector, the Public Cleansing Branch of the Ministry of Health is at the moment working on a field strength of about only 83 per cent. Also, with the high degree of literacy among our younger population, public cleansing work is not their first or second choice of an occupation. That being the case, the situation, as far as shortage of cleansing workers is concerned, is not going to improve as the years go by. Therefore, the solution is to mechanise public cleansing. But, as I have stated before, street cleansing work is labour-intensive and to mechanise it would mean that there will be quite a number of problems associated with such mechanisation. For example, the mechanical sweeper will not be able to sweep drains, scupper holes, side-tables, and so on. Further, with regard to side lanes where we have hawkers and car parking lots, the operation of the mechanical sweeper will be quite limited. But as far as the financial provision for mechanisation is concerned, we have already ordered four mechanical road sweepers with a suction device. For the information of the Member for Punggol, they will be arriving in June. First of all, we will use them to clean the main roads as a pilot scheme. If they prove to be successful, they will be used to clean other roads as well.

Mr Speaker, Sir, in the light of the reply, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The following amendment stood in the name of Mr Ng Kah Ting -

I am not moving, Sir. The sum of $12,706,510 for Head 81 ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. Head 91 -

(In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 91 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 00l*. (* The same amendment also stood in the name of Mr Teong Eng Siong) Sir, this provision is a loan to the Jurong Town Corporation. I would like to take this opportunity to raise a few questions regarding the housing estate in Jurong Town. We know that in recent years there has been rapid development in Jurong Town and there has been an increase in population which number about 30,000 now. However, it is regrettable to say that the J.T.C, is only concerned with the need for housing, and has not paid enough attention to beautify the environment or to promote environmental health. According to complaints received from the residents there and the observations I have made, I can summarise a few points. I would like the Minister to note what I am going to say. Firstly, the grass, the lawn and the trees in the housing estate in Jurong Town have not been properly taken care of. Many fields are left bare without grass, and the trees in Jurong Town are not growing bigger, although they are growing older. Perhaps the soil is not very suitable, or it may be due to other factors, such as air pollution thus stunting the growth of the trees. I hope the Minister will urge the J.T.C, to look into this. Otherwise the trees will not grow any taller, and will be stunted forever. Secondly, the complaint is that there are insufficient playing grounds for the children. The J.T.C, is only concerned with building houses and have neglected the need for playgrounds and other amenities. This is not proper, because the children have no place to go to in the evenings. Hence, the importance of playing fields. Therefore, some space should be reserved for playgrounds. Thirdly, the collection of rubbish and refuse. I have received complaints that the collection of refuse and rubbish has not been regular. The result is that a stench emanates from the accumulated refuse and rubbish heaps. After investigation, I found that the J.T.C, contracted out the work of disposing the rubbish to private contractors, but the contractors have bidded a low tender and therefore their service is not very satisfactory. I would like the Minister to note that the J.T.C, should get proper and efficient contractors to do this job. Even if they can get contractors to collect and dispose of the rubbish at a very low cost, it is useless if they cannot do it properly. Fourthly, the flats put up by the J.T.C., especially those recently built, are concentrated in a small place and in close proximity to each other. The distance between one block and another is, I think, only about 10 feet. I hope the J.T.C. will build flats with liberal empty space between the blocks so that there is more privacy. 3.45 p.m. The fifth point is the serious problem of air pollution. Many residents have complained to me that every morning there is a lot of black soot in the air. This probably comes from the factory chimneys. I hope the Minister concerned will take note of air pollution in Jurong Town.

(In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, let me first pay a tribute to the Government for its brilliant success in industrialisation. Before industrialisation was embarked upon, our country was faced with a very grave unemployment problem. However, as a result of rapid industrialisation in this country over the past five or six years, we have been able to solve our unemployment problem. The number of people working in the factories is now more than 100,000. This is a great success by any standard, and I would like to express my admiration to the Jurong Town Corporation. Jurong is not only an industrial estate, but is also a place with many tourist attractions. For example, there is the Jurong Bird Park with beautiful gardens and various other tourist attractions. There are also playgrounds and recreational parks for our local citizens. The Member for Jurong will observe that there are certain areas which could be developed. He should bring them to the attention of the Government, because he is the Member for Jurong. I would like to ask the Minister to tell this House how is it that this provision will be used for industrialisation? What projects are in the offing to promote further industrialisation in Jurong?

Mr Speaker, Sir, first, I would like to give the Member some information on the Development Expenditure of Jurong Town Corporation for 1972-73. The total amount to be spent will be $120.5 million, made up of $50 million for land acquisition and resettlement and $70.5 million for development projects. The details of the Development Expenditure have been published in the Government Gazette of 17th December, last year. However, perhaps I may summarise the details as follows: The Corporation will spend $50 million on land acquisition and resettlement this year. The main items are $24.9 million for 1,197 acres in Jurong Town; $17.4 million for 64 acres in Kallang Basin, and $7.2 million for 311 acres for resettlement purposes. The Corporation will spend $70.5 million on development projects this year. The details are as follows: Jurong Other Town Estates $ million $million Land developement projctes 18.9 4.9 Jurong port 2.0 - Standard terraced factory buildings 2.3 1.5 Warehouses 1.3 - Flatted factory buildings 8.2 - Canteen and hawker pitches 4.2 0.05 Housing 23.3 3.0 Jurong Park 4.3 - Sports complex 1.3 - Jurong pier and restaurant 0.08 - Improvements to social amendities 4.2 - Jurong Town Hall 3.0 - The Corporation is expected to finance from its own resources an estimated $40.5 million of the total development expenditure of $120.5 million. The balance of $80 million required by the Corporation to finance its development expenditure would, therefore, have to be provided by Government in the form of loans, and this is the provision which has been entered under Head 91, subhead 001, of the Development Estimates. In answer to the Member for Jurong's questions, the amounts which have been provided for Jurong Park $4.3 million; .Jurong pier and restaurant $80,000, improvements to social amenities $4.2 million, will be sufficient proof that we have provided considerable sums for improvement of environmental conditions. The allocation of funds is always a matter of judgment. However, I would say that as the Minister for Finance -this is not necessarily the attitude I took when I was in charge of Jurong development - the amounts which have been provided for sports complexes, swimming pools, playgrounds, parks, Jurong Bird Park, and so on, are more than adequate for the purposes. In fact, I am not quite sure whether the amounts provided, in relation to other constituencies, are not excessive. Having listened to the recent debate on the provision for overhead bridges and other amenities for Sembawang, I think that $4.3 million for Jurong Park is certainly ample. I have also taken note of the comment of the Member for Jurong on the health of the trees and grasses. I am not responsible for this and other details of Jurong housekeeping - my responsibility being confined to giving directions to the Jurong Town Corporation on matters affecting policy. I am sure he is more keenly interested and, therefore, he would have a greater knowledge of the details of Jurong development. However. I am prepared to pass on his comments to the Jurong Town Corporation for their consideration. 1 have been given to understand, however, that some of his comments are not necessarily correct. The Parks and Recreation Unit of the Jurong Town Corporation is continuing to provide from its nursery enough trees for planting especially in the housing areas and in open spaces, in addition to the roadside planting carried out by the Trees and Parks Unit of the Public Works Department. In 1971 the number of trees planted by the Jurong Town Corporation is 14,800, and the number of shrubs 74,900. This is considerably heavy planting. As for the statement that the trees are growing older but not bigger, I think this is merely an impression. Some trees are slow-growing and, therefore, the Member's impression that they are not thriving is not correct. With regard to refuse from the residential flats in Jurong Town, I understand that refuse is collected by the Jurong Town conservancy contractor every day and deposited in the various bin centres set up by the Ministry of Health. As far as I know, the Public Health Department of the Ministry of Health regularly clear the bins every day. They have checked on this. Perhaps sometimes unusually large amounts of refuse may be accumulated after the daily clearing, arid this could have given the impression that the refuse is not collected daily. With regard to the complaint about the design of the flats and that the blocks of flats are too close to one another, the position is as follows. The distance between each 10-storey block is 90 feet and between each 5-storey block is 50 feet, when the flats are facing one another. This ratio is the same as for Queenstown and Toa Payoh housing estates. In the design of the special type of staggered-blocks of 4-room flats, the .Jurong Town Corporation thought that the hack of the block of flats should face the back of the other block of fiats and, therefore, you have the kitchens of one block facing those of another block. But the front of each block of flats. which face the opposite direction, would have a vast open area so that the sitting room and the main bedroom will not face those of another flat, thus affording greater privacy for the tenants. The distance between the kitchens in the rear of two blocks of flats in the first experimental stage is 22� feet. This was necessitated by the small site available and the necessity to provide ample open space for car parking areas. But the distance between the kitchens of two blocks of such flats now under construction will be 35 feet, which should be considered as standard. A distance of more than 35 feet will, I think add to the cost of construction.

Mr Speaker, Sir, will the Minister for Finance consider lowering the rate of interest which is charged on that portion of the loan to the Jurong Town Corporation used for the building of social and recreational facilities? I am told that the admission fees for the Bird Park are as high as they are because of the exorbitant rate of interest, which is about 7X per cent, charged by the Ministry of Finance for their loan. If we add the fact that property tax is payable on the properties, then the charges to the public for the use of such facilities must necessarily be high.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the interest rates for the various loans to the Jurong Town Corporation have been carefully negotiated with them. I am sure they are capable of looking after their own interests. In so far as the Ministry of Finance is concerned, the question of the use of these loans has been considered. But in the case of the Jurong Bird Park, which is supposed to he run like any other private company, the terms on which the Jurong Bird Park gets its finance will he on commercial terms. Whether or not the Bird Park will be able to pay its way is another matter. But for accounting purposes, it is necessary to make quite sure that if the Bird Park is intended to be run like a limited company, then they should not be given any hidden subsidy. 4.00 p.m.

(In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, the Minister for Finance has explained just now that a certain sum has been allotted for recreational and other purposes in Jurong, e.g.. the expenditure on the Bird Park and other recreational amenities. I would like to know whether a concessionary rate will be given to residents of Jurong Town to enjoy these recreational amenities.

Sir, I have already stated in my reply to the debate on the annual Budget Statement that I would pass on the request for lower charges to the Jurong Bird Park (Private) Limited, which is a private company. The Member for Whampoa has suggested the reduction of admission fees by charging lower interest rates on the loans. I have rejected this. I am sure that if the fees are lowered, it may then be a matter of calculating whether or not the reduction in the charges would result in more visitors going to the Jurong Bird Park. And if such calculation promises a greater number of visitors resulting in higher gate receipts. I am sure the Jurong Bird Park (Private) Limited will be only too happy to adopt the suggestion.

Mr Speaker, Sir, when I spoke to the Chairman of the Jurong Town Corporation, he told me that he was just trying to cover costs. But when I asked the Minister for Finance, he said it is a commercial venture. I do not know exactly where we stand. I appreciate the reason that maybe we should not subsidise by reducing the rate of interest to, say, four or five per cent on the loans to the Company. But I would think that six per cent, which is the rate of interest that people normally get on fixed deposits, would be the rate to charge, for then we would not be subsidising nor would we be making any profit. But by charging 7- per cent commercial rate, as the Minister rightly acknowledged, he is passing the buck over to the private company. I think we have got to make the decision whether the Bird Park should be run as a commercial proposition or whether it is to be considered as an amenity for the people to enjoy, and then determine the rate accordingly. I do not think we should keep on passing the ball to and fro, especially in new social amenities like swimming pools which are going to be provided by the Jurong Town Corporation. They have got to pass on the rate of interest which they have to pay, even if it is just simply to cover their cost of operation and not to make a profit at their end. It does not mean that the Minister for Finance should make a profit.

Sir, the question of covering costs and of perhaps making something above that is not inconsistent. First of all, they should try to cover their costs. If they cannot, then perhaps there would be a question of a subsidy, in which case, of course, it would be properly accounted for as a subsidy under Contributions and Charitable Allowances. As far as the Bird Park is concerned, we are trying to run it as a commercial proposition. There are zoos and other bird parks run on this basis. If the Jurong Town Corporation can succeed, so much the better for them, and this will be a feather in the cap of the Chairman of the Jurong Bird Park (Private) Limited.

(In Mandarin): Sir, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 91 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 002. Sir, I notice that this is a loan of $25 million to the Public Utilities Board. I do not know what the P.U.B, is going to do with the $25 million. Anyway, I wish to raise some queries. I wish to query the P.U.B, on the manner in which it deals with the public as far as deposit accounts are concerned. Let me point out an example. A widow who wanted to transfer the account of her husband, who was the sole breadwinner in the family, was asked to pay another deposit and start a new account. I want to know why the deposit already paid by the husband cannot be used. She was told that the original deposit will be refunded only later on and subject to a claim for it. May I ask why is the P.U.B, so heartless, especially to the lower-income group? The P.U.B, seems to give the impression to the public that it is doing a very big favour for a very small service. Let me give a further example of how the P.U.B. metes out a shabby form of treatment to the lower-income group. The rich who can afford air- conditioners in their homes are charged a lower rate for their electricity supply. While unfortunate people who only want better ventilation by using fans are charged a higher rate because fans can only be connected to the lighting points. This is a terrible injustice on the part of P.U.B. It is high time that this unjust form of charges should be brought in line with the socialist practice. It is also hoped that when the P.U.B, introduces a uniform rate of charges for both power and lighting in the near future its officers will take into consideration the plight of the lower-income group. To charge a uniform rate for power and lighting is a good idea. But it must be a reasonable charge for the lower-income group. It is encouraging to note that the P.U.B, is using naphtha as feedstock in order to reduce air pollution. Is the P.U.B, aware that Singaporeans are finding it cheaper to use the commercialised bottled gas, and has the P.U.B, any intention of reducing the charge for their domestic gas so as to compete at par with commercial suppliers of bottled gas?

Mr Speaker, Sir, the provision of $25 million to the P.U.B, is for any shortfall in financing which may be experienced by them. The P.U.B, gets most of its money from external sources, the Asian Development Bank or the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development. On matters of detail which the Member has brought up, I am given to understand that, under the Board's existing procedure, when a consumer transfers his account to another person, the new consumer must be prepared to pay the liabilities of the old consumer. It is either that or he pays a new deposit until the old account has been settled. Where the new consumer pays his own deposit, the old consumer's deposit will then be used to settle any of the outstanding charges on the closing of the account and the balance, of course, will then be refunded to whoever is entitled to it or to the administrators of the estate. This is perhaps a matter of detail which could be pursued with the P.U.B, direct. On electricity charges, I have given an explanation to the Member for Telok Blangah in the debate on the Budget Statement. The Board is preparing to introduce a new single meter of domestic tariff for both lighting and power consumption, so that the discrimination between the two kinds of electricity - one for power and another for lighting - would be eliminated shortly. As for the use of bottled gas, this is a matter which every consumer must decide for himself whether bottled gas is cheaper or whether the P.U.B, gas supply is cheaper as well as more convenient. It would appear, however, that there are enough consumers who consider PUB, gas competitive with other methods of heating, and the P.U.B, has been extending its gas supply to ever larger areas. The P.U.B, considers the price to be both reasonable and competitive.

Sir, I am aware of the reply given by the Minister for Finance to the question asked by the Member for Telok Blangah. What I want to know is whether the Minister for Finance will direct the P.U.B, to take into consideration the plight of the lower-income group when fixing the single rate for power and lighting. The main point of my question is that the rates for lower-income group should be slightly lower than the rates for the other income groups.

Sir, this is a matter of policy and I have no doubt that due consideration will be given to the lower-income group, as suggested by the Member. In fact, that is the case now. But as I understood the Member when he was speaking, he was complaining of the discrimination between those who get their cooling done by the power system and the others; i.e, the lower-income group - or even the higher-income group, because even the higher-income group have fans connected to lighting points - who have to pay the higher lighting rate for their electric fans. As I have said, that discrimination will be eliminated when the new single tariff system is introduced.

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

(In Malay): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 91 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 003*. (* The same amendment also stood in the name of Mr Teong Eng Siong.) Sir, for 1971-72 the amount loaned to the Housing and Development Board totalled $100 million, and for 1972-73 a loan of $180 million has been provided, which is an increase of $80 million. Last week, the Minister for Health, when discussing the allocation for the Public Health Division, said that Alsagoff Estate has to be redeveloped before public health measures can be carried out. Therefore, I wish to know whether this loan to the Housing and Development Board includes development to be carried out by the Housing and Development Board in the Alsagoff Estate. 4.15 p.m. I wish to put forward a few questions to the Minister in charge. Firstly, can the Minister explain to this House whether Alsagoff Estate has been bought over by the Housing and Development Board? The reason for my question is that when I submitted an application for amenities to the Urban and Rural Services Committee, they replied that permission is required from the landlord. And when the secretary of my C.C.C, sought permission from the Alsagoff Estate, the administrators said that they no longer had powers to give such permission because the land has been bought over by the Government. However, they are still collecting ground rent from the occupiers of Alsagoff Estate every month. Secondly, what are the development plans for this area, and when will such plans be implemented? Thirdly, in the implementation of the development plans in Alsagoff Estate, would the evicted families be given priority of employment in the factories in the area when they are built, as has been mentioned by the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Law and National Development, who is also the Chairman of the U.R.S.C.? He has said so a little while ago in this House. My final question is when will the development projects be started?

(In Mandarin): Sir, under this subhead we can see that the vote is for the Housing and Development Board. The Board has undeniably contributed much and has achieved very good results in public housing. At the moment there are half a million people staying in the flats built by the Housing and Development Board. Because of this we have successfully resolved the problem of housing shortage. On the other hand, a few years ago, we started the home-ownership scheme under which we sold the flats to people of the lower and middle income groups to enable them to possess their own houses. This is a laudable project. I would like to raise three questions which I hope to get a reply from the Minister. (1) Where will the project be sited? I-low is the amount allocated under this vote going to be used and in what areas? Other than the building of housing estates, will the Housing and Development Board also be interested in building shopping complexes and hawker centres? (2) I have received certain complaints from shop tenants that the rentals are too high. They would like to request the Government to consider selling the shop premises to the present tenants on hire-purchase terms. At the moment we have the home- ownership scheme for the dwellers, and I think perhaps we can also consider extending this scheme to tenants of Housing Board shop premises. This will help to resolve their problem of high rentals and also help them to maintain their business. I remember I raised this question last year in this House, and the Minister replied that he would convey my suggestion to the Housing and Development Board to carry out a survey to find out the response of the shop tenants. I would like to ask the Minister now what was the result of the survey and how good was the response. Are these shop tenants willing to buy over the shop premises constructed by the Housing and Development Board? (3) Now that we are engaged in the Second Five-Year Development Plan, 20,000 units of flats will be built this year. There are many people on the waiting list for flats, and they are rather worried because fewer and fewer flats are being released for rental. If they want to buy flats, they must have some money in the Central Provident Fund before they can register. And since the lower income group do not have sufficient C.P.F. deposits at their disposal, they are not in a position to buy. So we should consider continuing renting out flats to people in the lower income group. I would like the Minister to give serious consideration to these suggestions.

Sir, the sum of $180 million is provided in the 1972-73 Development Estimates under this subhead, "Loan to Housing and Development Board", for its programme for the year 1972-73. Government loans to the Board are determined on the basis of their own overall building programme. The target this year is 20,000 units of flats, and the loan is to meet the total financial needs for the year. As such, the loan is not specifically tied to any particular housing project. As far as the Alsagoff Estate is concerned, the Government will, of course, provide the necessary loans to the Housing and Development Board, but as I have pointed out before, any overall development of this low-lying area will first require major road and drainage improvement schemes. The Sims Avenue extension was completed last year. The Pan-Island Expressway from Paya Lebar Road to Jalan Eunos will be completed soon; I believe, in a month or two. Further, both Jalan Eunos and Jalan Ubi, as the Member for Kampong Kembangan is aware, are being widened and improved and brighter lights are being installed along these two roads. I think the Member appreciates that the necessary infrastructure has to be laid for pre-development of the whole area which also has to be taken into consideration extensions to the Paya Lebar Airport. As for acquisition, the land north of the Pan-Island Expressway was gazetted for acquisition on the 2nd February last year, and the land south of the Expressway on the 20th September last year. A survey of the population in the area has not been completed and possession of the land not yet taken, so that some projects by the U.R.S.C, may still need the consent of the trustees of the estate concerned. But the stumbling block to redevelopment is, of course, resettlement. In respect of the two new roads which I have mentioned, there were 1,200 cases for resettlement, involving about 4,000 persons. On a rough estimate, there would be more than 15,000 cases of resettlement involving about 100,000 people for the whole area. They cannot be evicted or resettled until new homes are built. This is being done in housing estates in Kallang, Geylang East, Kampong Chai Chee, and the Bedok new town on the cut side between Changi Road and Upper East Coast Road. I assure the Member that steps will be taken to provide low-cost housing within the area itself together with light industrial facilities to cater for the needs of the residents. A large part of the estate lies in the way of the air route which aeroplanes take when departing or arriving at Paya Lebar Airport, and buildings along this stretch of land must necessarily be low. I would like to reassure the Member that Geylang Serai is very much in the Government's plans, but it will take many years to complete plans for its development. The area north of the Pan-Island Expressway will be developed first and later the area south, but the exact commencement date for the development will depend on when we can find alternative homes. But homes alone are not enough. People must not only be given new homes to move into but their capacity to earn a living from light industries, which could be profitably established in the area, is an important factor in rehabilitation and redevelopment. With the co-operation of the residents and the active support of the Member of Parliament for the area, I am confident that Geylang Serai can and will be turned into an attractive and well-planned area with healthier conditions for our citizens to live and work in. 4.30 p.m. As for the Member for Sembawang, he asked certain questions, one of which is: where will these housing projects be? I mentioned a few. There are other projects all over Singapore - Woodlands, Toa Payoh, Queenstown, Farrer Road, Redhill, Telok Blangah are some of the few. He asked: will there be shopping centres and hawker centres? Certainly. But he complained that some of the rentals of shops are too high, and at the same time and in the same breath he said they wanted to buy. This is what I do not understand. If they cannot pay the rents, which they say are too high, how can they afford to buy? But on this question of wanting to buy shops, it is not the same as the home-ownership scheme for tenants who live in flats. The qualifications are different. Hence it is also difficult to sell. You do not have to be a citizen of Singapore to tender for a Housing and Development Board shop premises, but you have to be a citizen of Singapore if you want to buy a Housing Board flat to live in. So are we to extend this scheme to non-citizens too? If we do sell, we must obviously sell to everybody. We cannot pick and choose. That is just one reason. But the Housing Board has considered this for some time now and, after the Member's request last year, I am afraid the answer is still no. As for renting out - this is the third time I am saying this, probably the Member has not been in the House - I gave the assurance that 20 per cent of the new two-room and three-room flats will still be let out, and 80 per cent will be sold. But, of course, the one-room flats are the ones that are in demand, and most of them are being let out. I think there is only one per cent of one-room flats that have been sold. In other words, it is cheaper to rent them.

(In Malay): Sir, I wish to assure the Minister for Law and National Development that the problem of resettlement will not be difficult. I believe that the Minister knows how the Housing and Development Board had resettled the families affected by the Pan-Island Expressway project. Likewise, Sir, if this area is redeveloped, I am sure the residents there will give their fullest co-operation to the Government. A little while ago, the Minister said that the first problem is resettlement and that development will take place in a few years' time. Sir, the problem which will arise if this development were to take place in a few years is that the residents there will continue to live under conditions where they will have bad roads and flooded drains, including the mosquito menace, if the U.R.S.C, cannot give prior consideration to repair the bad roads and drains. The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for National Development said just now that because these areas are affected by redevelopment, it is not wise to repair the by-roads in the area. If this area is not going to be developed, or it will take a long time to develop it, it means that the residents there will continue to experience the difficulties which they had experienced over the past years. In implementing this redevelopment, Sir, will the residents be given facilities and equal, if not more priority than the residents who are affected in the other areas, in matters such as compensation, choice of alternative accommodation offered by the Housing and Development Board, and whether they will be permitted to return to their old place it and when the Housing and Development Board flats are completed? If these problems can be considered by the Minister for National Development, I can assure him the residents there will co-operate whole-heartedly with the Government.

(In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, a while ago, the Minister said that if people cannot afford to pay the high rentals for Housing and Development Board shop premises, he does not understand how they can afford to buy them. I would like to tell the Minister that this is a long-term investment plan. They can try to get a larger sum of money as a deposit. If the property belongs to them they do not have to pay the high rental. So the instalment payment will be less than the payment for rental of the shop premises. Then they will be able to tide over and continue to do their business on a long-term investment basis. Regarding the survey, the Minister said that the result was "no". I wonder whether this was based on the response after the survey, or whether the "no" came direct from him. I hope the Minister will be able to clarify these points. As regards his mention that there is a problem between selling Housing Board premises to our citizens and non-citizens, some kind of adjustment can be made. Of course, we should look after our own citizens first and give them the priority of buying these premises. After the non-citizens have got their citizenship, they may then be qualified to buy Housing Board shop premises. On another point, the Minister said that the Housing and Development Board has decided to allot 20 per cent of flats for rent. I think it is not enough because I have information that there are more than 10,000 people on the waiting list to rent flats. In other words, 20 per cent of the new two-room and three-room flats would number about 4,000 units. But if there are at present more than 10,000 people on the waiting list, after five years there will be more than 100,000 people which means that every applicant will have to wait for more than two years before he can be allotted a flat for rent. So I hope the Minister can consider increasing the percentage of flats for rent to 40 per cent.

Sir, if we raise the rate of flats for rent to 40 per cent, there will be less to sell. I do not want to get into an argument with the Member about either financial or construction figures of the Housing Board. But the waiting list to buy has left the waiting list to rent very far behind. As for the survey, the answer "no" did not come from the survey but from the Housing Board. If I can deal with the questions raised by the Member for Kampong Kembangan, Geylang Serai is, I think, involved in this Alsagoff Estate. I cannot tell him exactly when development plans will start except to indicate that the area north of the Pan-Island Expressway will be developed first. The Member said that if we can find alternative accommodation for these 4,000 people stretched along the two roads, surely we can find accommodation for the others. The answer is yes. But it takes time. There were 4,000 along the two roads, but there are 100,000 in the whole estate. That is quite a big number. The Member also asked whether some of the residents affected will be allowed to go back. The answer is yes, but surely not all. It is difficult to evict everyone and then put them back. But I am sure some of them can go back if they love the place. As for compensation and resettlement rates, they will be entitled to the current rates. It makes no difference whether they come from Kembangan, Geylang Serai, Sembawang, or Jurong - everybody is paid the same rates. As for priority, of course, they will be given priority for Housing Board accommodation. If they are not given priority, then they are not resettled and there is no redevelopment. The Member for Kampong Kembangan also asked about priority for employment. I think that is difficult to give. We cannot force any employer to employ whoever the Member would like to be employed. Of course, they will be given the opportunity to apply for such employment, and this is up to the employer. But the whole intention is to try and set up light industries within the area so that the people not only can live there, but can also find employment in the area.

(In Malay): Mr Speaker, Sir, as the Minister has stated, he himself does not know how long it will take to develop the area north of the Pan-Island Expressway. He has just stated that this area will be developed first. I want an assurance from the Minister that in the meantime the drains, roads, and the by-roads of this area be repaired by the U.R.S.C, before commencement of the development projects.

I am sorry, Sir, that I did not deal with that point. Just because there will be a little delay in redevelopment, it does not mean that the whole area will be neglected. As the Member knows, the area has not been neglected. As I pointed out earlier, two big roads have been built, one is the extension of Sims Avenue, and the other the Pan-Island Expressway right from Paya Lebar Road to Jalan Eunos, which will be completed in a month or two. Lights have been installed along these two roads. Jalan Ubi is being widened and improved. These are major roads, and therefore they are being attended to. They cost millions of dollars. There have been requests to repair minor roads within the area, but not all of them have been attended to because there are also other roads in other areas, and we have to strike a balance between Kampong Kembangan and Chua Chu Kang, or between Kampong Kembangan and Jurong, or between Kampong Kembangan and Sembawang. However, I can assure the Member that, subject to priorities, repairs to roads and building of drains within his constituency and within Geylang Serai will continue. 4.45 p.m.

(In Malay): Mr Speaker, Sir, for the information of this House and the Minister for Law and National Development, Jalan Ubi, for which improvements have been made, is in the Kampong Ubi constituency, which is the constituency of the Minister of State, Prime Minister's Office. But that part of Jalan Ubi which is in my constituency has not been improved. Nevertheless, I beg leave to withdraw. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 91 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 007. Sir, the Singapore Telephone Board has been complaining for many years about acts of vandalism on public telephones. Can this act of vandalism be prevented by lighting the booths so that such acts can easily be detected? This will be a deterrent to those intending to damage public telephones. The Singapore Telephone Board can increase its earnings by installing more coinafons in coffee shops. Many of the public telephone booths are sited in obscure places. The design of the booth is such that the weather has not been taken into consideration. Is there any means whereby the Singapore Telephone Board could introduce a timing device in public telephone booths whereby a caller is limited to only a few minute's use? At present it is common to see inconsiderate people using public telephones for long periods at a time when a number of other people are waiting to use them. I would also suggest that a burglar alarm be installed, so that when the coin box is being broken into, it will sound a siren so that the culprit can easily be apprehended. It is also noted that certain public telephones are out of order, and it would be some weeks before they are repaired. Will the Singapore Telephone Board undertake immediate repairs to telephones which are out of order?

Mr Speaker, Sir, I fully concur with the concern expressed by the Member for Anson over the question of acts of vandalism to our public telephones. However, I am pleased to say that such acts of vandalism have shown a noticeable decline in recent years. There were 670 cases in 1970, but the number has gone down to 237 in 1971, Of particular significance is the number of incidents where coin boxes were broken into. There were as many as 337 cases in 1970, but the number went down to only 37 for last year. Of course, we must give credit to the Police for having arrested a very persistent culprit late in 1970. The case was reported in the press. I would like to express my appreciation of the Police, as conditions have since improved. However, I should like to take this opportunity to mention the various measures which have been taken by the Singapore Telephone Board to reduce acts of vandalism. It is unfortunate that some people who use public telephones are inclined to put match sticks into the dials, and therefore jamming the mechanism. These are minor irritants. But when we have cases of severe damage, for example, when the handsets are smashed - we consider this a major damage - the Singapore Telephones Board has been instructed to contact, first, the Member of Parliament for that area to seek his assistance, because he knows his constituents best. He may know where the bad hats are and where the troublesome people usually congregate. Therefore, through the Member of Parliament, we will also be able to liase with the Citizens' Consultative Committee, whose members are at the grass-root level. They know which streets are "good" and which streets are "not very good" for the siting of public telephones. It is through the assistance and co-operation of Members of Parliament and the Citizens' Consultative Committees that we have been able to reduce the previous high rate of vandalism and to bring it down to a check. Secondly, the Singapore Telephone Board also secures the assistance of the Vigilante Corps. For instance, in the course of their duties, especially at night, they could pass by public telephones booths more often than usual and to keep an eye on them. This assistance is particularly sought where there are public telephones in remote areas. Thirdly, the Singapore Telephone Board has begun to remove the spring doors of telephone booths. In the past we thought that wooden doors would give the users some privacy. However, we now think that this is not a good idea. We are going to remove the doors so that if anyone tries to prise open a coin box, he can easily be seen by passers-by or by the Police patrol cars. Lastly, there will be more frequent visits to the telephone booths by the Singapore Telephone Board coin collectors. These are the measures we have taken so far, but other measures are being contemplated. Firstly, public telephones will be located in conspicuous places, like community centres. Secondly, we are considering the possibility of installing burglar alarms, as has been suggested by the Member for Anson. Of course, such devices can only be installed if the cost is not too prohibitive. It should be reasonably economical. If we install an alarm which costs $1,000 in order to collect $10 a month, then it is not economical. Of course, we will try to educate the public through the mass media, that is, the radio and the television. We will also consider the question of lighting the booths. Here it is a question of cost. Is it economically worthwhile to provide lighting for the booths as against the provision of more coinafons in coffee shops? We will have to look into this matter. Coming now to the timing device for public telephones, it is true that some people do put in ten cents and talk for half an hour. This is unreasonable, especially when there are other people waiting to make use of the telephone. We are now considering the possibility of introducing a timing device which will automatically disconnect the call after three minutes. The cost of such a device is estimated at $150. As there are more than 1,200 public telephones, the capital expenditure involved could amount to $200,000. It is a sizable sum to spend on such a device. We will have to study the cost benefits to see whether it is worthwhile to spend such a large sum of money. In the meantime, we can only hope that the public will cooperate, so that if they do not make use of the public telephones for such a long time, we would not have to spend $200,000 to cut off the call automatically after three minutes. While on the subject of vandalism, Sir, perhaps this is a good opportunity for me to remind the House, especially members of the public, that we do have the Vandalism Act (Chapter 108) where, under section 2 (b) of this Act, an act of vandalism includes "stealing, destroying or damaging any public property". And "public property" has been defined as "movable or immovable property belonging to the Government... or to any statutory body...". And the Singapore Telephone Board is a statutory body. Any person found guilty of acts of vandalism, such as stealing, destroying or damaging public telephone booths is liable, on conviction, to a fine not exceeding $2,000 or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding three years, and shall also be punished with caning with not less than three strokes and not more than eight strokes. I think the punishment by caning will deter many acts of vandalism in Singapore.

Mr Speaker. Sir, in view of the Minister's long explanation and also his plea for cooperation on the part of the public, I beg leave to withdraw. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn

(In Mandarin):Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 91 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 101*. (* The same amendment also stood in the name of Mr Sim Boon Woo.) Sir, this provision of about $96 million is for loans to industrial and commercial enterprises. This, I believe, is essential to enable commercial and industrial enterprises to develop further. Can the Minister explain to this House how are these loans going to be used? I wish to know the details concerning these loans. What are the projects for which these loans are given? What are the conditions for such loans and what is the rate of interest?

Mr Speaker, Sir, speaking on this subhead, I must say that although the Development Bank of Singapore was established by statute, I presume there is a sufficient safeguard over the investment of public moneys, and that all investments are made in good faith and with good intent. However, I would like to ask the Minister to be more explicit than what is said in page 48 of the Memorandum on the Development Estimates, Paper Misc. I of 1972. Sir, it would appear that the Development Bank of Singapore has the lion's share of this loan. But the House is not sufficiently informed as to how the Development Bank of Singapore will make use of this loan. As stated in the Memorandum, the Government has approved ten lines of credit to the Bank, totalling some $411 million. The House is entitled to know more details before we are asked to approve any further sums of public money. 5.00 p.m. Sir, the next major beneficiary appears to be the Neptune Orient Lines Limited. I wish to know what class of ships and tankers is to be purchased and their total tonnages. I presume that our local shipbuilding industry will also benefit from this loan. The new addition of ships for the Neptune Orient Lines Limited will naturally be built by our own shipyards.

Sir, for the financial year 1972-73, a sum of $96.1 million has been earmarked for loans to industrial and commercial enterprises. These loans are for financing part of their operations. The breakdown has been given as $58 million for the Development Bank of Singapore, $11.5 million for Jurong Shipbuilders (Pte.) Ltd., $25 million for the Neptune Orient Lines, and $1.6 million for the other companies, making a total of $96.1 million. Loans to the D.B.S, are intended for the purpose of assisting the Bank in financing part of its lending operations, mainly in manufacturing industries, shipbuilding, real estate development, transport projects, and some projects of the M.S.A, for which loans are also to be provided. The lines of credit, as indicated by their name, are not project loans. It means that the projects are not known in advance. This is the kind of financing which the World Bank and the Asian Development Bank do when they provide loans to the Development Bank of Singapore. A sum is provided and the disbursements are made upon projects being received by the Development Bank of Singapore and carefully assessed as to their credit-worthiness. The actual projects are not known except by categories. The lines of credit, of course, have been given for various purposes, and some of them are for direct loans to manufacturing industries, others for real estate financing and for purchase of aircraft. One line of credit is to finance the purchase of freedom-type vessels built by the Jurong Ship-builders (Private) Ltd, for Neptune Orient Lines. In the case of Jurong Shipbuilders (Private), Ltd, there is also a loan to finance the major part of the cost of imported materials for shipbuilding during the initial period of operation of the company. The Neptune Orient Lines Ltd, requires funds for purchasing a number of ships and tankers. The details are: dry cargo carriers, product tankers and super tankers totalling 330,600 deadweight tons, of which 306,600 would represent tanker tonnage. These vessels have to be built outside Singapore because Singapore's shipyards are not yet capable of building some of these vessels. However, wherever possible, Neptune Orient Lines has been building the vessels in Singapore. For instance, four freedom-type multi-purpose dry cargo vessels are being built by Jurong Shipbuilders. These ships will have a total tonnage of 59,200 deadweight tons. The balance of the loans is for small sums to be given to various partly-owned or wholly-owned Government companies, including Keppel Shipyard.

(In Mandarin): Sir, I thank the Minister for his reply, and I beg leave to withdraw. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The following amendment stood in the names of Messrs Ng Kah Ting and Sim Boon Woo -

Mr Ng Kah Ting is not moving amendment (6). Mr Sim.

I am also not moving, Sir. The sum of $419,845,500 for Head 91 ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. Head 101 -

(In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 101 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 201. Sir, I would like to take this opportunity to praise the Vigilante Corps. The Vigilante Corps has played an important part in helping to maintain law and order in our country. As time goes on, the V.C., will become a more disciplined organisation. It has been able to provide various services to our people. The provision for this subhead is $109,580 for the construction of stores at the training centres. I would like the Minister to inform the House, firstly, whether the Vigilante Corps has a lot of equipment and other items which require the construction of stores. What are these items which are to be stored? Secondly, when will the construction of the stores be completed?

Mr Speaker, Sir, the Member may be aware that civil defence training in the Vigilante Corps begins at the deployment phase, i.e, from the second to the fourth year of national service in the Vigilante Corps. An integral part of civil defence training is fire-fighting and rescue work. Such training, which is held at the nine V.C, training centres, is conducted with the equipment essential for fire-fighting and rescue work. The equipment includes water trailer pumps and portable pumps at each training centre. The stores which are at present under construction and which are nearing completion will house these equipment in safety and in proper condition. At present, Vigilante Corps members in the auxiliary fire service are also being trained as firemen to combat airport, harbour and city fires. The auxiliary fire service, which will be integrated with the Civil Defence Organisation, will use these stores and equipment at the various centres in times of emergency.

(In Mandarin): Sir, I thank the Parliamentary Secretary for his reply and I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

(In Mandarin): Mr Sneaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 101 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 202. Sir, this provision is for the purchase of equipment for the Civil Defence Organisation. I would like the Parliamentary Secretary to explain what kind of equipment is required for the Organisation.

Sir, the sum of money under this subhead will be used to purchase various equipment for the Civil Defence Organisation. The equipment needed at this stage may be classified as training and operational equipment. At present the equipment which will be purchased will be largely for training purposes, and includes trailer pumps, portable pumps as I have mentioned just now, and among other things, fire extinguishers and hoses for fire-fighting purposes. Stretchers and essential training equipment for first-aid - cutters, hydraulics jacks, pneumatic drills, debris clearance equipment, lashing equipment -and other mechanical aids for training in rescue techniques, together with equipment for instruction in various aspects of civil defence work are also required. When the Civil Defence Organisation becomes operational, more equipment will be necessary if the Organisation is to be an effective source of national assistance in times of emergency. And when this subhead shows an increased sum in future Estimate, Sir,I trust the Member will be appreciative.

(In Mandarin): Sir, I thank the Parliamentary Secretary for his very detailed reply, and I beg leave to withdraw my amendment, Amendment by leave, withdrawn. The sum of $3,979.090 for Head 101 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 11, 21, 33, 77, 92 and 141. I propose to take those heads of expenditure en bloc.

Question, "That the sums stated for those heads of expenditure which appear in the last column of the Summary of Estimated Expenditure on pages 5 and 6 of Paper Cmd. 4 of 1972 stand part of the Development Estimates for the financial year 1st April. 1972 to 31st March, 1973," put, and agreed to. Question, "That the sum of $750,769,890 shall be supplied to the Government under the heads of expenditure for the public services shown in the Development Estimates for the financial year 1st April. 1972, to 31st March. 1973, contained in Paper Cmd. 4 of 1972," put, and agreed to. Resolution to be reported. Thereupon Mr Speaker left the Chair of the Committee and took the Chair of the House.

Mr Speaker. Sir, beg to report that the Committee of Supply has come to a certain resolution. Resolution reported - "That the sum of $750,769.890 shall he supplied to the Government under the head' of expenditure for the public services shown in the Development Estimates for the financial year 1st April, 1972, to 31st March. 1973, contained in Paper Cmd. 4 of 1972."

Mr Speaker. 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.

Order. I suspend this sitting now and shall take the Chair again at 5.45 p.m. Sitting accordingly suspended at 5.16 p.m. until 5.45 p.m. Sitting resumed at 5.45 p.m.

Order for Second Reading read.

Mr Speaker. Sir,I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." First of all, may I give a brief background to this Bill? There are at present five statutory authorities dealing with matters relating to seafarers and seamen: -

Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of the National Maritime Board Bill, but subject to such qualifications as I shall later on detail in my speech. The topic of maritime employment is a matter of great interest to the NTUC which have sponsored the formation of the Singapore Organisation of Seamen, a registered trade union to organise and represent seamen in relation to their respective employers. The NTUC, therefore, have reasons t' be grateful for the opportunity to give their comments while the Ministry of Communications were in the process of drafting the Bill. Some of the recommendations contained in NTUC's memorandum to the Ministry, I am glad to say, have been incorporated into the Bill before the House. The accepted recommendations include those dealing with the definitions of "seafarer" and "employer", and with the imposition of a penalty against employers engaging seamen in contravention of the proposed Act. Other accepted recommendations of NTUC dealt with minor matters. Despite the acceptance of some of their recommendations, the NTUC have reservations about the Bill as it now stands. While it is natural that NTUC should feel disappointed that not all their recommendations have been accepted, the reservations of NTUC are not founded on chagrin but concern for the future of maritime employment in our Republic. In the second sentence of the Explanatory Statement to this Bill, it is averred that "the general intention of the Bill is the welfare of members of the mercantile marine and the development of the mercantile marine." In so far as the Bill seeks to promote the welfare of seafarers, it does seem that the Bill is an answer to the concern of the NTUC. But therein lies the snag. The Bill in seeking to repeal the Seamen's Registry Board Act, the Seafarers' Welfare Board Act, the Singapore Mariners' Club Act and the Singapore Sailors' Institute Incorporation Ordinance and to re-enact the provisions of these four statutes is, in effect, a consolidating Bill without any new provision of any great significance. Other than the Seamen's Registry Board Act, the other three statutes are not concerned with the matter of maritime employment. And under the Seamen's Registry Board Act, read together with the Seamen's Registry Board Rules, the seamen find themselves in a position of "Heads, you win: tails, I lose" vis-a-vis their employers, for that accurately describes the actual working of the Act. Under the law at present, and it will continue to be so under the Bill, a seaman who commits any misconduct would, in the absence of mitigating circumstance, be invariably meted out with some form of disciplinary action by the existing Seamen's Registry Board or the proposed Maritime Board. The disciplinary action would usually be in the form of suspension from registration, or the loss of priority in registration. As registration is a condition precedent for the employment of any seamen of the registrable categories, it can be easily imagined that such disciplinary action has a sobering effect on, besides the financial shock to, the erring sailors. Such disciplinary action would have been bearable to the seamen if they can be sure that the employers who literally short-change their seamen would be brought to account in a similar fashion by the Board. Unfortunately, a seaman who has been granted less favourable terms than those originally promised to him cannot expect any remedy from the Board, even though the representatives of his employer may be sitting on the Board itself, for the simple reason that the Board has no power to discipline the employer. What utterly demoralises the seamen is that the same employers' representatives, when disciplinary action against seamen is called for, would have no scruples about demanding the imposition of the heaviest penalty on the seamen. Sir, for that reason, the NTUC happily places on record the acceptance of their recommendations by the Ministry to assure seamen the fruits of their labour by including a definition of "employer", which is wide enough to cover the local agent of a foreign employer, and enabling the Board to regulate the manner of payment of salaries and the discharge of contracts of service. The Ministry is indeed to be congratulated for their inclusion of such provisions which go towards increasing the protection of seamen. But to that extent the aim of the Ministry and the aim of the NTUC seem to coincide. Beyond that, their aims seem to be irreconcilably divergent. The cause for such divergence seems to lie in the fact that the Ministry approved the Bill as a consolidation of existing provisions with the incorporation of new provisions limited to the barest minimum possible. The NTUC views the Bill as an opportunity to eliminate malpractices by the efficient and effective regulating of maritime employment in Singapore. Thus, from the viewpoint, the Bill must necessarily incorporate new provisions as the existing provisions of the four statutes to be repealed by and re-enacted in the Bill have not been adequate to deal with such malpractices. In order that Members of this House can have a proper perspective of such malpractices in relation to maritime employment, it is necessary for me to dwell at length on such malpractices. More important than the other major question of assuring seamen the fruits of their labour, for which the Bill now contains provisions, is the question of assuring seamen a fair and equal opportunity of employment. Thus, in theory, the system of registration of certain categories of seamen for the purpose of maritime employment ensures that seamen of the registrable categories have equal opportunities for employment by requiring them to take their turn in the queue for employment. In practice, however, Sir, the provision as reproduced in clause 6 (h) of the Bill allowing the Board to supervise the selection of seamen and to provide both employers and seamen reasonable freedom of choice in relation to employment, is very ineffective. A seaman who refuses three consecutive offers of employment goes down to the bottom of the queue. On the other hand, an employer who refuses to select any seamen from these batches of seamen offered by the Board is not similarly penalised. Sir, I am given to understand by the officials of the Singapore Organisation of Seamen that the greatest number of malpractices arises out of such selection of seamen. It must be clearly emphasised that the rates of pay and other terms of service vary greatly from shipping to shipping companies. Naturally, there is a clamour among seamen to work on, for instance, a Norwegian vessel where they can earn double or treble the sum they may obtain on, for instance, a Greek vessel for the same given period of time. A Greek vessel, it may be also added, is the last recourse of desperate seamen, for invariably a Greek vessel is literally a floating jungle. To return to the point, seamen are prepared to offer up to one month's wages, which can be substantial on a Norwegian vessel, to the recruiting agents to ensure that they are taken on by such a well-paying shipping company. That is where the abuse of the selection machinery of the Registry Board comes in. If the seamen who have offered bribes are not in the first or second batch to be called up by the Board for selection, the recruiting agents who, I regret to say, are also Singapore citizens, would reject all the seamen in the first two batches on one pretext or another. Even if the seamen who have offered inducement are not sufficiently well up the queue to be included in the third and final batch of seamen to be called up by the Board for any particular ship, the recruiting agents will make a passionate plea for the employment of those particular seamen, or else they will wait until almost departure time outside the office hours of the Board to take on such seamen. Now, Sir, the question of selection is a matter of life and death for the seamen because every additional day of waiting for selection means another day without pay for themselves and their families. The point is how does the Government intend to resolve the problem of ensuring that the selection machinery offers every seamen an equal opportunity for employment? The Police and the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau have their hands full with their existing responsibilities as it is without having to look into the malpractices in maritime employment. A policy of "a rate for the port" - that is, same pay and other conditions of service for all seamen who sign on at Singapore irrespective of whichever ship they are attached to - is not acceptable to the Ministry as not being feasible at present. I must add that the NTUC agrees with the view of the Ministry on this matter. That leaves us with the question of a manning scale as a means of eradicating the abuse of the selection machinery. By manning scale, I mean some form of predetermined percentage of ratings, or registered seamen, that must make up any ship's complement. I am given to understand by the Singapore Organisation of Seamen that representation has been made on this matter to the Ministry. In their representation, the Singapore Organisation of Seamen have also drawn the attention of the Ministry to the fact that some ship's crew complements have been made up of more than 50 per cent non-ratings or non-registered seamen. Such a situation has come about through the recruiting agents' rejection of all the seamen offered by the Board under the normal selection process and hiring by the back-door, as it is, of persons who are not trained as seamen or who are deregistered or suspended ratings but who are prepared to offer some inducement to the recruiting agents. This constitutes the other principal abuse of the selection machinery of the Board, and it has more sinister implications. For one thing, untrained or inexperienced persons who are taken on ships normally as laundrymen, hatch-men, or any other of the non-registrable categories, are not able to cope with the natural hazards or exigencies that can be expected to occur to a ship at sea. The risk to the fare-paying passengers can well be imagined since the non-registered seamen may not be able to take care of themselves in a crisis at sea, not to say spare a thought for the passengers. It is a matter of great importance that there should be some form of machinery for manning scale to ensure that every ship carries a minimum number of trained seamen. For another thing, as long as ship-owners and ship-captains can engage non-registered seamen with impunity, the selection machinery of the Board will never achieve the purpose for which it is intended, and that is, besides being a machinery, to ensure equal opportunity of employment with a disciplinary device to ensure that seamen taken on at Singapore are of the highest standards and so enhance the reputation of Singapore by their work and conduct. It is obvious that seamen who are unruly and anti-social, to begin with, so as to merit the disciplinary sanction of the Board, are unlikely to submit themselves meekly to any suspension imposed by the Board on them. It is such registered seamen who offer themselves for employment by the back-door, by-passing entirely the selection machinery of the Board. The significance of the absence of any statutory provision governing manning scale in relation to the Board's objective of seeking to regulate maritime employment is that it makes for unnecessary difficulty in the attainment of the Board's objective. Having given Members of the House a picture of the background of this Bill, I now put forward the following proposals for the consideration of the Minister and the House. The Bill is clearly intended as an enabling instrument in that specific powers are exercisable by the Board by way of the various regulations to be made under the proposed Act with the approval of the Minister. I see no harm in enhancing the enabling provision of the Bill so as to allow the Board to have more scope for action and more teeth for effectiveness when the need arises. There is hardly any danger of the Board running amok with its powers, as the final say always lies with the Minister. Sir, thus I suggest the inclusion of:-

Mr Speaker, Sir, earlier on in my speech, I did mention that some organisations, including the National Trades Union Congress, were consulted in the drafting of this Bill and, I stress the word, many of their comments have been incorporated in this Bill. I was not in the happy position to say that all their recommendations have been incorporated. Probably the long speech by the Member for Telok Blangah is in respect of those suggestions which have not been accepted. He has now narrated them to this House. If it is any consolation to the Member for a very fluent speech on behalf of the NTUC, may I say that quite a number of the recommendations from ship-owners in the Singapore Employers' Federation were also not accepted. Of course, in the case of the workers, there is a spokesman in this House, but in the case of the shipowners there does not seem to be any spokesman to plead their case. I want to say that we do not claim that the National Maritime Board Bill is perfect. I have stated that its main purpose is really to consolidate the five different statutory bodies which have been looking after the affairs of mercantile marine, it is now felt that there should be one central body. May I say that it has taken as long as three years for this central body to take place. I have mentioned the desirability of having a central National Maritime Board as far back as 1968 when I assumed office. I visited the various bodies and it appeared to me that they were very disorganised and why should there be five different bodies to look after marine affairs. I, therefore, suggested that we should create just one central body. It has taken three long years to do this. This is only, as I have said, a step in the right direction. It is hoped that the reservations of the NTUC will be resolved in due course of time. If we refer to the Bill with regard to the constitution of the proposed National Maritime Board, we will see that there will be opportunities for the NTUC to give full weight to their reservations and fears, if any. There will be a membership of nine members in the Board. The Chairman, who will be appointed by the Minister will, I hope, be a man of impartial standing who will be able to give us the benefit of his experience and advice. Then there will be the Director of Marine and the Director of Social Welfare. There will be two persons representing shipowners and two persons representing seamen. Although there is no indication here that the NTUC will be consulted, I can give my assurance here in this House that it will be consulted before the two representatives from the seamen are appointed to the Board. There is no question at all that the NTUC will not have a say in the conduct of the affairs of the Board. There will also be two public servants on the Board. Therefore,. we have on the Board two representatives from the shipowners, two representatives from the workers and the four officials who when appointed will act as impartial arbitrators to the conflicting requirements of the employers and the workers. Above all, there will be an impartial chairman. As I have said, there is no question at all that the workers' views will not be given due consideration, and when the Board does come to any conclusion, fairness will not only be apparent to the workers but also to the employers. We cannot have everything to the advantage of the workers, otherwise the employers will just fold up and then there will be no ships to employ the workers. The Member has mentioned the situation in which the seamen are placed, "Heads, you win; tails, I lose." I wish to assure him that this will not happen as long as it is a fair proposition and if the Board makes suitable recommendations. As the Minister for Communications, I will be only too happy to accept the Board's recommendations. As for the various malpractices, I would appreciate it if the representatives of workers on the Board could give the Board sufficient evidence and specific information for it to act on. There may be backdoor selections which would be contrary to the law, in which case I am sure that with adequate evidence to follow up our very efficient Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau - I do know that they have a lot of work to do, but I still think it is necessary for sufficient evidence to be made available to the C.P.I.B, for them to follow up - will take the necessary action to reduce, if not eliminate, all these malpractices. The Member for Telok Blangah has conceded that his proposed legislation is new and which would require an amendment to the Merchant Shipping Act. It is the manning scales proposed by the Singapore Organisation of Seamen. May I suggest that this matter be referred to the National Maritime Board when it is set up, and probably this matter can be the very first item on its agenda. It can all be thrashed out by the Board then. And if it is the majority view of the Board -. I would not use the word "unanimous" -that these suggestions should be accepted, I shall be very happy to come back to this House to make various amendments to this Act so that it can be a much better piece of legislation to improve the working conditions of our seamen and for the general prosperity of the shipping community. I hope the Member is satisfied with my answer to his long and able speech which, I am sure, will be given serious consideration by the new National Maritime Board when it is formed.

Question put, and agreed to. Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House. The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill.-[Mr Yong Nyuk Lin] Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed.

Resolved, "That Parliament do now adjourn."-[Mr Yong Nyuk Lin]. Adjourned accordingly at Thirty minutes past Six o'clock p.m.