Hansard, 1973-07-26

Order for Second Reading read.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." Members of this House will recall that the President, at the opening of this session of Parliament last year, indicated in an addendum to his Speech that an Urban Redevelopment Authority would be established to implement a systematic programme of redevelopment of the Central area. The objective is to create a new and gracious city with better environment for business, residences as well as social activities. To achieve this aim, the upgrading of the present Urban Renewal Department to an independent Urban Redevelopment Authority with increased planning responsibilities and wider functions is necessary. Towards this end, this Bill is now before the House. The Bill establishes the Urban Redevelopment Authority as a body corporate with a Board, consisting of a Chairman, a Deputy Chairman and at least three but not more than seven other members. The Authority is given the responsibility and power on all matters relating to urban redevelopment, including the clearance of land, development of land and management of buildings therein. The Bill therefore provides for the transfer to the Authority of all such lands, buildings and other properties belonging to Government and the Housing and Development Board, as the Minister may think fit. Provision is also made for the transfer to the Authority of every person employed by the Housing and Development Board in its Urban Renewal Department as well as such employees of the Government who are engaged in discharging the functions to be vested in the Authority on terms not less favourable than those they enjoyed immediately prior to the coming into operation of the Act. The other provisions of the Bill are many, but I will draw the attention of Members to only some of the special features. The first of these is that the Authority, in addition to its main function of comprehensive planning of the Central area, is empowered to sell land to the private sector for development and to carry out any finance development on its own or in conjunction with the private sector. The Authority will, therefore, continue the series of urban renewal sales that have been so successful in promoting the participation of private entrepreneurs in our efforts to rebuild the city. Secondly, the Authority with the approval of the Minister may declare certain areas as urban redevelopment areas and may acquire any land in the designated area within three years from the date of declaration, or for such extended periods as the Minister thinks fit, at market values prevailing at the date or dates of declaration. This provision will in effect freeze land and property prices and prevent land speculation in an area earmarked for urban redevelopment. It will also give the Authority sufficient time to carry out a survey and census of the area. The third special feature confers upon the Authority the responsibility of controlling, developing and running car park facilities. The Authority will take over the Chief Planner's functions in the provision of car parks in new developments, and will in due course also take over the responsibilities of the existing Car Parks Division. The main objective is to reduce over a period of time kerb-side parking, which tends to obstruct the traffic flow, so that streets will be freed for their right vehicular use and traffic congestion thereby relieved. It is intended to build multi-storey car parks at strategic locations. Sir, I beg to move. Question proposed. 2.37 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I welcome and support the Bill in principle, which no doubt will enable many of our urban redevelopment schemes to be more effectively implemented. However, there is one aspect of the Bill which I would like to comment, and that is, Part VIII of the Bill which deals with the regulating and controlling functions of the Authority. Part VIII of the Bill requires that every person who wishes to develop any land shall submit to the Authority proposals and plans for the provision of car parks and car parking spaces before applying to the competent authority under the provisions of the Planning Act for permission to develop such land. I feel that this is putting the cart before the horse, since the provision of car parking spaces is dependent upon the use and intensity of any proposed development which may be permitted by the Chief Planner. Besides, this regulatory function is not explicitly stated either in Part IV of the Bill or in the Schedule to the Bill, which deals with the powers and functions of the Authority. I wonder whether this is a deliberate omission, or whether Part VIII of the Bill is an afterthought or a subsequent hasty addition. I have no doubt the House will agree that there could be a basic conflict of interest if the Urban Redevelopment Authority, whose main functions and duties are to prepare and execute proposals and to sell and manage properties, etc., is also empowered to perform regulatory and enforcement functions as well. Although such function is only in respect of car park provision, it is to be realised that such a provision is normally an integral part of any land or building development. Unless there is a very good reason for this new Authority to discharge such regulatory function, I would like to see this function continue to be the function of a regulatory and enforcement agency, such as the Planning Department or the Building Control Division of the PWD. If the object of this particular Part of the Bill is to enable the Authority to finance and develop multi-storey garages in the Central area, then I think there are other more appropriate means of achieving the same objective. Besides, it should be recognised that car parking is an important element of comprehensive land use and transportation policy, and it would be unwise to consider car parking policy in isolation, particularly at this present moment when a decision on a mass rapid transit system is still pending and that the bus services in the Republic is due for reorganisation again soon. I therefore wish to suggest, for the consideration of the Minister and the House, that the Bill be referred to a Select Committee for consideration, as I feel that the implementation of this Bill, particularly Part VIII of the Bill, is more far-reaching than it appears to he.

Mr Speaker, Sir, may I say immediately that I support this Bill, and I think it has come fairly promptly considering the fact that the decision for urban renewal to go corporate was taken only last year. It does not require much scrutiny to grasp the significance of this Authority which is to be established through this Bill. Going through Part IV of the Bill and recalling the experience and achievements of the Urban Renewal Department of the Housing and Development Board, its approach to the problem of resettling hawkers notwithstanding, one quickly sees that this Authority will determine the physical and social structuring of redevelopment in the urban areas. To the credit of the Urban Renewal Department, it may be said that the Department is already responsible for the impressive manner in which the city's skyline is shaping. One obvious merit in having such an Authority is that, being an autonomous body and operating on its own commercial viability, it will escape the stringency of governmental constraints most of which usually emanate from the Treasury and allows urban redevelopment to take on some acceleration and quality. In my view the physical planning for urban redevelopment should be based upon an in-depth and long-range study of our physical, social and cultural needs as individuals, as primary groups, and as a society. Such a project study calls for a coherent vision of the kind of urban life we should have and can have. I have learnt that in May 1970 the Urban Renewal Department began a project to prepare and evaluate a detailed plan for the Central area based on the State and City Planning Concept Plan for 1992. This Sub-Project which is being prepared with the assistance of United Nations consultants under the United Nations Development Programme is not completed. It claims to entail problems of distribution of land uses in the Central area, road and traffic systems, land floor space intensities, open space, car parking needs and other related problems. I do not know to what extent the State and City Planning Concept Plan for 1992, on which the Sub-Project is based, is now or will soon be irrelevant or obsolete in the light of subsequent policy decisions on the Mass Rapid Transit System and other major decisions relating to the physical, social and cultural patterns of urban living. I should think that some obsolescence already exists. Building construction technologies are advancing rapidly. New techniques are available making what were bold concepts a few years ago a practical proposition today. In this regard, I wish to make the suggestion that the Urban Redevelopment Authority give due consideration to the feasibility of creating extensive space below ground level. To-date, the creation of space underground has been limited to making provision for the parking of cars and basement facilities in that building. I feel there is scope for a dynamic exploitation and manipulation of space below ground through the construction of passageways, offices, shopping and social centres. The idea of getting pedestrians off the streets and above the roads along passageways is already accepted and has been incorporated into the physical planning of some urban renewal projects. We should now consider doing likewise below the roads. If we begin to look at the feasibility of the proposition and its problems at this stage we will have the advantage of being able to co-ordinate the planning for underground urban redevelopment with the Mass Rapid Transit System project (especially if such a system uses subways in the Central area) and with the siting of future multi-storey buildings, and piling for which must necessarily sink some distance into the ground. In any case, the need to take urban redevelopment below ground level should be increasingly compelling as space and land become more scarce and expensive at ground level. I note, Sir, that the Urban Redevelopment Authority will also undertake public housing schemes in the Central area, and thus in the totality of its functions and duties, this Authority will be responsible for shaping the style of urban life in our city in the future years. People respond according to the extent of the liberation of or restriction on themselves as determined by the physical environment. Such responses, when sustained, develop into a style of life with its particular modes and mores and we get the society which our environment produces. There are ample studies to show us that planning for urban living must take account of one critical consideration, and that is provision for meaningful contact between people. The physical planning for urban redevelopment, in my view, must ensure what may be called the optimum environment which sustains the mechanism for meaningful human contact between persons, and persons in the primary groups, that is, the family, the children's play group and the adult group through adequate housing and effective social and cultural meeting places. Planning must provide the opportunities for people to establish meaningful contact as persons and not meeting each other in their various role-relationships. A fact of urban dwelling is that a person has numerous contacts with other people every day, but he is still a lonely person at the end of the day. These contacts are superficial and meaningless. In urban life, the manifold needs of a person are easily available. He secures all these needs with money. He thus experiences an autonomy of his person. Stress in urban life and the absence of meaningful human contacts force him to withdraw. His autonomy allows him to sustain this withdrawal from society and he is soon alienated. This is referred to as the autonomy withdrawal syndrome by the experts. If this process occurs on a large scale, we may soon find ourselves beset with the huge problem of resolving social pathologies like delinquency, drug addiction, crime and schizophrenia. Such alienated people create for themselves a way of life which has been determined by their environment. It is fortunate for us that at this stage of our growth we are able to study the adversities of urban crises in the major cities in various parts of the world, and to some extent identify the causes of these crises. We should benefit from the study and recognise the miseries experienced by urban dwellers in these cities. Hence, any physical planning for urban redevelopment should be based on a substantive long-range study which has identified the kind of urban life we should have, co-ordinated with major projects such as the Mass Rapid Transit System and incorporate new technologies and techniques to construct the optimum environment for a healthy, peaceful and productive urban society. By way of conclusion, I wish to observe that clauses 17 and 18 of the Bill, as has been pointed out by the Minister, indeed vest considerable powers in the Authority. The clauses concerned empower the Authority, with the approval of the Minister, to freeze land for three years or more for the purpose of urban redevelopment, if the Authority so decides. While I understand the need for such powers, if the Authority is to be able to plan ahead and make suitable feasibility studies of various redevelopment projects, I would like nevertheless to make the point that, first, these provisions should be utilised only after reasonable certainty is established in the overall urban redevelopment planning of the need for the land for urban redevelopment. Secondly, that the owner or owners of such lands be given the choice of developing the land in question in the manner planned for by the Authority for the purposes of redevelopment. Finally, I wholeheartedly support the hon. Member for his suggestion to commit this Bill to a Select Committee.

Mr Speaker, Sir, if I may just supplement what I have mentioned earlier. I hope the Minister would consider the possibility of setting up a special committee, as a matter of urgency, to study and formulate a comprehensive transportation policy and strategy for the Republic, in conjunction with the Ministry of Communications and other relevant statutory bodies, to guide the provision, distribution, and management of car parking facilities in the Central area. I appreciate his concern over the present traffic and parking situation in the Central area as reflected in Part VIII of the Bill.

Mr Speaker, Sir, after that long lecture on urban redevelopment from the Member for Serangoon Gardens, I do not think I need add much further to my speech. At this stage also, I do not propose to answer any of the criticisms or queries of either Member, because I accept their suggestion to commit this Bill to a Select Committee.

Question put, and agreed to. Bill accordingly read a Second time. Resolved, "That the Urban Redevelopment Authority Bill be committed to a Select Committee consisting of Mr Speaker as Chairman, and the following seven Members: Mr Ivan Baptist (Potong Pasir) Mr E. W. Barker (Tanglin) Mr N. Govindasamy (Telok Blangah) Mr Hwang Soo Jin (Jalan Kayu) Mr Ong Teng Cheong (Kim Keat) Mr L. P. Rodrigo (Serangoon Gardens) Dr Tan Eng Liang (River Valley)."--[Mr Barker],

Order for Second Reading read. 2.57 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." Land holdings appearing in maps published under the Boundaries and Survey Maps Act are identified by reference to Lot numbers and appropriate Town Sub-division or Mukim numbers, The boundaries of Town Subdivisions or Mukims usually follow existing roads or other prominent boundary-marks. With the accelerated real estate development in recent years, the existing boundary-marks of many Town Sub-divisions or Mukims have been obliterated. It has, therefore, become necessary, in some cases, to alter Town Sub-division or Mukim boundaries. Furthermore, some development projects are sited in two different Town Sub-divisions or Mukims, and in such cases before any new title can be issued the existing Town Sub-division or Mukim boundaries have had to be changed. The practice has been for the Chief Surveyor to alter the boundaries of Town Sub-divisions or Mukims by the publication of the alteration in the Government Gazette for public information. While such a practice is not prohibited by the provisions of the said Act, it is nevertheless not expressly provided for by the Act. It is desirable that such alterations should be covered by specific statutory authority. The Bill, therefore, seeks to amend the Act in order to confer upon the Chief Surveyor the express authority to make the alterations of the boundaries of a Mukim or a Town Sub-division when the alteration is required by reason of any change, or revision of any boundary-marks of the Mukim or Town Sub-division boundaries. In addition, the Chief Surveyor is also given the authority to alter the boundaries of a Mukim or Town Sub-division when the alteration is required by reason of any change in the boundaries of a land holding or of any reclamation of the foreshore or the seabed. Sir, I beg to move.

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

Order for Second Reading read. 3.00 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I have just received a letter from the Singapore Medical Association stating that they would like to make certain representations on the provisions of this Bill. In order to give them an opportunity to make representations, I suggest that the Second Reading of this Bill be postponed to the next available sitting of Parliament.

So be it.

Order for Second Reading read. 3.02 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." Sir, since 1969 there has been a sharp increase in the number of private investigation and security guard agencies. There are at present some 80 such agencies registered in the Registries of Business Names and Companies. Their activities cover a wide area and include, inter alia: -

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 Chua Sian Chin.] Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed.

Order for Second Reading read. 3.18 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." The financial year of a number of statutory boards under the law is the calendar year. However, as the Government financial year is the period 1st April to 31st March in the following year, it may be more convenient for the purpose of control for statutory boards to adopt the same period for their financial year, particularly where they depend on Government funds for their operations. The Bill now before the House, therefore, seeks to amend the Singapore Telephone Board Act, the Nanyang University Act, the Housing and Development Act, the Hindu Endowments Act, and the Commercial and Industrial Security Corporation Act, so as to enable the statutory bodies created by the said Acts to adopt as their financial year a period of twelve months ending on the 31st day of March in each year and to prepare their accounts accordingly, to bring them in line with the financial year of the Government from whom these statutory bodies draw their funds. Sir, I beg to move.

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 Hon Sui Sen]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed.

Order for Second Reading read. 3.21 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." Statutory bodies enjoy exemption from a number of taxes. However, there is no uniformity in respect of these exemptions. For example, some statutory bodies are exempted from stamp duty while others are not. Moreover, some of the statutory bodies have the exemption embodied in their own statutes, while other statutory bodies are granted exemptions under the parent legislation for the tax concerned. The main tax concessions embodied in the statutes of a number of statutory bodies are exemption from income tax, exemption from property tax, conferment of "institution of a public character" status whereby donations to the institution from the public may qualify for income tax deduction, and exemption from stamp duty. This Bill seeks to delete all such tax concession provisions contained in the statutes of the various statutory bodies concerned. In future, exemptions will be granted only under the appropriate tax legislation, namely, the Income Tax Act, the Property Tax Act and the Stamp Act. The centralisation of exemption under the parent legislation is logical and convenient and will enable any change in the policy on exemption to statutory bodies to be uniformly and comprehensively applied without the tedium of amending the Act for every statutory body. Exemption from income tax for statutory bodies will be centralised under the First Schedule to the Income Tax Act. As for "institution of a public character" status, this will be conferred by a Gazette notification issued under section 37 of the Income Tax Act. The policy regarding property tax is not to exempt statutory bodies from paying property tax. Regarding stamp duty, the policy has been for some time that all statutory bodies should pay the stamp duty to reflect their true cost of operation. Any exemption will in future be considered only on the merits of each case, for example, as an economic incentive towards the development of a financial centre. Sir, I beg to move.

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 Hon Sui Sen]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed.

Order for Second Reading read. 3.26 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." The Bill proposes amendments to the Property Tax Act (Chapter 144 of the Revised Edition) which aim to protect revenue, rectify certain shortcomings in the Act, and streamline procedures. The main amendments deal with objections to assessment, delegation of more power to the Valuation Review Board, eliciting information for speedier assessment and tax collection, recoveries of tax arrears and remission of tax. Clause 2 relates to section 7 of the Property Tax Act under the existing provisions of which a refund of property tax may be allowed for any unbroken period of not less than 30 days during which the building is unoccupied. The intention was to refund where the building vacancy is a month or longer but, as presently worded, section 7 precludes a refund for the calendar month of February which has only 28 or 29 days. This anomaly will be removed by the amendments proposed in clause 2 of the Bill which will permit refund of property tax on an unoccupied building provided it has been unoccupied for any unbroken period of not less than 30 days or a calendar month. The Comptroller of Property Tax will also be given the discretionary power to extend the period of 14 days within which a written notice of such vacancy has to be given to qualify for refund of property tax paid. Clauses 3 and 11 will provide for the situation arising from the increase in recent years in the number of multi-storey commercial projects, where parts of such buildings are brought into occupational use whilst work on upper floors still remains uncompleted. To avoid delay in the assessment and collection of tax on the occupied portions, it is proposed to permit the Chief Assessor to assess separately and include in the Valuation List each part of a partially completed building as it is used or let out. Consequentially, it is also proposed that the Comptroller of Property Tax be empowered to recover tax from the date of use of such part of a building. Clause 4 relates to the present practice in regard to an assessment under objection or appeal, which is to issue a notice of assessment for every ensuing year so long as the objection remains outstanding. This creates unnecessary work and, more often than not, confuses taxpayers as to whether their original objection would cover the assessment for the subsequent years. The amendment suggested in clause 4 will obviate the necessity of having to issue notices of assessment for ensuing years, unless it is intended to vary the original assessment. It is proposed that once an objection is determined, the decision thereof shall be made applicable to each year from the first assessment or reassessment. Clauses 5, 10, 12 and 17 deal with the situation under the Act at present, where owners of new properties do not have to pay tax when they object to the assessments of the Chief Assessor until a decision is reached by the Valuation Review Board. Some owners, therefore, resort to objections in order to delay payments. It is now proposed to require an owner to pay tax on the assessment of the Chief Assessor notwithstanding any appeal lodged; adjustments will be made as soon as the appeal against the assessment is resolved. For example, if the Chief Assessor assesses a new property at an annual value of $10,000 and the owner claims it to be $5,000 the tax will be collected, in the first instance, on the assessment of $10,000. Subsequently, if the Valuation Review Board determines the assessment at (say) $8,000, the overpayment of tax will be refunded forthwith, and the Board will be empowered to award at its discretion interest at 6 per cent per annum. If in the opinion of the Board an appeal is frivolous or vexatious, it may order an appellant to pay costs to the Board. The proposed amendments will discourage objections and appeals made to defer payment of tax and will relieve valuers from work on such appeals for more productive work. Where arrears of property tax are sought to be collected under section 19 of the Property Tax Act, disputes may arise and such questions are, at present, resolved by proceedings initiated by either party in the High Court. It is proposed by clauses 12, 15, 16 and 17 to empower the Valuation Review Board to hear and decide on disputed cases of back-collection of property tax. This will expedite the resolution of these disputes as well as the collection of tax arrears. Section 14 of the Act empowers the Chief Assessor to elicit information from the owner, lessee and occupier of any property for preparing or correcting the Valuation List. The amendment of this section, proposed in clause 7, will enable the Chief Assessor to obtain such particulars as may be required from other relevant sources, such as architects, developers, contractors and management corporations. By the new section 19 proposed in clause 11, the Comptroller of Property Tax is given similar powers but for the purpose of determining the tax payable. These proposals, it is hoped, will expedite assessment and reassessment of properties and collection of tax. Under section 16 of the Act, an owner who has not received a notice calling on him to pay within six months from 1st January, 1961, is required to notify the Chief Assessor within 14 days after the expiration of that period. The amendment proposed in clause 8 will require the owner to give notice of his charge-ability to tax, if he has not received a notice calling on him to pay tax in respect of his property within six months from the 1st day of January of each year. Section 17 (8) of the Act prescribes that whenever the rent of any property which is let is increased, the owner of such property shall give notice thereof to the Chief Assessor. However, some owners of properties do not report increase in the rentals on the pretext that the whole of the increase is attributable to furniture, fittings, service charges or maintenance fees, etc. In cases where an owner is in receipt of a premium paid by the tenant as a condition for the tenancy, and where an owner obtains planning permission for development or subdivision of land, there is presently no obligation to inform, the Chief Assessor. Accordingly, the amendment in clause 9 seeks to impose a clear obligation on the owners to inform the Chief Assessor as and when each such situation arises so that the Valuation List may be amended where appropriate. All these situations invariably give rise to an increased assessment. The new subsection to section 34 proposed in clause 19 provides that if any tax is not paid within the prescribed period, the Comptroller may in his discretion add thereto a sum not exceeding five per cent of the amount of the tax payable. Clause 20 introduces another section which allows payments of the tax by instalments with interest which shall not exceed ten per cent per annum. Clause 21 of the Bill seeks by an amendment to section 35 to give explicit powers to the Comptroller to execute the conveyance on properties sold pursuant to section 35 of the Act. It will not affect the application of section 123 of the Land Titles Act in relation to registered land. Without this amendment, the power to execute the conveyance of properties sold pursuant to section 35 has to be implied from the application of the provisions of sections 35 and 38 of the Act. The power under this amendment is also to apply to conveyances executed before the commencement of the Property Tax (Amendment) Act, 1973, as it is necessary to remove any possible doubt whatsoever as to the regularity or validity of the execution of past conveyances. Clause 22 amends section 59 of the Act to provide for maximum penalty for an offence under this Act, or any regulation made thereunder for which no penalty is expressly provided, to be increased from $500 to $1,000. Clause 23 introduces a new section to the Act by which the Comptroller may compound any offence under this Act by accepting the payment of a sum of money, and no further proceedings shall be taken against the person for the offence committed by him. There are at present no provisions in the Act for remission of property tax on the ground of poverty, or where it is just or equitable to do so. Under the provisions of the new section 59A, the Minister will be empowered to remit wholly or in part the tax payable by any person on the ground of poverty, or if he is satisfied that it is just and equitable to do so. The other amendments in the Bill are either consequential or are designed to tidy up procedural matters. Sir, I beg to move. Question proposed. 3.38 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I have only one comment to make on the Bill to amend the Property Tax Act, and that is, to welcome the token of compassion and generosity by the Minister in introducing clause 23 of the Bill, which proposes a new section 59B to the principal Act, whereby the Minister may grant property tax remission on the ground of poverty or if he is satisfied that it is just and equitable to do so. At first sight I thought it must have been a drafting error, as it seems patently ridiculous that any owner of real estate property in Singapore can justifiably apply for tax exemption or remission on the ground of poverty or any other equitable ground. But, on further consideration, the proposed provision turns out to meet a very real need. One situation I have in mind is that of a worker who has exhausted his CPF contributions by paying the initial instalment for his flat and eventually dies without fully paying for his flat and leaving perhaps a sum of money against his insurance policy, which sum may just be able to pay off the balance of instalments on the flat. It is conceivable that in such a situation, the widow as owner of the flat, and if she is not working, may have to ask for remission of estate duty until such time as she can make arrangements for alternative accommodation and selling off the flat. I do not know if the Minister has some other situation in mind. However, Sir, at the last sitting of this House on 11th July, a Question was asked as to whether the Minister could, in view of the greatly inflated prices of real estate property in Singapore, grant exemption or remission from estate duty in respect of a family whose sole breadwinner has died. The reply given by the Minister was that it would be difficult to draw a distinction between houses owned and occupied by such a family and a palatial mansion owned and occupied by the heirs of a wealthy deceased. In that respect, the introduction of the proposed section 59B into the Property Tax Act is heartening, as it seems to indicate that the Minister has second thoughts about the plight of a family of a deceased wage earner. If the principle underlying such a provision can be extended to the payment of estate duty by the family of a deceased, who was the sole principal wage earner and who left no sizable assets other than the house or flat occupied by the family, either by way of an outright remission of estate duty for so long as the house or flat is not sold by way of a deferment of tax for a stipulated number of years or until such time as the family could sell off the house or flat without being desperate, then the proposed section 59B could be rightly regarded as an example of equitable legislation. 3.44 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, clause 8 of the Bill requires a property owner to notify the Inland Revenue of his liability to pay tax if he has not received a notice calling on him to pay tax in respect of his property within six months from the 1st January of each year. Failure to do so is an offence and the offender may be punished with a fine not exceeding $1,000. Sir, in the implementation of this particular provision, I do hope that the department concerned will be flexible and reasonable in dealing with noncompliance by rural folks. I have in mind those people who at present enjoy concessionary rates at $6 per annum, as their houses are of timber and/or attap material. Perhaps on account of the very small sum involved, it has not been the practice of the department to send out notices to owners of such structures. Consequently, I have come across many cases where houseowners have not paid their taxes for many years, because at each visit to the department to inquire they are told to wait for notices to be sent to them. In most cases, of course, the notices never seem to arrive. Sir, these people are mainly working class people and they have very little time, apart from their own personal affairs, to look into the numerous items of taxes, fees, etc, which they have to pay in the course of any one year. It is therefore inevitable that such items could be overlooked. Take an average farmer in a rural area. He has the following items to pay: (1) Temporary Occupation Licence fee to the Land Office. (2) Property tax to the Inland Revenue. (3) Farmer's licence fee to the Primary Production Department. There are several types of licences depending on the scope and nature of his operations. (4) Radio and TV licence fee. (5) PUB bills. (6) Motor vehicle licence fee, if he happens to own a truck or a motorcycle. (7) Hawker's licence fee, if he happens to sell his own produce. (8) Telephone bill. Of course, not every one can afford a telephone, but an increasing number of people are installing telephones in their homes to avail themselves of such modern means of communication. Furthermore as he does not normally have a bank account, the payment of each of these items can involve considerable inconvenience and time, which is precious to him. I would therefore take this opportunity of enquiring from the Minister whether he would consider setting up a central collection agency which will be charged with the responsibility of collecting all types of fees and taxes receivable by Government departments and statutory bodies. If this can be introduced, I feel sure that it will benefit not only the rural folks but the majority of our population.

Sir, I do not have very much to add to what I have said. The Member for Telok Blangah has said that the Minister was compasssionate with regard to property tax but not estate duty. I would only like to remind him that there is already a limit of $25,000 within which poverty-stricken people would not have to pay estate duty. But it was for an extension of this generosity that the suggestion was made. In the case of property tax, it may be that an attap hut owner, as the Member for Jalan Kayu says, has to pay $6 a year and he may not even be able to pay that. We may be concerned with those cases when perhaps the Minister can exercise his compassion of which he has some supply, if not very much. The Member for Jalan Kayu also touched on the problem of non-compliance with notification to the Comptroller. If a notice for payment has not been received by the owner within six months, and if he does not report that he is chargeable to tax, that constitutes an offence. Again, we would have regard to the circumstances of the case, and if it is found that there is deliberate evasion of property tax, then the full force of this particular section in the Property Tax Act will be made to apply. Otherwise, at least in the initial stages, we will view with some consideration any non-compliance with the Act.

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 Hon Sui Sen]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed.

Order for Second Reading read. 3.50 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." Provision for the payment of salaries of the Chief Justice and Judges in Singapore is made in the Judges' Remuneration Act (Chapter 7 of the Revised Edition). As a consequence of Government's decision to revise the salaries of Senior and Superscale officers from 1st March, 1973, the salaries of the Chief Justice and Judges have also been correspondingly increased. The salary of the Chief Justice has been increased from $3,500 per month to $7,500 per month, that of the most senior of the Puisne Judges from $2,700 per month to $6,000 per month, and the salaries of other Puisne Judges from $2,700 per month to $5,500 per month. These revisions have been effected administratively. The purpose of this Bill is to give legal effect to the above revisions. Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move.

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 Hon Sui Sen]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed.

Order for Second Reading read. 3.53 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." The existing Business Names Act was enacted more than 30 years ago, in 1940, and is limited in objectives and coverage, imposing only the minimum of formalities, fees and sanctions, and requiring few returns to be submitted to the Registrar of Businesses. To keep pace with Singapore's development as a major commercial and financial centre, it is necessary that up-to-date and accurate information on business firms, which are rapidly increasing in number, be readily available. It is also necessary to revise, up-date and strengthen the law to prevent the perpetration of fraud. The Bill, therefore, seeks to repeal the Business Names Act and to replace it with the Business Registration Bill. The provisions of the Bill differ from those of the existing Act in several major aspects. Persons now exempt from registration under the existing law, notably those carrying on business under their own names and those carrying on business in premises, the annual value of which is less than $360, will have to be registered under the new Act. Registration will no longer be a onetime affair; instead clause 9 of the Bill proposes to make it mandatory for registration to be renewed annually. The Bill will also confer upon the Registrar of Businesses the power to refuse to register or to cancel the registration of a person: (i) where such particulars or information as may be requested by the Registrar are not supplied to him by the applicant (clause 9); (ii) where the name of the business is identical to or closely resembles that of an existing business, or if the name is undesirable (clause 11); (iii) where a person registered under the Act has ceased to carry on business (clause 13); or (iv) where the business carried on is unlawful (clause 30). Another major change appears in clause 19 which enables the Registrar to appoint inspectors for the purpose of ascertaining whether provisions of the Bill are being complied with. The Registrar and appointed inspectors are given powers at all reasonable times to enter premises believed to be used in the carrying on of an unregistered business. A penal provision to be applied to those who resist or obstruct the Registrar or inspectors in the performance of their duties is also contained in the clause. Clause 22 prohibits an undischarged bankrupt, without leave from the High Court and without notifying the Official Assignee, from direct or indirect participation in the management of a business. The other provisions in the Bill which differ from those of the existing Act are less fundamental. Generally, tougher penalties have been fixed for non-compliance with the requirements of the Act, while notice periods for the submission of information, applications and returns to the Registrar have been shortened. Thus, clause 5 requires that persons be registered before commencement of business. In the case of those already in business prior to the date of commencement of this proposed Act, application for registration must be made within 30 days of an appointed date. The penalty for non-compliance will be a $1,000-fine and/or six months' imprisonment. The carrying on of a business under an unregistered business name is prohibited under clause 10, and any person convicted under this clause will be liable to a $5,000-fine. Clause 12 deals with changes, making it mandatory for changes in particulars of a business to be recorded with the Registrar within 14 days. In clause 13 a person who has ceased to carry on business is required to notify the Registrar within one month (instead of three months) of cessation. The provisions in the clause empower the Registrar to cancel the registration of businesses that have ceased. The Register of particulars kept by the Registrar will no longer be open to the public for inspection. Instead copies of Certificates of Registration and other particulars can be obtained from the Registrar at a prescribed fee. Clause 23 lists the following as offences punishable by a $1,000-fine and/or six months' imprisonment: (i) The carrying on of a business without a Certificate of Registration or after expiry or cancellation of a Certificate of Registration; (ii) Failure to submit changes of particulars to the Registrar; (iii) Failure to comply with any summonses or requisitions of the Registrar; (iv) The making of statements which are false in any material particular or by reason of the omission of any material particular; (v) Failure to exhibit the Certificate of Registration or a valid copy of the Certificate in a conspicuous position in the principal place of business; and (vi) Failure to comply with any regulation made. Under the Bill, the Registrar will be given powers to compound offences by collecting a sum not exceeding $500 from the offender. It also provides that the Registrar and public officers may not be sued in respect of any errors or inaccuracies in the Register maintained. It is envisaged that these new provisions will bring about better administration of businesses, and see a more orderly development in this sector. With better control, the early detection of fraud would also be facilitated. Sir, I beg to move. Question proposed. 4.00 p.m.

(In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, although Singapore is a country without any rich natural resources, it is highly developed in commerce, industry and trade. Its population of more than two million depends entirely on its activities in commerce, trade and industry for its survival. Therefore, the laws relating to commerce, industry and trade should ensure that all activities concerning such matters are efficiently carried out. More important, they should seek to promote further development of such activities in order that the whole country and all its people can benefit even more. Mr Speaker, Sir, the introduction of this amendment Bill is a step in the right direction. It is a progressive piece of legislation, and ensures the proper control of business. This being the case, Sir, it is my hope that in implementing the provisions in this Bill, there should be simplification in the procedure as far as possible. For example, there is a provision in the Bill that business registration has to be renewed annually. In this respect, Sir, the procedure for renewal should be simplified as far as possible. It should be as simple as the renewal of television and radio licences. This is to ensure that minimum inconvenience is caused in respect of applications for renewal. There is another point to which I wish to draw the attention of the Minister. In the implementation of this Bill, what will be the position of non-residents and non-citizens? Mr Speaker, Sir, I support the Bill.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I do not think there is anything specific for me to answer the Member for Sembawang. He has asked about the position of non-residents and non-citizens. As far as the law is concerned, they are required to comply with the Act just like any other citizens or residents. As for simplification of the procedure for the renewal of registration, I hope that it will be as simple as can possibly be devised by my Ministry.

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 Hon Sui Sen]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed.

Order for Second Reading read. 4.04 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." The Statistics Bill seeks to amend and consolidate the law relating to statistics and to repeal the Statistics Act (Chapter 299 of the Revised Edition) which was enacted in 1921. Hon. Members may recall that a Commission of Inquiry on Statistical Activities in Singapore was appointed ort 23rd May, 1968, to review and recommend improvements to the existing Government machinery for the collection and compilation of statistics. The Commission of Inquiry submitted its report in July, 1969, which was accepted by the Government. The Inquiry Report recommended, amongst other things, the repeal of the existing Ordinance and the enactment of a new Act. Besides doing away with references and expressions in the legislation which have become obsolete with the passage of time, the new Act should also reflect the operation of the decentralised statistical system. The National Statistical Commission which was set up on 7th January, 1972, studied the Inquiry Commission's recommendations and the result is the present Statistics Bill, 1973. This Bill has two basic objectives. Firstly, it will provide the necessary legal authority to the decentralised statistical units for collection, preparation and publication of statistics. Secondly, and as recommended by the Inquiry Commission, the secrecy provisions will be amended to enable maximum use of compiled statistics. Under clause 3 of the Bill, authority is given to the Statistics Department, Research and Statistical Units of Ministries and the National Statistical Commission to collect, prepare and publish statistics relating to a wide range of subjects contained in the First Schedule. Authority is delegated to the Chief Statistician, Directors of Research and Statistical Units of Ministries and the Chairman of the National Statistical Commission to issue requisitions to any person to furnish particulars and supply information to them. Such requisitions would be in writing, and the legislation specifies the manner in which the requisitions should be served. The Schedule of subjects on which statistics may be collected has also been greatly extended to embrace subjects important to policy-making. This Bill also seeks, in clause 5, to amend the provisions on disclosure of information so that, without prejudice to the individual's interest, sufficiently detailed statistics can be made available for bona fide purposes, such as research and planning. The Inquiry Commission was of the view that present secrecy provisions were too restrictive so that available statistics are not put to the best possible use. It felt that the production of statistics per se would have little beneficial effect unless maximum utilisation is made of such statistical information. Under the present secrecy provisions, even general information such as addresses, products manufactured, or any other information which may be available from other sources cannot be disclosed by the collecting agency without previous consent of the affected individual. More important, it has not been possible to give as much detail as can be reasonably expected in published statistics. This is because the Chief Statistician has no powers to publish data where such data relates to a single individual or firm, lest it reveals its identities. In any developing economy, and typically one like Singapore, where frequently one company may constitute an industry, this tends to impair the comprehensiveness of statistical information. The interest of the individual will be safeguarded in that in any compilation of any report, summary or other communication to the public of information obtained under this Bill, they shall be arranged so as to prevent any identification of individuals except with the previous consent of those individual persons. Moreover, the Bill provides that the Minister should avoid disclosing trade secrets, trading profits or any other information, the disclosure of which is likely to prejudice the person furnishing the return. The Minister is also given the power to further impose restrictions on the disclosure of information should he think it necessary. The Bill departs from the present Act in that exceptions arc provided to the general rule on secrecy. These exceptions include compiled statistics on the operation of an industry which may be published, irrespective of the number of persons engaged in that industry, unless the industry is exempted by the Minister in charge. Information of a general nature, such as products manufactured, size of establishment, number of employees and addresses and any other information which could be obtained from other sources can also be disclosed. Information can also be disclosed where the individual person cannot he identified and an appropriate time has passed or if it is for the purposes of any proceedings for any offence under this Bill or any report of those proceedings. These exceptions, as provided in the Bill, are meant to maximise the use of statistics for research and analysis without prejudicing the interests of the individual. In repealing the Statistics Act, the Statistics Bill has also incorporated the necessary changes to the quantum of penalties to bring it in line with current money values. Provision is also made for the compounding of offences. Penalties are also provided for the impersonation of Statistical Officers. Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move.

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 Hon Sui Sen]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed.

Order for Second Reading read. 4.15 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." The Census Bill seeks to revise the law relating to taking a census in Singapore from time to time, and to repeal the Census Act (Chapter 297 of the Revised Edition) which was enacted in 1930. With rapid economic development, it is necessary to have more comprehensive and accurate information not only of the population, but of housing, agriculture, trade industry and other sectors of the economy. The present Ordinance enacted 43 years ago is now out of date, and the present Census Bill is meant to revise and update the law for census taking. This Bill will enable the Minister to direct that a census be taken on any of the subjects indicated in the Bill or any other matters as he may consider necessary or desirable. It may be, for example, necessary to have an agricultural census or a census on building and construction to provide better benchmark data and to update such data from time to time. The present Census Act only allows a population census to be taken. On the same basis as the Statistics Bill, provision is made in the Census Bill with regard to restrictions on the disclosure of census information. Secrecy will be safeguarded in that in any report or abstract of information obtained under the Act, the information shall be arranged so as to prevent any identification of individuals, except with the consent of that individual person. In addition, the Bill provides that the Minister shall avoid disclosing trade secrets, trading profits or any other information, the disclosure of which is likely to prejudice the person furnishing the return. However, exceptions are provided to the general rule on secrecy. These include compiled statistics on the operation of an industry which may be published irrespective of the number of persons engaged in that industry, unless the industry is exempted by the Minister in charge. Information of a general nature which could be obtained from other sources can also be disclosed. The exceptions also apply in cases where the individual person cannot be identified and an appropriate time has passed, or if disclosure is for the purpose of any proceedings for an offence under this Bill, or any report of these proceedings. The exceptions as provided are meant to maximise the use of statistics for research and analysis without prejudicing the interests of the individual. Penalties in regard to offences under the Act have also been increased in line with present money values and penalties for impersonation of a Census Officer are now spelt out in the Bill. The repealing of the Census Act by the enactment of the present Census Bill would go a long way towards tidying up the law to enable the taking of census and through this make available accurate and comprehensive information for planning and policy making. Sir, I beg to move.

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 Hon Sui Sen]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed.

Order for Second Reading read. 4.21 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." Sir, this Bill is the result of a change in policy by the Malaysian Government in regard to joint Malaysian and Singapore Government control of the industry in rubber and its packing and shipping for export purposes. The Malaysian Parliament has now passed an Act to set up the Malaysian Rubber Exchange and Licensing Board, which will replace the existing Malayan Rubber Export Registration Board (MRERB), the joint Malaysia/Singapore statutory body, and the Malayan Rubber Exchange. With the imminent dissolution of the MRERB, which has been regulating and improving the rubber industry, it is necessary that the functions of the MRERB continue to be performed here in Singapore. In addition to the MRERB, we have since 1967 established in Singapore one other body connected with the rubber trade. This is the Rubber Association of Singapore (RAS) which helps to control and promote the rubber trade, protecting the interests not only of the exporters, but also of the producers and consumers of natural rubber. It would seem appropriate, therefore, that the RAS should be asked to assume functions not unrelated to what it is already doing. The Bill which is now before the House accordingly seeks to repeal the Rubber Shipping and Packing Control Act which constituted the MRERB and to confer upon the RAS the functions now carried out by the MRERB. It also seeks to amend the Rubber Association of Singapore (Incorporation) Act (Chapter 200 of the Revised Edition) to enable the Association to perform these functions. Under the provisions of the Bill, the RAS will carry out the following functions: (a) Issuing of licences to rubber packers, shippers and manufacturers of technically specified rubber; (b) Ensuring the quality of rubber exported; and (c) Exercising disciplinary control on the natural rubber industry. I shall elaborate a little on these functions. When an application is made for a licence to pack or ship rubber for export, the RAS will grant the licence if, after consideration of the character and financial position of the applicant and the interest of the public, it is satisfied that the applicant is a fit and proper person to hold the licence. The RAS will prescribe the rules that must be followed before an applicant for a licence to manufacture technically specified rubber can be approved. Such rules will include testing and quality control procedures to be adopted by the manufacturer of technically specified rubber and the conditions upon which the licence is to be issued. Any person whose application for a licence is rejected may appeal to the Minister whose decision shall be final. To ensure that all rubbers including technically specified rubbers exported from Singapore are of the specified quality, the Bill provides the RAS with powers to inspect books, documents and rubbers and to cancel the licence if the holder has contravened any of the provisions of the Bill or any of the rules made thereunder. A person whose licence has been cancelled will have the right to appeal to the Tribunal of Appeal which shall be established under clause 11 of the Bill. The repeal of the Rubber Shipping and Packing Control Act will not prevent the existing registered shippers and packers of rubber for export from continuing operation until the date of expiry of their present licence. Moreover, any manufacturer of technically specified rubber will be allowed to continue with his manufacturing operation for two months from the date of coming into force of the Rubber Industry Act, during which time the manufacturer should apply for a licence under the new Act. This Bill also provides for the vesting in the RAS of all assets and property belonging to the MRERB and all the rights, obligations and liabilities of the MRERB will be assumed by the RAS. A great deal of effort has been put in by both Malaysia and Singapore traders to shift the rubber market from London and New York to this region. This Government can do no less than to help our traders consolidate the position of Singapore as a reliable market for quality rubber by enacting this Bill. I hope that both the markets in Kuala Lumpur and Singapore will continue to work closely and co-operate for their mutual benefit. Sir, I beg to move.

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 Hon Sui Sen]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed.

Order for Second Reading read. 4.29 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." The purpose of the Income Tax (Amendment) Bill is, firstly, to seek legislative authority for a number of tax concessions, many of which have previously been announced and, secondly, to tighten up certain of the existing provisions of the Act, which, in the light of experience since the Income Tax Act was last amended in 1969, appear to need improvement. I shall first deal with those amendments which represent tax concessions. Clauses 5 and 12 of the Bill stem directly from the Government's policy of developing Singapore into a regional financial centre. To sustain the rapid and robust growth of the Asian Dollar Market, it is considered that, in addition to liberalisation of foreign exchange regulations and exemption from income tax on interest paid to non-resident depositors of Asian Dollars, further concessions from income tax are desirable to create profitable outlets for the Asian Dollar Market. Clause 5 of the Bill provides exemption from income tax on the interest payable to non-resident holders of Asian Dollar Bonds issued in Singapore where such bonds have the prior approval of the Government. This exemption should help in the flotation of more international bond issues in Singapore. Clause 12 of the Bill provides a reduction from the income tax rate of 40 per cent to 10 per cent or other special rate on offshore income of banks or other institutions in Singapore making loans to overseas borrowers from their Asian Currency Units. Details of the kind of loans, and their appropriate rates of tax and other conditions will be specified in regulations made under this clause. In line with our policy of encouraging Singapore investment in Indonesia, profits repatriated to Singapore from approved projects in Indonesia have been exempted from income tax. The tax-free profits, however, presently become taxable when received by shareholders in the form of dividends. Clause 5 (f) seeks to allow such dividends to be distributed tax-free to shareholders. This "carry-through" provision will be consistent with the treatment of Singapore pioneer companies' profits. Dividends declared from these are tax-free in the hands of shareholders. The economic development of the Republic requires large amounts of capital to be borrowed for investment. Some of these borrowers are, for example, statutory boards and high skill and high technology industries in the private sector. At present, Singapore borrowers enjoy concessions in respect of income tax on interest payable to overseas lenders under the Economic Incentives Act and under Double Taxation Treaties which we have signed with many countries. The existing provisions may, however, be inadequate or may not be applicable in certain cases because we do not have Double Taxation Treaties with certain countries. It is intended, therefore, to make provision in the Income Tax Act to enable complete exemption to be given from tax on the interest payable to overseas lenders if the loans have the prior approval of the Government. Clause (5) (d) provides that such exemption from income tax on interest payable to overseas lenders will be considered where such a loan will promote economic or technological development of Singapore (in respect of the private sector or statutory boards) and in respect of all loans borrowed by the Government. I may add here that, generally, only for loans which are sizable, and where the interest rate and the repayments are favourable and the loans are made by bona fide financial institutions, will the full exemption be accorded under the provision of clause 5 (d). In view of Government's efforts to modernise and encourage the intensive form of farming in "flatted" farm buildings, clause 7 will extend depreciation allowances to such buildings used for rearing livestock and poultry. Clause 10 provides for a deduction of $1,000 or the full-earned income if this is less, in respect of earned income relief from the year of assessment 1st January, 1972; full deduction in respect of insurance premiums and provident fund contributions up to $4,000 by deleting the limitation of 1/6th of assessable income from the year of assessment 1973; and certain changes regarding allowances for maintaining children from the year of assessment 1st January, 1974, which are given in detail in the new Fifth Schedule to the Bill. I need not take the time of hon. Members by spelling out these changes as these have been announced previously in Parliament. The next category of amendments in the Bill seeks to cut some benefits which a minority of taxpayers have in each case enjoyed. The first such amendment concerns changes in the taxation of benefits in the form of free housing accommodation provided to directors and employees by companies. The present practice is to regard the value of such benefit as equivalent to the full annual value of the housing, if this annual value does not exceed 10 per cent of the taxpayer's emoluments. This practice needs to be changed in respect of rent controlled premises. It has been found that though the annual values of such rent controlled premises are already very low, some directors and employees receive even lower emoluments than the annual values of the houses, and pay very little income tax thereon, although they may be occupying very large and prestigious rent controlled premises. Clause 3 of the Bill, therefore, seeks to deem the full annual value of rent controlled premises provided to directors or employers by companies to be gains or profits of employment, and therefore subject to tax, if their remuneration is less than the annual value of premises provided. When the Income Tax Act was last amended in 1969, exemption from income tax was accorded for profits of Singapore registered ships. This was done to encourage more registration of ships in Singapore. The intention was to give income tax exemption to large sea-going ships only, but because the provisions are vague, passenger ferries, barges, fishing trawlers and tongkangs and miscellaneous local harbour craft have also been applying for exemption. Clause 6 will clearly restrict the exemption to Singapore sea-going ships. The Income Tax Act was amended to disallow carry-forward of losses on takeovers where a company with accumulated losses was bought purely for tax benefits. It is also proposed to bring into line with this amendment the carry-forward of depreciation allowances, which is also another source of tax manipulation. Clause 8 accordingly seeks to disallow carry-forward of depreciation allowances where the ownership of a company is changed substantially. Charitable organisations and charities in Singapore, unlike those in some countries, have hitherto been subject to very little scrutiny or supervision of their activities. These organisations and charities enjoy major concessions under the Income Tax Act, as they get full exemption from income tax on contributions of donors and on their own income. It would not be unreasonable, therefore, to require under the Income Tax Act that these organisations apply their tax exempt income solely for charitable purposes, that they do not engage in trade or business except in pursuance of their primary purpose, and that a reasonable part of their income is distributed every year. Clause 5 of the Bill provides that charitable organisations should distribute not less than 80 per cent of their income, unless it is otherwise agreed by the Comptroller of Income Tax which he will do if any reasonable grounds are presented why a lower proportion should be spent. To prevent one common abuse of its tax exemption status, any expenses which do not fall directly within the ambit of charity can be disallowed by the Income Tax department. As the proposed amendments will ensure that charitable organisations fulfil the objectives of their founders, I do not expect them to be other than generally welcomed. The Stock Exchange which witnessed a lot of speculative activity last year, also saw the emergence of "share option schemes". Such share option schemes allow directors and employees to take an option to buy shares in the company at often a nominal price. Clause 3 of the Income Tax Act will make it clear beyond doubt that gains or profits from share option schemes are liable to income tax. Clause 9 clarifies that income tax will be imposed on the profits made by a life insurance company on the sale of its investment. Such investment is an integral part of the day-to-day business of an insurance company. Clause 10 will disallow income tax deductions by individual taxpayers on life insurance premiums, unless the insurance company concerned has a branch or office in Singapore. This amendment is logical and equitable as the Insurance Commissioner has no authority over foreign insurance companies not operating in Singapore and such companies do not pay any tax in Singapore. The proposed amendment will not, however, affect existing policy holders who pay premiums to insurance companies overseas. The present rate of penalty for late payment of tax is 5 per cent interest on outstanding arrears of income tax payments. This rate is too low to induce some taxpayers to make early payments. Clause 14 provides that the penalty rate of interest of 5 per cent will be increased by 1 per cent for every month that the tax remains unpaid up to a maximum of 12 per cent. This amendment should prevent delinquent taxpayers from wilfully delaying their payments. I shall now deal with the last category of amendments which are intended to remove any vagueness in the existing provisions. Clause 4 seeks to make it clear that interest paid by a local borrower to a foreign lender and interest on a loan, the funds from which are brought into or used in Singapore, are taxable in Singapore irrespective of where the loan agreement is made. Clauses 5 and 11 seek to remove any doubt that non-resident directors are liable to a flat rate of 40 per cent tax, irrespective of the period of their presence in Singapore. Clause 2 seeks to define the residential status of individual taxpayers and companies because of the changeover to the preceding year basis of assessing income tax. The remaining amendments are consequential and procedural in nature. Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move. Question proposed. 4.42 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, speaking as one Member from a rural constituency, I am pleased to note that for once tax incentive is being introduced as a measure to encourage development in the agricultural sector. I have in mind clause 7 which provides for allowances for industrial buildings and structures to be granted in respect of multi-storey buildings used or intended to be used for the purposes of intensive pig and poultry production. Sir, in considering the practical effect of this particular provision, it occurs to me that the incentive provided may benefit only a handful of big timers with substantial financial resources behind them. In so far as the thousands of medium and small-sized farmers are concerned, the proposed incentive is to my mind quite meaningless. In the first place, how are they able to raise sufficient funds to purchase lands for development, not to mention the cost of construction at a time when prices of materials are so high? Sir, if the Government is genuine in its intention to encourage development of agriculture along modem lines, and I believe this to be the case, I suggest that the Government should give serious consideration to the provision of much needed organisational support and long term low interest loans to interested farmers on a group basis for the development of multi-storey farm houses. Perhaps a scheme similar to the house ownership scheme of the Housing and Development Board (we can call it "Farm Ownership Scheme") but with suitable adjustments to the repayment programme may be introduced. If the Government is prepared to undertake the task of organising and financing the scheme initially, I feel sure that the Farm Ownership Scheme is likely to succeed. For a start, the Government may wish to consider areas where farmers are scheduled for resettlement. Instead of the present system of compensation, those affected and are interested in continuing their farming business may be resettled in multi-storey farmhouses. By doing it on a collective basis, large savings can be made in infrastructure development which is becoming more costly in view of the need to adopt extensive antipollution measures, such as construction of septic tanks, drainage system and other sanitary amenities. Sir, at a time when a number of countries in the world arc suffering from a shortage of food, it is comforting to know that our agricultural sector continues to supply us with many essential items of food at reasonable prices. But for the contribution of our farmers, I am sure that our cost of living would have risen to a much higher level, as happened in many other countries which depend heavily on imports of food. With this in mind, Sir, I would urge the Minister, in consultation with the Minister for National Development, to give serious consideration to my suggestion so as to ensure that our agricultural sector will continue to make this meaningful contribution to our national economy.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I am indebted to the Member for Jalan Kayu for his valuable suggestions. As he has suggested, I will confer with the Minister for National Development to see whether or not any of his suggestions can be considered. I would, however, say that this provision in the Bill was intended really to apply to industrialised farming, which the future Singapore must get into, that is, to run the flatted factory farm in the way that an industry is run. I think this requires more skilled management than the individual farmer can provide, even on a collective basis. However, I do not think we can deal with the problems of agriculture while considering this particular Income Tax (Amendment) Bill, and the Member's suggestions therefore should be referred to and considered in other more appropriate areas.

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 Hon Sui Sen]. Bill considered in Committee.

4.49 p.m. Clauses 1 to 5 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 6 -

There is an amendment standing in the name of the Minister for Finance on the Order Paper Supplement, which is subject to the Speaker's consent and the general assent of hon. Members present for dispensation of notice under Standing Order 33. I give my consent, is it the pleasure of hon. Members that the amendment be moved? Hon. Members indicated assent.

Sir, I beg to move, In page 6, to leave out lines 31 to 35 inclusive and insert "income of a shipping enterprise" means the income derived by a shipping enterprise from the carriage (other than within the limits of the port of Singapore) of passengers, mails, livestock or goods by sea-going Singapore ships and includes the income from the charter of such ships;"". Sir, it was the intention of clause 6 of the Income Tax (Amendment) Bill to remove any doubt that under the existing provision of section 13 (a) of the Income Tax Act, the exemption from income tax to Singapore registered ships does not apply to harbour craft, such as passenger ferries, fishing boats, tongkangs, etc., which operate within the Port limits of Singapore. Unfortunately, clause 6 of the Bill, as drafted, could also be construed to exclude any Singapore sea-going ship which does not call at Singapore. The purpose of the exemption from income tax is to encourage registration of all sea-going ships registered in Singapore, irrespective of whether they call at Singapore or not. Therefore, it is proposed by the present amendment to reword the definition in clause 6 to make it clear that there would be no change in the exemption from income tax of seagoing Singapore registered ships, but not of vessels which are used only within the Port limits of Singapore. Amendment agreed to. Clause 6, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clauses 7 to 15 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 16 -

There is a note, In page 12, line 8, after "Gazette", to insert close inverted commas and a fullstop. This will be done. Clause 16 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Bill reported with an amendment; read a Third time and passed.

Order for Second Reading read. 4.53 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." The Bill which is now before the House seeks to establish the Singapore Institute of Standards and Industrial Research (or SISIR in short) as a statutory body. The Institute will take over from the Economic Development Board the latter's responsibilities in regard to the promotion of standardisation and the operation of a Certification Marking Scheme. The Bill will in addition give SISIR wider powers to establish and implement schemes that are necessary for the promotion of Singapore-made products. Presently, SISIR operates the Certification Marking Scheme for products and processes which conform to, the relevant Singapore standard or other international standards. This gives intending purchasers of a product an assurance by an independent body that the product conforms to the highest standards. Manufacturers join this scheme voluntarily. However, where Singapore's good name as a manufacturing nation may be affected because some manufacturers produce shoddy goods, SISIR is empowered, under the Bill, to make export inspection of certain types of goods compulsory. It is thus part of SISIR's function as a statutory body, to upgrade the technology in local industry and to ensure that the Made-in-Singapore label is synonymous with quality and reliability. SISIR's main functions as provided in the Bill may, therefore, be summarised as follows:-

Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise to speak in support of the Bill. If one looks at the functions and powers of the Institute, as stated in clause 15, one easily notices that nearly all the functions listed are those which the present SISIR already fulfils. Indeed SISIR has garnered extremely useful experience in the course of its operations, some of which are well worth listing: (a) SISIR has already received and discharged several commissions to seek ways to overcome certain production problems in a number of local or locally-based concerns; (b) SISIR has been in the forefront of the PQR movement, a side-benefit of which is SISIR's modest contribution to better labour/management relations; (c) SISIR has set standards for scores of industrial items, not just for the sake of devising standards, but related practically to quality control. SISIR's certification has also covered more than 200 products; (d) SISIR's work has been so successful that UNIDO (United Nations Industrial Development Organisation) has asked Singapore to host a seminar to show developing countries what can be done in the field of standardisation; (e) SISIR has run several courses on quality control. Now that our stage of industrialisation has reached a more sophisticated level, the services of SISIR will be more critical, and it is necessary for SISIR to be established as an independent authority. However, Mr Speaker, Sir, there are two specific criticisms which I would like to make in relation to this Bill. One is that while there is, and rightly so, repeated mention of the need to ensure the viability of our export drive through quality assurance where our local products are concerned, there does not seem to be much concern over the possibility of shoddy goods being imported, now that our policy is to remove tariffs and quotas in the case of several import items. Let me make it clear, Mr Speaker, Sir, that I do not support protection of weak and inefficient local industries. The lesson of quality must be driven home in no uncertain way where local industries are concerned. But the same standards of safety, health requirements and quality which we insist on our local products must be imposed on imports. Otherwise, our local industries will face unfair competition from cheap but shoddy imports, and consumers will witness the dumping of inferior goods from abroad. I therefore hope that amongst SISIR's tasks one will be the surveillance for quality of imported goods, especially those affecting local industries. Another point is the useful role that S1SIR can play in helping to tackle the problems of environmental control. Many factories are faced with the problem of seeing that adequate measures are taken in this direction. I am told that some commercial consultants in this field may be no more than salesmen of equipment. Industries, in trying to comply with environmental regulations, may be landed with equipment not necessarily suitable for local conditions. SISIR has a range of multi-disciplinary facilities that may be usefully directed towards tackling environmental problems. I hope that every encouragement will be given to seeking SISIR's consultancy services in this area of environmental control.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I appreciate the Member for Katong's general welcome to the Bill and his well-deserved praise for SISIR and its activities. I also welcome his suggestions, which I do not regard as criticisms, although he may term them as such. I will look into the matters which he has commented upon. However, it may well be that the question of shoddy and cheap imports is not so much a matter for SISIR as for some other body or some law governing imports and exports. But, nevertheless, I think his suggestions certainly have merit and deserve consideration. As for his suggestion to consult SISIR when dealing with environmental problems, I believe that SISIR is already doing considerable work in this regard, and that the Singapore Manufacturers' Association has been accustomed to seeking its advice. In regard to highly specialised problems - this may be something on which, like other general practitioners, SISIR may have to call upon specialist services elsewhere. But, in the first instance, I think the services which SISIR can render would be most helpful to our industries.

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 Hon Sui Sen]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed.

Order for Second Reading read. 5.06 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." This Bill seeks to repeal the two provisions in the Economic Development Board Act which confer powers on the Board to promote standardisation and to operate a Certification Marking Scheme, as these powers will now be transferred to the Singapore Institute of Standards and Industrial Research, which is to be constituted as a statutory body. Sir, I beg to move.

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 Hon Sui Sen]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed.

5.09 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move the motion* standing in my name as it appears on the Order Paper. * The motion reads as follows: `That this Parliament, pursuant to subsection (1) of section 106 of the Income Tax Act (Chapter 141), resolves that the First Schedule to the said Act be varied by inserting immediately after item 35 of paragraph A thereof the following statutory authorities, with effect from the date of the coming into operation of the Statutes of the Republic of Singapore (Miscellaneous Amendments) (No. 4) Act, 1973: - 36. Monetary Authority of Singapore (Cap.195). 37. Timber Export Industry (Cap.203). 38. Jurong Town Corporation (Cap.209). 39. Land Surveyors Board (Cap.216). 40. Professional Engineers Board (Cap.225). 41. Preservation of Monuments Board (Cap.315). 42. Science Centre Board (Cap.317). 43. National Statistical (No. 27 of 1971). 44. Telecommunication Authority of Singapore (No. 2 of 1972). 45. National Productivity Board (No. 11 of 1972). 46. Commercial and Industrial Security Corporation (No. 18 of 1972). 47. National Maritime Board (No. 21 of 1972). 48. Sentosa Development Corporation (Cap.22 of 1972). 49. Industrial Training Board (Cap.36 of 1972). Sir, in recent years a number of statutory bodies have included in their Statutes provisions to exempt them from income tax. The Statutes of the Republic of Singapore (Miscellaneous Amendments) (No. 4) Bill, 1973, just passed, has removed such provisions from the various Statutes of statutory bodies. The intention of my resolution is that these statutory bodies affected will continue to be exempted from income tax, hut the exemption will now be centralised under the First Schedule to the Income Tax Act. The opportunity is also taken to include five other statutory bodies, namely, the Timber Export Industry Board, the Land Surveyors Board, the Professional Engineers Board, the Commercial and Industrial Security Corporation and the Industrial Training Board, which have no income tax exemption provisions in their Statutes but which in accordance with the current policy should enjoy equal treatment with the other statutory bodies. Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move.

Question put, and agreed to. Resolved, That this Parliament, pursuant to sub section (1) of section 106 of the Income Tax Act (Chapter 141), resolves that the First Schedule to the said Act be varied by inserting immediately after item 35 of paragraph A thereof the following statutory authorities, with effect from the date of the coming into operation of the Statutes of the Republic of Singapore (Miscellaneous Amendments) (No. 4) Act, 1973:- 36. Monetary Authority of Singapore (Cap. 195). 37. Timber Export industry Board (Cap. 203). 38. Jurong Town Corporation (Cap. 209). 39. Land Surveyors Board (Cap. 216). 40. Professional Engineers Board (Cap. 225). 41. Preservation of Monuments Board (Cap. 315). 42. Science Centre Board (Cap. 317). 43. National Statistical Commission (No. 27 of 1971). 44. Telecommunication Authority of Singapore (No. 2 of 1972). 45. National Productivity Board (No. 11 of 1972). 46. Commercial and industrial Security Corporation (No. 18 of 1972). 47. National Maritime Board (No. 21 of 1972). 48. Sentosa Development Corporation (No. 22 of 1972). 49. Industrial Training Board (No. 36 of 1972).

Resolved, "That Parliament do now adjourn to a date to be fixed."-[Mr Hon Sui Sen]. Adjourned accordingly at Twelve minutes past Five o'clock p.m. to a date to be fixed.