Hansard, 1973-12-18

Under the provisions of clause 2 (d) of Article 30 of the Constitution of Singapore, I have granted permission to the following Members to be or to remain absent from sittings of Parliament (or any Committee of Parliament to which they have been appointed) for the periods stated: Dr Augustine H. H. Tan (Whampoa) - from 9th to 18th December. 1973. Mr Jek Yeun Thong (Queenstown), Minister for Culture - from 10th to 20th December, 1973. Mr N. Govindasamy (Telok Blangah) - from 11th to 26th December, 1973. Mr Ng Kah Ting (Punggol) - from 15th to 21st December, 1973. Dr Toh Chin Chye (Rochore), Minister for Science and Technology - from 17th to 30th December, 1973. Mr Lee Kuan Yew (Tanjong Pagar), Prime Minister - on 18th December, 1973. Encik Sha'ari Bin Tadin (Kampung Chai Chee), Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Culture- from 20th December, 1973 to 30th January, 1974. YEOH GHIM SENG Speaker Parliament of Singapore

The following Bills were assented to by the President of the Republic of Singapore on the dates stated: 6th December, 1973 Financial Procedure (Amendment) Bill. 8th December, 1973 Control of Essential Supplies Bill. YEOH GHIM SENG Speaker Parliament of Singapore

asked the Minister for Labour how many applications from work permit holders to marry Singapore citizens have been approved, and how many applications have been rejected and for what reasons.

Mr Speaker, Sir, hon. Members may permit me to recall the rationale for the implementation of the policy in July this year requiring work permit holders to obtain the approval of the Commissioner for Employment before contracting marriage with Singapore citizens. Singapore's high rate of economic growth and the resultant tight labour situation in recent years have led to the adoption of a liberal policy in the issue of work permits. There is at present a large number of such work permit holders, many of whom are in the younger age group, working in Singapore. For these young workers, it is natural for them to mix freely in our society, making friends, marrying, settling down and raising families in Singapore. A healthy infusion of a vigorous and hardworking people can result from this, provided they are industrious and have acquired the necessary skills. These qualities are essential if the young work permit holders are to be integrated successfully into the society of Singapore. The policy requiring work permit holders to obtain the approval of the Commissioner for Employment was implemented to discourage young workers on work permit from contracting early marriages until they have shown that they are able to settle down successfully in Singapore and to support a small family. Unless a work permit holder has adjusted to the different and faster pace of life in Singapore's highly disciplined and urbanised society, marriage between a work permit holder and a Singapore citizen can lead to difficulties for themselves and for Singapore. In processing applications for marriages, consideration must therefore be given to these factors. As at 30th November, 1973, the Commissioner for Employment has approved a total of 702 such applications. 792 others were rejected because the work permit holders were unskilled and working in Singapore for too short a period prior to application. In this connection, hon. Members may wish to note that no approval is required in marriages between work permit holders where Singapore citizenship or permanent residence in Singapore is not acquired nor desired. Furthermore, applications from work permit holders who are skilled or who have more than five years' continuous employment in Singapore will be favourably considered.

(In Mandarin): Sir, can the Minister say whether applications will be approved for those work permit holders who want to give up their work permits and who want to marry local citizens?

Sir, the answer is "No".

Mr Speaker, Sir, a Malaysian girl applied for a work permit, but it was not approved. A Singapore citizen wants to marry this girl, but the application was rejected. Can the Minister give reasons why the application for marriage was not approved?

Sir, if the Member can submit that case to me, I will certainly look into it. I would also like to ask him whether the girl's intention of coming to Singapore is to work or to get married.

Sir, she wants to get married in Singapore.

In that case, she should not have applied for a work permit.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I fully agree with the Minister for introducing this regulation. But I would like to ask him why has the regulation been made retroactive. When the regulation came into force on 1st July, 1973, those people who had already contracted to marry before that date, applied to the Commissioner for Employment for approval, but their applications were rejected. I want to know what is the justification for making the regulation retroactive.

Mr Speaker, Sir, as far as I am aware, I have not rejected any of those cases where the applicants have made arrangements to get married, i.e, if they have made bookings of restaurants, and if they have spent money on furniture and all sorts of things connected with the proposed marriages.

Sir, I have even come across a case where the girl is already pregnant.

Sir, that shows a lack of discipline on the part of the couple. If the couple can show to the Commissioner for Employment that they have already made the necessary arrangements, I think favourable consideration may be given.

Sir, never mind the discipline. Everybody makes mistakes. The fact is that this couple had contracted to marry before 1st July, 1973. And when this regulation came into force, all those who wanted to marry foreigners had to get the approval of the Commissioner for Employment. So the couple went to the Registry of Marriages and the Registrar referred them to the Commissioner for Employment, who turned it down without finding out whether the contract was made before or after the 1st of July, 1973. This is the point I am making: How can, the Minister make his regulations retroactive?

Sir, if the Member can submit his case to me, I will look into it. If the whole intention is to beat the deadline by submitting an application for marriage even though there was no intention originally, then I think we have to think twice before giving approval.

Sir, this is not the fault of the people who want to beat the deadline because the announcement was made earlier than the effective date of the regulation. Naturally, those who had already contracted to marry wanted to apply before 1st July, 1973. Therefore, since they applied before 1st July, I just want to know why the Minister turned them down.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the Member for Bras Basah kept on repeating that the couple has contracted to marry before the date. As I have said, if the couple has already contracted to marry before 1st July, then approval will be given. I have not rejected any such case.

asked the Minister for Law and National Development if he will give details of the occupation licences, rentals and other conditions for premises in the proposed multi-storey building for pig-rearing at the Sembawang Field Station.

Mr Speaker, Sir, a piece of State land at Bah Soon Pah Road to the north of the Primary Production Department's Sembawang Field Experimental Station has been set aside for pig farming. The land has been sub-divided into eight lots of about five acres each. These lots will be let out to interested pig farmers on a 30-year lease at an annual rent of about $1,600 per acre, which amounts to about six per cent of the freehold value of the land at about 60 cents per square foot. It will be a condition of the lease that the development of the land must be completed within two years from the date of possession of the site. Lessees are expected to employ modern intensive farming techniques, and preference will be given to those who make use of multi-storey structures and efficient methods of waste disposal. The Primary Production Department will soon be inviting applications, and further details will then be supplied to interested applicants.

asked the Minister for Law and National Development how the Housing and Development Board intends to solve the overcrowding problem of car population in the existing housing estates of the Board and, in particular, the problem of the current overspill of car parking on to public roads caused by the Board's recent introduction of the paid-parking system in Toa Payoh New Town.

Mr Speaker, Sir, in recent years, the car ownership population in existing Housing Board estates has increased due to increasing affluence. However, it is not feasible for the Housing and Development Board to cater for the parking needs of every car owner who lives in a Housing Board flat. To alleviate the situation, paid parking of cars has been introduced progressively in Housing Board estates. This should ensure more orderly and systematic parking of cars and prevent misuse of the car parks. The parking fees in Toa Payoh New Town at 20 cents per hour, or for season tickets at $15 per month day-and-night, are reasonable and not beyond the means of car owners. Car parking will not be allowed to overspill on to public roads. Car ownership may eventually require proof of a car parking space either in a parking lot or private garage. Meanwhile the Housing and Development Board, in conjunction with the Traffic Police, is looking into the problem of overspilling and to get these cars off the public roads on to parking lots.

Mr Speaker, Sir, in view of the apparent inadequate parking facilities in certain areas in Toa Payoh, will the Minister be prepared to ask the Housing Board to consider allowing season parking ticket holders as well as short term period ticket holders to park within Toa Payoh Town itself, rather than restricting them to certain parking lots only? The Housing Board should also prohibit lorries, trailers and buses from parking in the various car parks in Toa Payoh. I am sure this restriction will, to some extent, relieve the parking problems in Toa Payoh New Town as a whole.

Consideration will certainly be given to the suggestion of the Member for Toa Payoh. But I think I have to repeat what I said earlier on, and that is basically the car ownership population has increased considerably and the Board cannot cater for the parking needs of every car owner.

Sir, I thank the Minister for the answer. Obviously, the planning assumptions in the existing Housing and Development Board estates on which the car parking provisions were based have been outstripped by the rapid growth of car ownership. There is insufficient car parking space -

Mr Ong, are you asking a supplementary question, or are you proposing a vote of thanks to the Minister?

Sir, I am coming to my question. The overspill problem that I mentioned earlier on is due to the insufficient number of parking spaces provided by the Housing and Development Board in their estates, based on these wrong planning assumptions. This problem is also partly due at the very outset to the lack of planning and control on the allocation of parking spaces in HDB estates. Therefore, I am wondering if the Minister would in future take into account the car ownership when making allocations for Housing Board flats.

By that, does the Member mean that if a person owns a car he is entitled to a Housing Board flat?

No, Sir,If the Housing Board is providing, say, only 200 car parking spaces for every three blocks of flats and allocation of flats is made without consideration of car ownership, then when the people move in with a total of, say, 400 cars, obviously there is going to be an over-spill problem.

If what the Member means is that the Housing Board must supply or build a car park for every car owner, then I say he has got his priorities wrong. The job of the Housing Board is really to build houses for the people. It cannot at the same time build one car park for every house it builds. That is the short answer. The houses take priority. Some people say that "if you live in a Housing Board flat, you should not own a motor car!"

Sir, this over-spilling is really a hindsight wisdom! But my question is: will the Housing Board in future take into consideration the provision of sufficient car parking space for the Housing Board tenants?

Again, the answer is not a question of bad planning in the past. There has never been any bad planning. If the planning is such that every Housing Board flat owner deserves a car park, then I say it is bad planning. But the planning has not gone that way. Due to rising affluence, the Board is trying its best to provide more car parks, as suggested by the Member for Bras Basah. Obviously, the Board cannot build one car park for every occupier of a flat, whether owner or tenant.

Sir, will the Minister consider allocating parking spaces for those who require to use vehicles for their livelihood? I agree with the Minister that the Housing Board cannot build car parks for flat owners who possess cars, but I think that those who are required to use vehicles for their livelihood deserve consideration.

I can put the Member's suggestion to the Board. But many people require the use of cars or vehicles - some for business and some to go to work. So where do we go from there. It is a question of priority. If someone uses his mini-bus or lorry for business, is he entitled to priority? If he says "yes", another Member says, "Throw the lorry out."

asked the Minister for Finance (a) if be is aware that after the lifting of import duty on certain goods, those goods are still being sold at high prices, and if he intends to look into the matter; and (b) on how many kinds of goods has import duty been lifted since 1st January, 1973; what has been the loss in revenue; and what has been the benefit to consumers.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I propose to answer the Member's questions in reverse order. Since January this year, the import duties on 151 items have been lifted. These are mainly food items, building and construction materials, household goods and other consumer products. The Government will lose approximately $19.6 million annually in revenue. The consumers, on the other hand, should benefit both in terms of lower prices in some of the imported commodities and a greater variety and regularity of supplies. In other cases, where the duties have been mainly protective in nature, the prices of goods of local manufacture could also, because of possible competition from imports, be significantly lowered to the benefit of consumers. In theory, the prices of imported goods should be cheaper at least to the extent of the duties which have been removed. In practice, importers who have paid duty on existing stocks and do not face immediate competition from other importers may not be willing to reduce prices immediately. I would expect importers, however, in their own enlightened self-interest, to reduce prices on new stocks which are no longer subject to duty. The Department of Trade is keeping a close watch on the prices of goods on which duties have been lifted, and if the prices are not reduced the importers will be required to explain why. Importers, who are competing against local manufacturers and have not been importing in the past because of the duty, may need some time to establish fresh links with overseas suppliers. When such links have been established, the Government expects that prices in Singapore will at least be comparable to international prices. It is heartening to note that prices of some of the imported items which are no more subject to import duties have gone down by 10 to 30 per cent, but in other cases the prices have remained high or even increased because of the world wide shortage and increasing cost of production.

2.55 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to introduce a Bill intituled "An Act to make temporary provision for the imposition of restrictions on the supply, distribution and use of petroleum and electricity." Bill read the First time.

Second Reading, what day?

Now, Sir. Certificate of Urgency signed by the President in respect of the Bill, laid upon the Table by the Minister. Typed copies of the Bill distributed to Members.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." With all the gloomy reading in the news these days, Members of the House will need no reminder of the grave situation facing many countries, including Singapore, as a result of the reduction in oil production by Middle East producing countries. While we must all hope that international discussions in the near future will lead to some alleviation of the situation, it would be foolhardy to assume that there will be any early resumption of the normal supplies of petroleum products to consuming countries. Many countries in the world have already begun to introduce compulsory measures to conserve all energy resources. Singapore itself has started a Save Energy Campaign, with active participation by the public, the Public Utilities Board and all the oil companies. But while there has been a useful drop of electricity consumption since the start of the campaign, we have not achieved anything like the 12 to 13 per cent savings required by the present level of restriction in petroleum supplies. We must expect this level to go progressively higher in the coming months. It is clearly unlikely that voluntary restraints alone would be effective in cutting down the often unnecessary consumption of energy to the desired extent. Compulsory measures must therefore be considered. The Government already has certain powers under various Acts enacted by Parliament. The Control of Essential Supplies Act, 1973, approved by this House at its last sitting, gives powers for control of the domestic sale, including possibly rationing, of essential commodities but it is not entirely suitable for the control of petroleum and electricity consumption. Under the Petroleum Act also, action can be taken against hoarders of petroleum. Under the Public Utilities Board Act, measures to restrict the use of electricity can be imposed. And under the Road Traffic Act, prohibition on the use of public roads can be introduced. But these Acts will have to be amended if, as announced in Government's press statement sometime ago, compulsory measures to conserve energy have to be implemented and heavy deterrent penalties imposed, such as the suspension of driving licences and the cancellation of vehicle licences. It is desirable, therefore, that all the necessary measures to cope with the current situation be provided under a single Bill and not by amendments to several existing Acts. The Bill now before the House will provide the Government with the necessary powers to restrict the supply, distribution and use of petroleum and electricity. It also provides for the imposition of severe penalties for the prohibited use of cars or hoarding of petrol or the excessive use of electricity. Penalties include the cancellation of vehicle and driving licences and the cutting off or reduction of electricity supplies to premises. Offences may be compounded however, in appropriate cases, for a sum not exceeding $500. The public need have no fear that the wide powers under the Bill will be permanent. The sweeping measures contained therein are intended for use only during the current energy crisis, and it is therefore provided that the Act will be in force for an initial period of one year only. It can, however, be extended for one year at a time if the situation so demands. Sir, I beg to move. Question proposed. 3.00 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, today, we have to consider this emergency Bill. We have no choice but to accept it if we want to avoid the dark days ahead. At this time last year, we did not anticipate that an energy crisis would occur and would affect many developing countries. We were making tremendous progress both in our social and economic fields. But now, because of this energy crisis, our economic growth for the coming years is going to be bleak. This Bill appears to be drastic as restrictions are provided for the use of petroleum and electricity. However, looking at the world's supply of oil, it is apparent that the supply of oil will never meet the demand of the consumers even if the producing countries were to increase their exports in later years. I wonder whether the Minister has any plans to obtain alternative sources, like building a tidal barrage in the sea to generate electricity, or to utilise gaseous vapours as substitutes for petroleum for our daily requirements. Statistics have shown that our major oil users are as follows: electricity 45 per cent; transport 38 per cent; industry 14 per cent and domestic heating 3 per cent. Our main users are electricity and transport, while the industrial sector only utilises 14 per cent. We must be careful not to restrict the industrial sector too much or else our economy will be greatly hit. However, the implementation of the law should be carried out carefully. We should not be penny-wise and pound foolish, because there may be avenues where a small percentage of oil and electricity may be saved but in terms of production we may lose heavily. On the other hand, there may also be areas where electricity and petroleum are heavily used, but the profits are nominal. Whilst implementing the Act, consideration should also be given to the safety of our shift workers in the factories and industries who may have to go to work in blacked-out streets. In this regard more security personnel should be provided in those blacked-out streets. Sir, I support this Bill.

Mr Speaker, Sir, in view of the importance of conserving fuel and the need to cut down the consumption of electricity, it appears to me that the Government is not setting a positive lead. Take this Chamber, for instance. Do we need to light up these two chandeliers? Why has this Chamber always got to be kept cold at this temperature? And I think there must be a great number of Government offices air-conditioned to a pretty low temperature. We should set an example. These two chandeliers are merely for ornamental purposes. There are also other areas where electricity can be saved. Why should our television programmes still go on to 12 midnight? Cannot we cut them short to 10.00 p.m.?

Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to join this debate by making a particular appeal to a special sector in our society. It is perhaps unfortunate that this Bill has to be passed in this Chamber. But it serves to emphasise the gravity of the crisis in the world at the moment. While there is no cause for panic, Sir, I think there is need for many of us to tune in to the disorders of the day resulting from this international oil crisis and grasp their meaning in so far as they relate to us. Many of us have benefited from a bouyant economy in recent years which resulted from investment and industrial activity in the State. With affluence and additional income, people sought to gain higher standards of living and, in fact, gained them. In transport, the scooter, the motorcycle, the car, has been bought. In home convenience and comfort, the electric oven, the washing machine, the vacuum cleaner, the air cooler or air-conditioning plant, has been bought. Additional lighting for sophisticated effects has been installed, complete with solid state stereophonic system. A high standard of living means a high consumption of fuel and electrical power. It is imperative that our industries do not drag and it is also imperative that the entire industrial infrastructure supporting our economy is fed with sufficient energy in order that it operates smoothly. In order to help ensure this situation, Sir, those of us who have benefited from the economy and become high fuel and energy consumers as a result of being able to afford cars, energy-consuming appliances, comfort devices and amusement gadgetry, should be the first to restrain ourselves in our daily manner and tempo of living. Not only does the Government accept this but I think I may say that the greater number of the less well-off people expect such self-imposed restraints from those who can afford to bear such restraints. We are a compact nation and should easily jell around a slogan for survival to achieve the necessary measure of social discipline in the face of national threats or difficulties. I think here lies a strength peculiar to ourselves with which we can withstand hardships falling upon us from time to time. Our experience has shown that collectively we can respond and discipline to national difficulties. We have done so in regard to the 1971 anticipated recession, the Employment Act, National Service and flat-dwelling in urban conditions. And we have responded to these difficulties satisfactorily. We need but to retain in us a sober and rational approach to national problems, and if we are prepared to transcend beyond self-interest, we should be able to contain the difficulties ahead of us.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I just want to say a few words to balance any impression that may have been perhaps unwittingly conveyed by the hon. Member for Jalan Kayu. I agree with him entirely that Government should take a lead in setting the example of saving electricity, and that this should start with the various Ministries, Government offices, statutory boards, and so on. But where Parliament is concerned, I would like to correct the impression that perhaps this institution is not setting an example. If anybody were to come here on a non-sitting day, he will have to grope his way through dark passages and feel the presence of a musty odour affecting him wherever he goes, because all the lights and the air-conditioning are turned off. In this case, Mr Speaker, Sir, I think you are also at a disadvantage because the air-conditioning here is turned on for one hour only a day and you have to work in these musty conditions. I say this, Sir, just to correct any wrong impression that may have been conveyed to the public by reference to this Parliament.

Sir, I would like to ask the Minister a few questions. To what extent are we dependent on the Middle East for our oil supplies, and what efforts have been made by the Government to look for alternative sources of supply? The next question is: Has the Government sought the co-operation of the Malaysian Government for such alternative sources of supply?

Mr Speaker, Sir, I am much obliged to all the Members of this House who have spoken and given us their views on the conservation of energy. It is very necessary that all of us pay attention to the requirements for saving which will be necessary in the coming months. I am therefore gratified that this particular Bill has attracted so much comment in the House. With regard to the various questions which have been asked, I think one which has received the attention of more than one Member is the question of whether we can have alternative energy sources and whether we can formulate any plans for replacing petroleum as the energy source. The answer to this is, in the short-term, "No" because - and this is in answer to another question - the main sources of oil supplies come from the Middle East. Of course, there are some supplies from nearer Singapore, but the amount is relatively small, and the proportion of energy which comes from oil is also very high. The amount that we can get from wood or charcoal is really quite negligible. In the long term, of course, it would be to Singapore's advantage to try and diversify our sources of supply and I have no doubt that this is a matter to which we ought to give some attention. The Public Utilities Board and my Ministry have, between them, set up a committee to study the feasibility of setting up a nuclear power station. This will to some extent help us lessen our dependence on oil as the source of energy for Singapore. There is also a possibility that coal may be used and may be fired in the boilers for the power station. But this is a matter which, I have no doubt again, my Ministry and the Public Utilities Board will give some attention in the future. With regard to the various comments on the need for ensuring that Government, including Parliament, should take the lead in the possibilities of reducing electricity consumption, I should like to say that it is really necessary that the business of Singapore should be carried on and I would suggest that the business of Parliament in the passing of this Bill is as important as any other activity in trying to reduce electricity consumption in Singapore. But I quite agree with the Member for Jalan Kayu and other Members that it is very necessary that we should always be on the look-out for ways and means of saving electricity, for example, raising the temperature of rooms cooled by air-conditioning and thereby saving electricity. I also agree with the Member for Serangoon Gardens that with our very high standards of living and perhaps a very lavish use of energy, which is a manifestation of our standard of living, we can all afford to make some sacrifice against our high standards of living. This is, in fact, the position in many other very developed countries in the world to-day. I also concur with him that in a cohesive and homogeneous society like Singapore's, we ought to be able to co-ordinate our efforts in the campaign to save a lot more energy. I think I have answered all the questions, except perhaps those raised by the Member for Toa Payoh. I think his first question was, "What is our dependence on the Middle East?" I have answered that we are almost wholly dependent on the Middle East oil for our sources of energy. What alternatives have we got? It is possible, of course, that the sources nearer Singapore, i.e. Indonesia and Malaysia, may be available. I think suggestions had already been made by ASEAN countries that additional supplies of oil should perhaps be made available first to ASEAIN countries. But in regard to his question as to whether we have approached the Malaysian Government, the answer is no. I do not think the Malaysian Government at the moment has any additional supply of oil to spare. If they do have, I shall have no difficulties in making an approach to that Government.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I would just like to tender my apologies to you and your staff for my hasty remarks, and to thank the Member for Katong for putting me right.

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.

Clauses 1 to 6 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 7 -

Sir, I beg to move, In page 5, line 35, to leave out "for" and insert "from". This is a typographical error. Amendment agreed to. Clause 7, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clauses 8 to 13 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill. Bill reported with an 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." Sir, various measures need to be taken to curb speculation in land and to keep prices of houses for our citizens within reasonable limits. Quite apart from the continuing need to acquire more land for housing as well as for other public projects, it will also be necessary to acquire properties left undeveloped by owners who are obviously speculating in land - land which the public interest dictates should be better utilized. Sir, the Land Acquisition (Amendment) Bill before this House provides specifically for the following basic changes in the existing law relating to the compulsory acquisition of land: -

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. 3.33 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." The Timber Export Industry Board was established in 1968 under the provisions of the Timber Export Industry Board (Incorporation) Act, 1966, as a joint Singapore-West Malaysian Board. It had ten members, three from Singapore and seven from West Malaysia. These members were drawn from representatives of the Government and the timber industry from both sides of the Causeway. During its existence, the Board did good work in promoting, regulating and improving the timber export industry in both countries. It was always self-financing through cess collection on exports of sawn timber and logs and the Singapore Office of the Board has till today a substantial amount of liquid assets. This position has now changed to the extent that the Malaysian Government on its own initiative has decided to have a separate Timber Board for the timber industry of Malaysia only. Consequent upon this decision, the Malaysian Government repealed the Malaysian Timber Export Industry Board (Incorporation) Act, 1966, thus dissolving the joint Board. A new Malaysian Timber Industry Board (Incorporation) Act, 1973, was passed and came into force with effect from 1st June, 1973. So far as the Singapore industry is concerned, it is encouraging to note the large and increasing exports of sawn timber. The f.o.b, value of this timber, both graded and ungraded, rose from $67.9 million in 1968 to $132.8 million in 1972, an increase of 95 per cent during the last four years. Owing to an unprecedented demand and consequent high prices for this commodity, our exports for the first six months of this year for sawn timber topped $140.5 million - more than the value of our 1972 exports. In view of the importance of the timber industry and its major contribution to our external trade, it is considered that it should continue to be controlled and regulated by a statutory body as in the case of the rubber industry. It will therefore be necessary for Singapore to establish its own Timber Industry Board. Under the existing Timber Export Industry Board (Incorporation) Act, 1966, the now defunct joint Board was responsible only for problems and operations affecting the export of sawn timber and logs only. It is proposed, however, under the present Timber Industry Board (Incorporation) Bill, that the functions of the new Board will be extended to cover all matters pertaining to the timber industry, which include not only logs and sawn timber but also veneer, plywood, wood mouldings and other wood products. The Bill provides for the establishment of a Timber Industry Board which shall consist of a Chairman, a Deputy Chairman and eight members to be appointed by the Minister. Of the eight members, four will represent the Government and four the timber industry. There will be one representative each from the Singapore Sawmillers' Association, The Singapore Plywood and Veneer Manufacturers' Association, the Singapore Timber Exporters' Association and the Singapore Manufacturers' Association. The Bill will also provide for the establishment of "The Timber Industry Board Fund of Singapore". Income for this Fund will come mainly from cess collections levied on the export of sawn timber and logs. It is not proposed to vary the existing rate of 55 cents per cubic metre for sawn timber and 45 cents per cubic metre for logs. The new Board will have, as its share from the joint Board, liquid assets of $1.45 million. There will be no change as far as staff matters are concerned except that the present Assistant Secretary of the joint Board will be renamed the Executive Secretary of the new Board. This Bill also provides for the new Board to make rules and regulations to govern its day-to-day functions and to submit its Annual Report and Accounts to Parliament. Sir, I beg to move. Question proposed. 3.39 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the Timber Industry Board (Incorporation) Bill is a timely measure, being much more comprehensive in scope than the Timber Export Industry Board (Incorporation) Act which is now to be repealed. A fundamental defect of the existing legislation is that it confines itself, as the Minister has just said, to the regulation of timber export. The proposed legislation, I am happy to note, has done away with the impractical distinction of regulating timber for export and ignoring timber for local consumption. All timber sold, processed or manufactured in Singapore, whether for export or local use, are henceforth to come within the purview of the proposed Bill. Similarly, the registration of timber exporters, graders, suppliers, packers or manufacturers - that is, everyone who has anything to do with the timber trade or industry in Singapore - provides a firm basis for the proper control of the timber trade or industry. My only regret is that, under clause 4 of the Bill, the proposed Board seems to be constituted of the representatives of the Government and the timber exporters, suppliers, packers or manufacturers. The Second Schedule to the Bill lists out the four recognised associations for the purpose of clause 5 of the Bill. Nowhere in the Bill has any reference been made to the representation of the interest of the timber graders in the proposed Board. As it would not be practical for the proposed Board itself to employ all the timber graders required in the timber industry in Singapore, most of the graders would be and are, in fact, in the service of the timber exporters, suppliers, packers or manufacturers themselves. As such, the timber graders represent a vital group of persons in the timber industry who can make positive contributions towards the further improvement and rationalisation of the timber industry. But at the same time they also constitute a body of persons who are extremely vulnerable to any conflict that may arise between the interest of their employers and the objective of the proposed Board. Many timber graders are members of a trade union affiliated to the National Trades Union Congress for their own protection. Under the Bill it appears that whatever scant trade union recognition or protection the timber graders may presently have would not be given expression to in the proposed Board. Mr Speaker, Sir, I hope the hon. Minister for Finance would be able to give an assurance that a member would be appointed under clause 4 (1) (a) of the Bill to represent the timber graders indirectly through the NTUC or, alternatively, since there are provisions for five members to be appointed under clause 4 (1) (b), to list the NTUC as the fifth recognised association in the Second Schedule to the Bill. 3.43 p.m.

(In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I am happy to note that important changes have been made by this Bill which, among other things, repeals the existing legislation. I would like to speak on the question of timber grading in Singapore. In the past, as the Minister has mentioned, timber grading was based on the criteria set down in Malaysia. Sources of timber for Singapore are diversified. We cannot solely depend on Malaysia for our timber supply. In fact, over the past few months we have imported timber from Indonesia and other sources. Sir, some sawmillers have made representations to me that timber and logs from Malaysia and Indonesia have different criteria for grading. As a result, if our local timber graders are to grade the timber from Indonesia according to the criteria laid down in Malaysia, there will be difficulties. In fact, difficulties have been faced, and I hope the Minister will take note of this.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I note and welcome the Member for Toa Payoh's support for this Bill. With regard to his comment on representation, I will consider whether timber graders should also be represented on the Board. As he has pointed out, there is provision for adding to the number of representatives, and it may be that, after investigation, there is reason also to appoint a representative of timber graders on the Board. With regard to the Member for Bukit Panjang, I noted his suggestion about timber grading and the fact that it is based on Malaysian timber. I will take note of his suggestion for the future operations of the Board.

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.

3.46 p.m. Clauses 1 to 3 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 4 -

Sir, I beg to move, In page 3, line 21, to leave out "five" and insert "tour". The word "five" is a drafting error. The intention is to appoint at present only four representatives to the Timber Industry Board, as shown in the Second Schedule to the Bill. Amendment agreed to. Clause 4, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clauses 5 to 40 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 41

Sir, I beg to move, In page 17, after line 21, to insert - "(4) The Board's auditor may at any time report to the Minister through the Board upon any matter arising out of the performance of his audit.". Sir, this amendment is being inserted at the suggestion of the Auditor-General. While there appears to be nothing in the present Bill to prevent the Board's auditor from reporting to the Minister through the Board upon any matter arising out of the performance of his audit, I am advised that the amendment will strengthen the hands of the Board's auditor and give him positive encouragement to report to the Minister. Amendment agreed to. Clause 41, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clauses 42 to 54 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill. First and Second Schedules ordered to stand part of the Bill. Bill reported with amendments; read a Third time and passed.

3.50 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move the motion* standing in my name as it appears on the Order Paper. * The motion read as follows: `That this Parliament in accordance with section 4 of the Foreshores Act (Chapter 270) approves the reclamation by Government of those portions of the foreshore and seabed around Pulau Seraya, Pulau Seburus Luar and Pulau Seburus Dalam containing a total area of approximately 386 acres as shown coloured green on the plan marked "LAND OFFICE RECLAMATION PLAN NO. 11173", which is deposited in the Land Office, Singapore.' Sir, it is proposed to reclaim the foreshore around Pulau Seraya, Pulau Seburus Luar and Pulau Seburus Dalam, thereby amalgamating these three small islands with deep water frontage, into one large island to provide sites in the most economic manner for petrochemical companies wishing to set up operations in Singapore. The development will not only create a comprehensive oil refining and petro-chemical complex in the Southern Islands but will also provide the Jurong Town Corporation and the Port of Singapore Authority with a suitable dumping ground for surplus dredged materials from the Corporation's port extension projects as well as the Port of Singapore Authority's projects, including dredging of nearby navigation channels. The proposed reclamation will cover an area of approximately 386 acres of the foreshore, as shown coloured green on the plan marked as "LAND OFFICE RECLAMATION PLAN NO. 11/73", a copy of which is displayed in the Library of this House for the information of Members. The reclamation cost of $26 million will be borne by the Jurong Town Corporation which will undertake the development as agents of the Government. On completion of works, the reclaimed land will be proclaimed as State land and alienated to the Corporation on terms and conditions to be agreed with the Commissioner of Lands. The reclamation proposal at Pulau Seraya, however, necessitates the acquisition of approximately 33 acres of the private land therein. Compulsory acquisition proceedings are being taken. Clearance of those affected will be undertaken by the Resettlement Department in accordance with its present policy. The 350 inhabitants, including 34 Temporary Occupation Licence holders required to be cleared from the island, will be resettled by the Jurong Town Corporation in the Corporation's flats. The Corporation will also arrange for the clearance of the mosque which is on a Temporary Occupation Licence, the Government primary school and the community centre on the island. Sir, I beg to move.

Question put, and agreed to. Resolved, That this Parliament in accordance with section 4 of the Foreshores Act (Chapter 270) approves the reclamation by Government of those portions of the foreshore and seabed around Pulau Seraya, Pulau Seburus Luar and Pulau Seburus Dalam containing a total area of approximately 386 acres as shown coloured green on the plan marked "LAND OFFICE RECLAMATION PLAN NO. 11/73", which is deposited in the Land Office, Singapore.

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

asked the Minister for Health and Home Affairs if he will state the number of road accidents which occurred along Yio Chu Kang Road and the number of persons injured and killed in those accidents in each of the years 1971 and 1972 and from 1st January, 1973, up to the latest convenient date.

The information is as follows: - 1971 1972 1973 1st Jan- 31st Oct (a) No, of road accidents which occurred along 361 524 473 Yio Chu Kang Road (b) No, of persons injured in the accidents 108 220 142 mentioned in (a) above (c) No, of persons killed in the accidents 4 3 5 mentioned in (a) above The Traffic Police recognise that Yio Chu Kang Road is an accident-prone area and are stepping up mobile squad patrols along that road. They will also be approaching the URSC to upgrade the lighting along the road. There are plans in hand to widen parts of Yio Chu Kang Road in 1974 and the Traffic Police have urged the PWD to give priority to this. There are also plans to resite some of the bus-stops along Yio Chu Kang Road.

The following Bills were assented to by the President of the Republic of Singapore on the dates stated: 22nd December, 1973 Restrictions on the Supply, Distribution and Use of Petroleum and Electricity Bill. 25th January, 1974 (i) Parliamentary Elections (Amendment) Bill; (ii) Prohibition on Smoking in Certain Places (Amendment) Bill; (iii) Supreme Court of Judicature (Amendment) Bill; (iv) Building Control Bill; (v) Immigration (Amendment) Bill; (vi) Arms Offences Bill; (vii) Penal Code (Amendment) Bill; (viii) Corrosive and Explosive Substances and Offensive Weapons (Amendment) Bill; and (ix) Timber Industry Board (Incorporation) Bill. 28th January, 1974 (i) Urban Redevelopment Authority Bill; and (ii) Land Acquisition (Amendment) Bill.