Hansard, 1976-03-17

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

Head N (cont.) -- Resumption of Debate on Question [16th March, 1976]. * "That the sum to be allocated for Head N be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead AGA 1111." - [Mr Chin Harn Tong]. * The same amendment also stood in the name of Mr Sia Khoon Seong. Question again proposed.

Mr Chin had the floor yesterday when he was interrupted at the Moment of Interruption. Mr Chin, will you please resume.

Mr Speaker, Sir, at the end of yesterday's session, I was commenting on the need to avoid unnecessary duplication of work in the Industrial Relations Division, with particular reference to the Preventive Mediation Labour Assessment Section and the Conciliation Section. As it is, I am given to understand that the Preventive Mediation Labour Assessment Section will, for instance, at the request of an employer, try its best to prevent an outbreak of dispute between the employer and his workers. If the attempt at prevention fails and a dispute takes place, the Preventive Mediation Section hands over the case to the Conciliation Section. To me, it seems more logical that the Preventive Mediation Section should continue with the handling of the case until its conclusion one way or the other. Under the existing arrangement, the relevant officer in the Conciliation Section will have to spend more time briefing himself as to what was done by the Preventive Mediation Section. I think that is a needless waste of time. I hope the Ministry can make some arrangement to ensure that the Preventive Mediation Section can also do the work of the Conciliation Section and vice versa. Then there is the section captioned as the "NON-UNIONISED WORKERS SECTION." The superficial impression thereby created on the public is that the Ministry conscientiously looks after the welfare of workers not represented by trade unions. But I have been given to understand that the officers in that Section are not too enthusiastic in their work. Recently a few workers who went to that section, with a view to invoking the Minister's power of reinstatement under section 14 of the Employment Act, found themselves being made to wait for more than two hours before they were attended to. I am not happy with the staffing of the Non-unionised Workers Section. I am given to understand that the officers of the Section are certified interpreters. Undoubtedly, these interpreters are competent to advise non-unionised workers on their nights under the Employment Act, as they have been and are probably still attached to the Labour Court which enforces the provisions of the Employment Act. But among the workers who seek the assistance of the Non-unionised Workers Section, there are some who require advice and assistance on their rights under some other statutory enactments such as the Industrial Relations Act. My concern is whether the officers manning the Non-unionised Workers Section have the relevant experience and training to give the wide range of advice and assistance they are called upon to give on behalf of the Ministry. It is all very well to promise about highpowered personnel overseeing the conduct of the industrial relations by the Ministry. But if little or insufficient attention is paid to both the professional and the human aspects of the Ministry's performance of its services to the public, the promise regarding the Industrial Relations Division becomes rather hollow.

I am not speaking, Sir.

Sir, I do not know whether Members could recollect what the Member for Aljunied said last night, but I hope that my reply will throw light on it. The Industrial Relations Division reorganised last year comprises three sections: the Conciliation Section, the Preventive Mediation and Labour Assessment Section, and the Registry of Trade Unions. The Conciliation Section comprises two units, one for disputes involving unionised workers and the other for disputes involving non-unionised workers. The Registry of Trade Unions retains its old title as an integral section of the Industrial Relations Division. The Preventive Mediation and Labour Assessment Section is a new one. Despite the unsettling effect of the global recession and the resultant spate of retrenchments, there were only 1 8 minor work stoppages and seven strikes in 1975 as compared to 28 minor work stoppages and 10 strikes in 1974. The number of man-days lost in the strikes was 4,853 in 1975 as against 5.380 in 1974. Seen against the 709 labour dispute cases involving 92,339 unionised employees dealt with by the Industrial Relations Division, Members will agree that the number of industrial stoppages in 1975 is insignificantly small. This is primarily because most of these disputes were amicably settled through conciliation by the officers of the Industrial Relations Division. Only in 51 cases did the parties fail to reach agreement through conciliation, and the unresolved issues were referred to the Industrial Arbitration Count. For the whole year of 1975 the Division also handled 1,191 dispute cases involving 3,437 non-unionised workers. Of these, 1 .079 cases were settled resulting in obtaining a total sum of $202,473 for the workers. The maintenance of industrial peace and stability in 1975 as in previous years was in large measure due to the good sense and reasonableness displayed by both management and trade unions and the hard work put in by the staff of the Industrial Relations Division. The Ministry is determined to improve and upgrade the competence and skill of the officers in the Industrial Relations Division. One of the objectives in reorganising the Division is to ensure that the staff are given an all-round training in the various aspects of industrial relations work. In this connection, the experienced staff in the former Industrial Relations Section are being retained to provide continuity, while new Administrative Officers are being trained in conciliation and mediation work. The initial training of these new officers in the Division consists of orientation, briefing and learning at first hand from actual conciliation proceedings. They are subsequently given close guidance and supervision in their duties. I am sure the Member for Aljunied, being a trained industrial relations man himself, will agree that in conciliation and mediation work no amount of formal training can substitute for on-the-job training. It takes time for a new officer to acquire the necessary specialist knowledge in order to become the skilful negotiator. mediator or assessment officer. It also takes time for the new officer to earn the confidence and respect of both managers and trade union leaders. The Member for Aljunied may wish to know that the Ministry is looking into the possibility of re-establishing a departmental service to deal with industrial relations and labour matters: provided, of course, that with such a service the Ministry can build up a corps of trained and experienced industrial relations and labour officers. With regard to the other matters raised, I would like to clarify the function of the Preventive Mediation Section. Briefly, the work involved would be to deal with brewing industrial problems, that is, problems of day-to-day relations which could escalate into serious labour disputes, and follow-up action in the form of advice to management on dispute cases which are known to have been caused by inadequate grievance procedure, poor management-worker communication and personnel mismanagement. In addition the Section also deals with alleged victimisation and wrongful dismissal cases as well as complaints of alleged unjustified retrenchment. Since the officers of the Preventive Mediation and Labour Assessment Section also come under the Industrial Relations Division, it has been possible for the assignment of work to be kept flexible and in no instance has there been any duplication of work between these two sections. The Preventive Mediation Section has consistently handled a case until its conclusion and has not handed any case to the Conciliation Section. Accordingly, when an impending dispute is handled by an officer in the Preventive Mediation Section, he will follow through the case until the dispute is resolved, even in the event that the dispute does escalate into industrial action. With regard to the Non-Unionised Workers' Section, the labelling is simply for the convenience of workers who visit the Ministry with their problems, so that they would know where to go and to whom they should present their problems in the first instance. It must be pointed out that the staff in this Unit are competent to advise unionised workers as well as those who are not unionised. There are in this Unit one post of Administrative Assistant, four posts of Executive Officers and four posts of Certificated Interpreters who together cover all Chinese dialects, in addition to Tamil and Malay. The Member also mentioned the case of a few workers who, seeking reinstatement, had to wait for hours before they were attended to. This is most unfortunate. If the Member were to give me more details, the case could be looked into. 2.45 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, in view of the explanation given by the Minister of State for Labour, although not entirely satisfactory, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head N be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead AlA 1109*. * The same amendment also stood in the name of Mr P. Govindaswamy. Industrial accidents resulting in death or permanent disabilities to workmen have occurred too frequently in our island Republic in the last few years of our industrial expansion. It is a sad fact of life that the victims of such accidents invariably come from the low income group. It is not difficult to imagine the heart pangs and anguish such tragedies bring to the families of such victims and themselves, if they escape death only to become permanent cripples. Added to these are the mental agonies and anxieties regarding the future of their families. The plight of the families of such victims not only deserves our compassion and sympathy but also constantly reminds us of the need for accident prevention in workplaces through adequate occupational health and safety measures. This is a matter of paramount importance and concern for the Government, the employers and the trade unions in their common pursuit of workers' welfare and security. Surely some of these accidents could have been prevented if greater care had been exercised by all concerned in safety measures. Sad to say, some employers, particularly those who are contractors, are just not treating their workers as human beings. It is made to appear to them that the life of their workers is no more sacred than the life of a dog. They are more concerned with the raking of profits, of more and more profits. More safety measures mean cutting down the margin of their profits. Unfortunately, this nonchalant attitude towards the sacredness of life of the workers as shown by some of the unscrupulous employers is also prevalent among a handful of senior civil servants in change of economic planning and development. They are very conscious of financial cost factor in any economic activity. Occupational and safety measures are only to be maintained at their absolute minimum level to save cost. To them the human cost is less important because, according to them, the human price we must pay for economic development is unavoidable, little realising that the economic losses due to accidents can be higher than the amount spent on additional safety measures. Such economic losses are in the form of workmen's compensation, medical costs, loss in productivity, etc. It is all the more important that both the Labour Ministry and the NTUC must relentlessly pursue occupational health and safety programmes to curb unnecessary deaths and maiming. It is heartening to note that this is being done. I must compliment the Senior Parliamentary Secretary (Labour) for his fearless attacks against employers, both in the public and private sectors, for not taking adequate safety measures to protect workers at their workplaces. In December 1975 regulations were introduced by the Labour Ministry to govern the effective running of Joint Safety Committees. This year on 1st March regulations governing safety officers were introduced. Equally important is the need for the Ministry of Labour to draw up programmes to ensure safer working environment to complement the new regulations that were recently introduced. I hope the 1975 statistics relating to industrial accidents is prompting the Ministry to initiate not only self-regulatory systems but also more scientific and systematic programmes to develop early warning methods of anticipating and preventing occurrences of accidents.

Mr Speaker, Sir, in the Memorandum on the Budget Estimates I observe that there has been an increase of 10 posts in the Factory Inspectorate for the purpose of setting up a new Shipbuilding and Repairing Inspections Section. In the past, I spoke a great deal about safety consciousness in the factories, construction sites and the number of avoidable accidents that took place daily at these places. I like to commend, of course, the increase in the number of posts for the Shipbuilding and Repairing Inspections Section. What about having more inspectors for the factories and construction sites? Too many accidents happen at these places. Whatever has been reported to the Police or the Labour Ministry may only be a fraction compared to the real number of accidents which go unreported, Regular inspections of factories for safety measures, particularly construction sites, or violation of safety rules would help to reduce the number of accidents on human lives. Sometimes a commission of inquiry has to be set up, such as the one on the recent accident at the construction site of the Singapore Maritime Centre. In addition to this, the Factory lnspectorate should also hold regular campaigns and exhibitions in connection with safety measures so that the workers would be constantly reminded of the safety rules to be followed. Otherwise, we may continue `to lose valuable labour.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I must thank the Member for Moulmein for his personal compliment given me. But I feel that my staff who have spent so much time and effort in this should be congratulated for controlling industrial accidents in Singapore. May I at the outset take this opportunity to clarify one or two points. There has been some misconception about the term "industrial accidents". Various figures were quoted in the press from time to time. In fact, "industrial accident" means those accidents reportable under the Factories Act only, and not all other forms of accidents involved during employment which I will broadly classify as "occupational accidents". Industrial accident is not that serious as one would imagine if one were to compare the figures with the number of occupational accidents. In fact, there had been occupational accidents in Singapore ever since Sir Stamford Raffles set foot on Singapore soil. I do not know whether any accident occurred during his landing. Sir, I am pleased to note that the NTUC has strengthened the Occupational Health and Safety Committee. This will indeed be a strong arm which can assist the Ministry to combat the common problem of industrial accidents. Unfortunately, the NTUC and the Ministry of Labour happen to be the orlly two organised bodies that are really tackling the problem. There seems to be an absence of a similar form of organisation on the part of employers, although much lip-service has been paid by employers all this while. The Member for Moulmein is quite correct in stating that in the construction industry the accident rate is high. I am afraid I have to agree with him, much to the dismay of the irresponsible employers. But what the Member has said is completely true: that a human being is not given the value that some employers would give to their dogs. The contractors have no excuse at all for failing to provide the various paraphernalia for industrial safety, because the cost of all these items are included in their tender quotations: these are what is known as the "Preliminaries" item. It is also augmented by another item - "prime cost" - a sum of money set for the provision of industrial safety appliances and equipment. Most employers, as the Member has pointed out, regard the provision of money spent on safety measures as non-productive expenses rather than as a kind of long-term investment for better returns. The Member for Moulmein touched on the question of loss of productivity, the loss involved in compensation and the loss of production time and cost. This is a very real problem but unfortunately most employers do not appreciate this point. Let me give a few figures to illustrate what the Member for Moulmein was trying to impress upon this House. Some figures were quoted by my Minister of State earlier on but may I repeat them for purposes of comparison. In 1973 the number of man-days lost due to industrial action was 2.

295. During the same year the number of man-days lost in industrial accidents was 549,499. The following year. 1974, the number of man-days lost due to industrial stoppages was 5.

380. For the same period, the number of man-days lost due to industrial accidents was 6 16.

559. In 1975, the number of man-days lost due to industrial stoppages was 4.

853. The number of man-days lost due to industrial accidents in 1975 is not available but I can safely put it at plus/minus 700,000. So Hon. Members can see the vast difference between the two figures and the total loss to the economy as a whole. Of course, the individual factory suffering one accident may not see the pinch of this loss but we cannot afford, as a whole, to lose nearly - million man-days per year simply because of industrial accidents. We have been doing very well in the industrial accidents front and for this my Ministry has been activated to have some work-plans for this year. The work-plans have been set out to work to a certain target, but I am afraid we do have our handicaps, in terms of staffing, for example. I will handle this point when I reply to the Member for Anson. As I have said earlier on, the Member for Anson is probably aware that the two most accident prone industrial areas happen to be the shipbuilding and repair and the construction industries. It is because of all the experience that we have had in the past that we have set up a special unit to look after the construction industry. This unit has been in operation for several years now and it also has its own set of regulations. Regarding the increase of 10 posts to establish the new Shipbuilding and Repairing Inspections Section. in fact, the bodies are already there though not in full establishment. They have been there for the last one year by Establishment Warrant and the Estimates only reflect the action of the Ministry in requesting for the staff. We have assigned them to look after the Shipbuilding and Repairing Inspections Section. The present establishment in the Factory Inspectorate comprises 52 posts of factory inspectors and other technical staff and field officers. Of these, 16 of them are in the Building and Construction Section, and 11 in the Shipbuilding and Repairing Inspections Section. The present staff strength of the Inspectorate is adequate only to carry out enforcement if we are to do only enforcement. But I do not believe at all that any unimaginative and strait-jacket enforcement is going to help the situation. Members are aware that the Factory Inspectorate is also involved in other aspects of work. It not only updates factory legislation, it is also involved in training. education, safety programmes, campaigns and providing consultation service. So you can see, Sir, if the Factory Inspectorate staff, as I said earlier, were to confine themselves to enforcement, I think they ought to be adequate. But since they have to take on the additional responsibility that I have just mentioned, they have to stretch their staff very thin. In fact, I must compliment them in that in spite of the great volume of work they have done exceptionally well. 3.00 p.m. The Member for Anson has also mentioned that many accidents were not reported. May I explain here that not all accidents are reported, or reportable, to the Chief Inspector of Factories. Only an accident which incapacitates a worker for more than three days is classified as a reportable accident under the Factories Act. Some accidents might have come to the knowledge of the Member for Anson. But I am afraid there is no legal requirement for employers to report all accidents to the Factory Inspectorate. Of course, they are still entitled to workmen's compensation. But not all accidents are reported. In the last two years we have improved our system of reporting. There is now a more effective system of monitoring accidents. I would say that most of the accidents which occurred are within the knowledge of the Factory Inspectorate. I agree with the Member for Anson that regular inspections of factories, industrial establishments, and worksites would certainly help to check accidents. In fact, in 1 975 the Factory Inspectors made a total of 7,118 inspections, and follow-up visits to the factories and work-places. As a result of these inspections. 5,538 cases of noncompliance with the Factories Act were detected and the employers were required to rectify the safety hazards. In addition, normal punitive action was taken against offending employers in court. Regular safety campaigns, as proposed by the Member for Anson, have also been conducted. For instance, the Member might know of the "Shipbuilding", "Construction" and "Safety and Health" Campaigns were launched in 1974. There were also other campaigns launched by the Ministry for a particular industry to highlight the problems peculiar to that industry. They were not general campaigns which the people concerned would find very little interest. The Ministry of Labour has also published a number of pamphlets and guides. Pamphlets such as the "Do you know" series to educate the workers on various hazards like explosion, fire, and health pamphlets to prevent noise-induced deafness and silicosis were distributed. The Ministry also sent out safety circulars to all the construction sites informing contractors of the latest discovery in safety hazards which some contractors may not have any knowledge of. We have also sent out safety guides, set up committees to look after peculiar problems of certain industries. I hope that with the cooperation of the employers, and I really appeal to them to be more positive, we should be able to do very much more to promote industrial health and safety. I look forward to a more solid support from the NTUC, and I take this opportunity to thank them for the help given to the Ministry of Labour all these years.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I would also like to join in congratulating the Ministry of Labour for its success over the last two years in reducing the number of industrial accidents and taking all the necessary measures for our workers' safety. Last year work at a number of building construction sites was stopped by the Ministry of Labour because of the occurrence of fatal accidents. I should say that this is most welcome. But, on the other hand, when work at the worksites stopped to enable all the precautionary measures to be taken, the workers lost their daily wages. Will the Ministry of Labour consider that, in future, when action is being taken against the employers and there is a complete stoppage of work at any worksite, whether the workers will continue to be paid?

Mr Speaker, Sir, I am afraid my answer will disappoint the Member for Boon Teck. Our philosophy is not to pay a person for no work done. There is a shortage of construction workers. The employers normally plead with the Ministry to allow their workers to resume work, otherwise they will run away to other worksites or even adjacent worksites. I do not think the workers really suffer because there is a shortage of construction workers. It is not the policy of the Ministry to pay workers for no work done.

Mr Speaker, Sir, when the Ministry directs a stoppage of construction work at the worksites, it is to ensure that all precautionary measures are taken by the employers. The workers should, therefore, not be penalised as a result of this action. It is different from other stoppages of work such as industrial action. The employers should be punished, and if the Ministry of Labour makes the employers pay for the daily wages, they will definitely try to take every precautionary measure to make sure that work can be resumed immediately.

Mr Speaker, Sir, it is very unfortunate that in more than half of the industrial accident cases the workers themselves were responsible. It is very difficult for our enforcement officers to lay hands on them. I must also take this opportunity to caution the workers that the Ministry would not hesitate to take whatever action necessary to bring them in line with our requirements. Most of the time we managed to catch hold of the employers because we could locate them but not the workers. If the NTUC can do their part by exhorting the workers to be more safety conscious, there would be no further need for any stoppage of work at all. There are three aspects to safety. First, there is legislation. Second, the physical environment, that is. the provision of safety appliances and supervision which are the responsibility of the employers, and third, which is the most important, the behavioral aspect. If the employers are not keen to supervise their workers, the workers would not be keen to comply with the safety requirements. So in the end stoppage of work will not save the workers at all. As I have said, more than half of the accidents were actually due to the carelessness and even blatant defiance of safety rules on the part of the workers. They should consider themselves lucky that we have not brought them to court. More of them should be.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I am happy to note that the Ministry of Labour has done so much and so well in the field of workers' safety. I have just a little question to ask the Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Labour. He has said just now that the Ministry of Labour has printed many pamphlets for distribution to the workers in respect of safety. I recall that two days ago in this very Chamber he complained about the high rate of illiteracy in Singapore. I am just wondering how he can get the workers to read the pamphlets?

There was no complaint on my part of illiteracy or the poor standard of literacy. On one occasion I did propose in jest to the former Minister for Education (I cannot remember which Minister because there have been so many changes) that they should call themselves the "Ministry of Literacy" and let the Ministry of Culture undertake the educational aspect. But the Ministry of Culture appears to be equally unacceptable to me to play this role. There is no question of the workers being unable to read the pamphlets which have been written in the simplest form. I do not think we can simplify it any further.

In Hokkien then.

Well, Hokkien is not a written language. Hokkien can be romanised but it might become a Frankenstein of a language.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise to support the request of the Member for Boon Teck. I am not at all impressed with the reply given by the Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Labour. The Member for Boon Teck said that where there is a failure to provide adequate safety measures leading to work stoppage and where the fault lies with the employers, then the workers should not be penalised. This is the point which I would like to emphasise: if it was the fault of the workers that the work had stopped, then it is surely reasonable and fair that the workers should be deprived of their pay. But if, on the other hand, it is the failure of the employers to provide the necessary safety measures, then I believe the Ministry of Labour should ensure that the employers be made to comply with the safety regulations by providing precautionary measures, and for any number of days in which work had stopped the employers should be made to pay the workers, because the workers are not responsible for the provision of these safety measures but the employers. I would like to have his considered reply once again, and if it is not satisfactory we shall pursue it further.

Mr Speaker. Sir, the Senior Parliamentary Secretary has mentioned that the workers are mainly responsible for accidents due to their negligence, carelessness, etc. May I correct him and say that from the Ministry of Labour's statistics it is due to a lack of knowledge. It was precisely for this reason that regulations were introduced with effect from 1st December, 1975, for safety committees to be set up to ensure that employers take cognisance of the fact that a lack of knowledge exists and that members of the safety committees should be educated to enable them to know more about safety. In addition, there should be provision for the adequate education of the workers at the factory floor level. I would also add that the employers too lack knowledge on occupational health and safety. I feel that this is of paramount importance for Government to stress. I do not know what plans are afoot, but I believe that the 77 personnel in the Factory Inspectorate will not be sufficient to go around enforcing legislation. Time and time again I have made the point that we will need an army of inspectors for the more than 5,000 factories in Singapore. Therefore, self-regulatory measures should be introduced in addition to the creation of enthusiasm, and education, which is covered by the Factories Act and enforcement. These self-regulatory measures will ensure that these accidents are not controlled, as the Senior Parliamentary Secretary has said just now, but limited and reduced. Extra stress should be made to ensure that joint safety committees work effectively. The Minutes of these safety committees and recommendations should be looked into by the Ministry of Labour from time to time to ensure that employers as well as workers are making progress where occupational health and safety is concerned. Total loss control, safety-sampling and hazard spotting exercises too ought to be carried out as part and parcel of the responsibility of joint safety committees. 3.15 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I fully support the views given by the Members for Boon Teck and Kim Seng. I strongly feel that if stoppage of work is the result of the employers neglecting proper safety measures and regulations, it is high time that the Ministry of Labour took serious action against them. And for God's sake, make them pay the workers for such negligence. The general impression of the public, especially the workers, is that it seems the Labour Ministry is very sympathetic towards the employers. Let us do something for the workers.

Sir, when I made my comments on this topic, it was intended more to stir up a hornets' nest among certain groups of the employers. But I did not quite realise that these comments could stir up a hornets' nest in this House, resulting in a lot of contributions. On the point mentioned by the Senior Parliamentary Secretary over the need for workers to be conscious of safety measures and so forth. I think that is accepted by the NTUC. But unfortunately many of these workers who suffer injuries or death as a result of industrial accidents were not organised under any union of the NTUC, like the construction workers. We have considerable difficulty in getting them organised. We did not get much sympathy and assistance from the Ministry of Labour to get them organised. So there is a limited capacity in which we could sort of inculcate safety consciousness among the workers and that is only effective in as far as it is within the ranks of those workers that we have organised. But many accidents occur in places quite beyond our jurisdiction. This is the difficulty. On the point raised by the Member for Boon Teck supported by the Members for Kim Seng and Bukit Ho Swee, the Senior Parliamentary Secretary has given a reply. On that matter, I am afraid it is also beyond him. I do not know whether pursuing the subject would bring about a fruitful conclusion, because I notice that the Minister for Labour and the Minister for Finance, including their colleague the Minister for Communications, are all listening intently. Maybe they are taking note of this to influence other Cabinet colleagues to consider this matter. Sir, in view of the time factor, I am just wondering whether I can have your permission or the permission of Hon. Members who have shown considerable excitement over this matter - Mr Fong Sip Chee rose -

- but I notice that the Senior Parliamentary Secretary wants to answer. I will give way. I will withdraw the amendment later.

Thank you very much for taking the words out of my mouth, I am caught in a dilemma: if I do not reply I would create the impression that I am not knowledgeable: and if I should reply, in the process I may have to expose the ignorance of the two Members opposite. As the Member for Moulmein has said, these workers are not unionised. I accept the suggestion of the Member for Potong Pasir. He spoke on behalf of the unionised workers who work under regular factory environment where the hazards can be identified easily and are regular. In the construction sector, the workers are not organised, and what I have said still holds true. The Member for Boon Teck is still very persistent on the question of pay. As I said earlier there is no difficulty in getting a job in the construction industry. I know for a fact that employers did pay them quietly for fear that they might run away. There is no fear that the workers would suffer. What I do know is that they were actually paid. I do not expect the Member for Kim Seng to agree with the rest. One brick-bat in exchange for a few bouquets, I think, is more than a fair deal for me. I think what I have said earlier should be able to satisfy him. Most of the workers were, in fact, paid because the employers were afraid that the workers would just walk away. It is so difficult to find workers. One of the functions of the Ministry is training: in fact what is going on at the moment is that we are providing training for one NTUC personnel. We have got one trainee, if I am not wrong. Lastly, may I say that the I LO expert will be asked to make a feasibility study on the establishment of an Institute of Occupational Health and Safety. When that is done, probably the job of training, education campaign and consultation can be taken out of the Factory Inspectorate so as to allow them more time to do enforcement. Until that is done. I am afraid that the Factory Inspectorate has got to take on more than they can chew. On the suggestion of the Member for Potong Pasir that the minutes of meetings of safety committees in factories should be checked, may I inform him that the last minutes I read was on Vosper Thornycroft. If he is interested. I can give him some time to read them. I have just finished reading.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I should say that the workers are not thinking in terms of getting a day's wage without work. May I ask the Senior Parliamentary Secretary whether the employers should be penalised or punished for this. This one day's wage could be donated to the Workers' Fund set up by the Ministry of Labour which, I would like to say, is most welcome. The two biggest affiliated unions of the NTUC, i.e, the PIEU and SILO, have donated $10,000. The Senior Parliamentary Secretary can be assured that the workers are always prepared to tighten their belts. If justified, the workers are prepared to sacrifice provided safety measures are taken. Mr P. Govindaswamy rose -

Mr P. Govindaswamy, are you answering for the Ministry of Labour?

No, Sir, I want to say that the Factory Inspectorate and the contractors should not gang up. That assurance must be given by the Ministry, otherwise the poor workers will suffer. If the Inspectorate and the contractors gang up, the workers cannot get compensation.

Sir, in view of the heat that has been generated oven the debate on this subhead and the need for us to cool down for the rest of the subjects, and in view of the detailed and satisfactory reply given by the Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Labour, I beg leave to withdraw. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head N be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead AKA 1111*. (* The same amendment also stood in the name of Mr Sia khoon Seong.) Sir, the Employment Service formerly known as the Employment Exchange was, I believe, reorganised in 1972. It is not clear to me in what way reorganisation has substantially affected the standard of service and the organisational structure of that department, except for the fact that there has been a change in name. It leads me therefore to wonder whether this is not just a case of what the Chinese describe as "old wine in a new bottle". Week after week during my meet-the-people sessions, I continue to see the all too familiar yellow registration cards issued by the department to job-seekers. The majority of these people have been on the waiting-list for months, if not years, and in many cases they have got tired of waiting and simply let the registration lapse without renewal. Over the last 10 years our country has undergone tremendous change in our economic structure and the entire pattern of population distribution has also altered radically but the Employment Service of the Ministry has remained essentially what it was when it was first established after the 2nd World War. The department at present maintains three offices at Havelock, Jurong and Bukit Panjang. Except for Jurong which is obviously an ideal location, the other two situations would appear to me to be totally out of place. One could easily think of many other suitable places where the demand for the services of the department will be the greatest. For example, the new towns at Kallang. Toa Payoh, Queenstown and Kampong Chai Chee. There is I feel a tendency for some of our Government departments to stand still in terms of upgrading the standard and quality of services where the types of services are not considered to be revenue-generating. This mentality has led to an inward looking approach on the part of most of these so-called non-revenue-generating departments whereas, considering the nature of the services they are supposed to offer, they should really attempt to reach out to the people. We complain about the tendency among our young workers in hopping from job to job. Financial inducement may well be one of the reasons or even the main reason, but have we not also considered that if we provide them with better career guidance and assistance to find the jobs that they are best suited, it may help them to overcome the frustrations on their part because of their being in the wrong jobs. Admittedly some may be too choosy and will never change but I firmly believe that with proper guidance and assistance our younger generation of workers will be able to develop the correct job attitude. One of the Employment Service's announced objectives is to maximise the efficient utilisation of the Republic's labour force through improved matching of workers' attitude with job requirements. Quite frankly. I do not think this objective has beer or will ever be achieved given the existing outdated organisational structure. To achieve it, radical changes in the set-up are necessary. Perhaps it would even be useful to extend the function of the Employment Service to include career guidance aiming not only at job seekers but also school children so that by the time they are ready to seek employment they will have some ideas as to the direction in which they may proceed. At present as far as I am aware, career guidance is not given much emphasis by the Ministry of Education. In any case, with the state of confusion in that Ministry. I do have my doubts as to the capability of that Ministry being able to do the job well.

Mr Speaker, Sir, in moving the amendment for this subhead, I was prompted by the same concern shown by the Member for Jalan Kayu over the question as to whether, since the reorganisation of the old Employment Exchange into the Employment Service, there is an increase in its effectiveness in providing service to those seeking jobs. At a time when we had almost full employment, it was not of great concern as to whether the Employment Service was effective or not because the workers could easily find jobs. But in view of recent times where, as a result of the economic recession, more and more people are retrenched and there is the projection that there may be a possible increase of retrenchments in the future, I think the effectiveness of the Employment Service is a matter of concern to us because we must assist in whatever way we can to help the job seekers. Because of that, Sir, I just want to take this opportunity to ask the Minister concerned to inform this House as to whether he is satisfied that improvements have been made with regard to providing this service to those seeking jobs. 3.30 p.m.

Sir,I welcome this opportunity to inform Members as to the function of the Employment Service and the purpose of its reorganisation. The present Employment Service was reorganised in July 1972 with a view to facilitating the employment process and improving the efficient utilisation of the labour force. The revamped Employment Service, formerly known as the Employment Exchange, was designed to alleviate the labour shortfall by increasing the effective supply of labour in three ways: firstly, by a faster matching of the unemployed workers with the job vacancy, thereby shortening the period of joblessness and raising the effective supply of labour: secondly, by reducing undesirable labour mobility through the provision of relevant labour market information: and, thirdly, by lowering turnover through better matching of work-aptitude and ability with job requirement, thereby raising job satisfaction. To this end, the reorganised Employment Service in 1 972 introduced vocational guidance and labour market information services. Vocational counselling is given to unemployed job seekers, particularly fresh school leavers, as part of the programme of assisting registrants to secure suitable employment. Whenever possible, young registrants without any specific technical training are encouraged to take on blue collar jobs and to acquire suitable trade skills. However, those with basic minimum academic qualifications and with interest in a blue collar career are referred by the Employment Service to the Vocational Training Board for admission into one of its vocational training colleges. In this connection, the Employment Service works closely with the Ministry of Education Guidance Unit and the Industrial Training Board. Moreover, senior officers of the Employment Service also give group counselling to schools, community centres and the Youth Leadership Training Institute. Furthermore, a senior employment officer sits on the National Guidance Service Council which coordinates the national efforts on vocational guidance programmes. So, in fact, the Employment Service do carry out a certain amount of career counselling. The labour market information service provided by the Employment Service since 1972 includes sending of monthly information sheet on job opportunities to all Government secondary, academic, technical and tertiary schools, private commercial institutes and community centres. Specific labour market information is also provided to private individuals and individual organisations writing in for such information. Since its reorganisation the Employment Service has been providing an improved service to both employers and job seekers. However, to further improve the efficiency of the Employment Service, we have a Colombo Plan expert attached to the Employment Service since last June. His role is to advise and assist the Employment Service in the training and developing of the staff at all levels, in developing procedural and operational machinery for the efficient operation of the Employment Service and in establishing a progressive evaluation system for the continuing appraisal of the effectiveness of the Employment Service. As a result of more efficient services being extended to employers and registrants, the number of private sector employers notifying their vacancies to the Employment Exchange has increased. Likewise, the number of better quality registrants with higher education has also increased. This has, therefore, made it possible for the Employment Service to improve its placement service. Prior to the reorganisation in 1972 job orders notified to the former Employment Exchange came primarily from the public sector, including the statutory bodies. Private sector employers used the Exchange sparingly and only as a last resort. Job orders from the private sector were predominantly for unskilled manual labour and often of a temporary or emergency nature. The average annual number of vacancies notified to the Exchange for the period 1969 to 1971 was 7,500, of which less than 20% were from private establishments. With the reorganisation the annual number of notified vacancies increased substantially to an average of 13,000 for the period 1972 tQ 1975, and the proportion of private sector vacancies went up to more than 50%. Successful placement of registrants in private firms in the past was negligible. However, since the reorganisation in 1972 the Employment Service has been able to place an increasing number of registrants in the private sector. The proportion of registrants placed in private establishments has gone up from less than 20% in 1972 to 30% in 1975. Last year the Employment Service found work for a record 8,756 registrants and many more registrants would have been placed had they not been over-selective in the jobs offered. Members will recall that at the height of retrenchment in the last quarter of 1974, the Employment Service set up a special retrenchment unit to help those retrenched workers who could not find alternative employment on their own. In August 1975 the unit extended its services to the locally employed civilians made redundant as a result of the final withdrawal of the UK forces from Singapore. All these serve to demonstrate the improved capacity of the Employment Service in coping with changes in the employment situation. Contrary to what the Member for Moulmein feared, the current economic indicators point towards a gradual but difficult recovery in our economy. However, should the unexpected happen and there be a downturn in the economy accompanied by high unemployment, the Employment Service will, as in the case of retrenchment, take immediate appropriate action to meet the changed situation. As pointed out by the Member for Jalan Kayu, the Employment Service has two branch offices, one in Jurong and the other in Bukit Panjang. These two branch offices are located in industrial estates to facilitate employers in recruiting workers as well as to assist job seekers who live in the vicinity of these industrial estates in seeking employment. The Jurong branch office caters for residents living in postal districts 5, 21 and 22. This includes the entire Jurong industrial estate with more than 2,000 industrial establishments. Members may also wish to know that the Ministry has submitted to the Ministry of Finance a proposal to set up in Jurong a Labour Regional Centre to house branch offices of the various sections of the Ministry, including the Employment Service. The Bukit Panjang branch office also serves an extensive area covering postal districts 23, 24 and 25. The main office located within the city area caters for the rest of Singapore. For the information of the Member for Jalan Kayu, the question of decentralisation of the Employment Service was further considered before and, in fact, a branch office was set up in Kallang. Because the demand for the service of this branch office in Kallang was rather small, the office had to be closed down. In view of the smallness and the compactness of Singapore and of the existing two branches strategically located in industrial estates. coupled with a fairly efficient transport system, it is not necessary to decentralise the Employment Service further. However, should the need arise in future. I am sure we will reconsider the matter. In addition to setting up branch offices the Employment Service also makes use of the community centres to communicate with possible job seekers visiting these areas. 3.45 p.m. As mentioned earlier, the Employment Service sends monthly lists of job vacancies to the community centres to be displayed on their notice boards. The Employment Service officers are also invited by the community centres to give talks on the role and functions of the Employment Service, and usually after these talks printed brochures giving particulars of job vacancies and how to apply for them, etc, are left with the community centres.

Mr Speaker, Sir, as a piece of official propaganda. I think the Hon. Minister has done a good job. But how near it is to the truth, I have my doubts. I am not convinced. Just by looking at the number of staff shown in the Estimates. I really have my doubts. There are only three Division I officers and seven Division II officers. I cannot imagine that with this very small number of staff they could undertake so many things. This is the first time that I have heard about the community centres being made use of. I have not received any pamphlets. On reorganisation, as I have pointed out, for many years now they have been using the same yellow card. Have they not considered computerising the system? By computerising the registration and the matching of jobs to seekers, that will surely speed up the processing. But with such a small establishment of staff, how are they going to do that quickly? The Minister mentioned about the Kallang Office being closed down very soon after it was opened. I suspect it is because the people felt that they were not getting anything out of it. So they did not want to go there. Their feeling is, "What is the point? Why should I come to you? You are not doing anything at all." As I pointed out and, in fact, the sentiment was expressed when Members discussed the earlier subhead on the Factory Inspectorate, that if it is not a revenue-generating department there is that tendency for the Government to say, "Let us save while we can." The Minister also mentioned about Bukit Panjang being close to an industrial estate. Where is the industrial estate? It is not even close to any centre of population. The centres of population are in Toa Payoh and Queenstown. He talked about a very efficient transport system but at the same time he is telling the people. "For goodness sake, do not come into the Central Business District if you can help it", and yet his office is in Havelock Road. It is all illogical. I think it is a lot of eyewash, if he does not mind my saying so.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the Minister has just stated that the Employment Service has only been successful in getting employment for those workers in the lower skilled jobs. I wonder what sort of information or facilities they have provided to employers in the private sector. It appears that there is a misconception amongst employers in the private sector that the workers that are being registered at the Employment Service are people of a lower education. So they do not make use of it as we can see from the regular advertisements in the newspapers for jobs in the higher level of employment, and so on. I wonder what steps the Ministry will take to encourage private employers to make use of the Employment Service.

Mr Speaker, Sir, it is precisely because of the identification of the former Employment Exchange with lower educated candidates as mentioned by the Member for Toa Payoh that we decided there should be a reorganisation and a new image given to it, I agree with him that under the old Employment Exchange, in fact. practically all the registrants with the Employment Exchange were unskilled workers, and those who had better educational qualifications would not go to the Employment Exchange for registration. But as I have pointed out just now, after the reorganisation, we are now getting more registrants with better educational, qualifications and we are informing the private employers of the existence of this pool of better qualified unemployed persons available. The extent as to how far the service could be further improved, I think a lot will depend on the staffing position and finance. The Member for Jalan Kayu has pointed out that since the Labour Ministry is not a revenue-generating department, probably the Ministry of Finance is not that keen to provide more money. Nevertheless, within the limited resources available to the Ministry, we are doing our level best and, as I have pointed out just now, in the course of last year the Employment Service has for the first time placed over 8,000 people in suitable jobs. As for the yellow card given to the registrant, as mentioned by the Member for Jalan Kayu, I have pointed out that if the registrants are not too selective there are jobs available for them. Everyone in this House knows in his heart that jobs are available but there are few prepared to accept certain jobs. At the height of the retrenchment in 1974 and early last year, although thousands of workers were retrenched there were at the same time thousands of workers on work permits who were imported from across the Causeway. It only demonstrates that there are jobs available but for various reasons the unemployed Singaporeans are not keen.

Mr Speaker. Sir, I do not believe I can sum up in one short sentence the efficiency of the Employment Service in Singapore. Over this period of time I believe there was a mushrooming of scores of employment agencies taking advantage of all our unemployed people in Singapore due to the "efficiency" of the Employment Service.

Mr Speaker. Sir, following what the Hon. Minister has said earlier regarding the availability of jobs and the fact that our workers are too selective, can I make a request to the Minister if he could circulate a monthly list of available jobs to all Members of Parliament or to all community centres? We, on our part, I am sure, will be able to better advise job seekers that we so often see during our meet-the-people sessions.

Sir, I will certainly circulate the monthly information sheets to Members of this House and to community centres if they have not yet received them.

Sir, may I suggest that if the list can be given fortnightly, it will have better use because if it is distributed monthly it gets out-of-date at times.

Sir, in view of the Minister's reference to the financial constraints within which he works, he makes me feel a little sorry for having brought it up SO strongly. I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The sum of $9,255,440 for Head N ordered to stand part of the Main Estimates. The sum of $1,606,000 for Head N ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. Head O --

Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head O be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead AAA 1004*. (* The same amendment also stood in the names of Messrs. L. P. Rodrigo, Chiang Hai Ding, Ng Kah Ting and P. Govindaswamy.) Sir, during the last Budget debate I brought up the question of the need to improve public relations in the Housing and Development Board. It appears that there is not much improvement in this direction. There are still some officers in the Housing Board who are arrogant and rude when dealing with members of the public. In periodic inspections of flats and shophouses certain officials tend to be crude and rude when asking for information. As you may be aware, Sir, many working couples leave their homes in the care of relatives or friends while they are at work during the day. In one particular instance, a housing inspector barged into the bedroom of a flat and demanded of the caretaker as to who slept in which bed. Shopkeepers are Similarly harassed, Under present regulations any person can tender for more than one shophouse in the same estate or other estates.

Sir, on a point of order. Sir, I think that perhaps the Member for Toa Payoh should bring this matter up under a different subhead relating to the Housing and Development Board, and not under this subhead.

Subhead AAA 1004 relates to the Minister, and he is in charge of the Housing and Development Board. I believe the Member for Toa Payoh in his debate is ranging on the policy of the Minister. I think he may be permitted to carry on.

Thank you, Mr Speaker. Sir. It is quite obvious that when a person runs more than one shop he could not be present in all his shops at one and the same time. On many occasions, shop tenants are taken to task for not being present to run their business. It is quite logical for some shopkeepers to employ someone else to help them in their businesses. The officers in the Area Offices insisted that shopkeepers who operate more than one shop must furnish to the Board a time-table showing when they are present in each shop. One shopkeeper who went abroad for two months on business was asked to produce his passport for inspection to prove that he went overseas. In several instances, allegations of subletting and unauthorised assignments were proved to be unfounded. Sir, I am not against the action taken for serious breaches of the Board's regulations, but frivolous actions of this nature tend to give a bad image of the Board. The Board has a good reputation for public housing. Let us not spoil it. Sir, another point I would like to raise is the stipulation of approved trades for shophouses. It is stated quite clearly in the tender forms that consideration may be given to permit dual or multiple trades provided such trades fall under the same category as defined in the tender forms. 4.00 p.m. Most intending businessmen tender for the trade of department stones, where one can sell a wide variety of goods. A businessman will obviously choose a trade in which he can sell larger quantities of goods than go in for other lines. So if textiles are the best selling lines, the shopkeeper tends to trade in textiles. But this is not permitted by the Area Officers. The Housing Board insists on a certain percentage of each type of goods to be sold, without regard to the viability of one's business. The end result is that the shopkeeper will be asked to revert to his original trade or pay the current market rate of rental or quit altogether. Current market rates of rental are arbitrarily fixed by the Housing Board. I believe they are based on the latest tendered price. This can be quite absurd. For instance, if a shopkeeper had tendered $500 a month for a shophouse in 1968, should he decide to change his trade then, under the present system he would have to pay a revised rental of nearly $2,000 per month. This is tantamount to telling the shopkeeper to close his shop and cease business. Sir, I am aware that rentals derived from shophouses in housing estates help to offset the subsidised rentals of fIats for the lower income group of citizens. But surely some equitable rates could be imposed. I would suggest that a review be made of the system of restriction of a change of trade for the present lawful shop tenants. As a matter of fact, no such restrictions are imposed on emporiums and supermarkets. I believe that the reason for this is that the rentals charged for such premises are sufficiently high. But based on floor areas, the rentals of some shophouses are nearly equivalent to the rentals charged for emporiums or supermarkets, which are based on the rate per square foot. I hope the Minister will give consideration to my suggestion.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I am taking this opportunity to raise certain matters which affect my constituency. First, there are anxieties in my constituency, particularly among the residents in Serangoon Gardens Estate, about the possibility of the Housing Board's acquisition of land area on which the Ang Mo Kio New Town is to be developed. There is the anxiety that such an acquisition would extend to the Serangoon Gardens Estate. I myself believe that this acquisition will not extend to the Serangoon Gardens Estate. But if the Minister could so state in this House, I think it will relieve a lot of anxiety of the residents in Serangoon Gardens Estate. The second matter I wish to raise concerns the farmers and residents in Ang Mo Kio, who are being cleared from the area. To-date, I do not think the Board has made it a policy to grant such resettlement cases priority in the issue of licences in the HDB markets on hawker centres, many of which are yet to come up in the Ang Mo Kio area. But I do know that the Board attempts to assist deserving applicants who are resident farmers and who are being cleared from the Ang Mo Kb area. What I wish to know is whether the Board intends to make it a policy to accord priority to the applicants from resettlement areas for stalls in the HDB markets in the Ang Mo Kio area. Thirdly, if the Minister could touch on the prospect of farmers and residents who are being cleared from Ang Mo Kio. As a result of resettlement they now have to reside in Sin Ming estate. But they wish eventually to go to Neighbourhood II or Neighbourhood III in the Ang Mo Kio area when the flats are up. Will there be a policy to accord such a facility to these resettlement cases who would want a transfer back to the Ang Mo Kio area?

Mr Speaker. Sir, the Ministry of National Development accounts for 5.33% of the Main Estimates and 42.15% of the Development Estimates, a total of 21 .68% on over one-fifth of all planned expenditure for FY 1976-77. It is second only to the Ministry of Finance itself, which accounts for 27.64% or over one-quarter. This is a huge sum. The Ministry of National Development impinges very considerably on the lives of Singaporeans. In most cases it is for the better although inevitably it creates problems for some. The scope of the Ministry can be divided into two unequal parts .- that which affects people more directly. and the other which deals with subjects like primary production, agriculture and fisheries. I propose to look at the first. The Minister is responsible for the Housing and Development Board. The expenditure involved here is enormous. The HDB will receive a loan of $792 million this year (compared with $718 million last year) besides an additional contribution of $46 million (compared with $36 million last year). The HDB's expenditure will exceed that of the entire Ministry of Defence which received 12.56% of the planned expenditure and is the third largest ministry in terms of allocation of funds. The HDB housed fully 50% of Singapore's population at the end of last year. This figure will rise to 6 5-70% by 1980, by which time the proportion of housing units built by private developers should be very small indeed. It will be Government that will look after the housing needs of most Singaporeans. My purpose in proposing a cut in the Minister's pay is to draw his attention to some problems of people previously living in kampong-type environments when they move into high-rise flats and to elicit his response to some suggestions on solving these problems. I am sure that these problems are not all new, but they are new to those who are affected, We have changed the way of life of our people. There are undoubted benefits - improved health conditions, electricity, potable water, modern sanitation, proximity to schools and medical facilities, etc. These are pluses. There can be no going back to what was previously the case. However, in the kampong-type situation, a relative who was emotionally-disturbed but not dangerous could be accommodated. Understanding friends and neighbours assisted to see that he or she did not come to any harm. In the high-rise flat situation this supportive and reassuring environment is absent. Space is at a premium and neighbours may be strangers. Then we have the problem of older folks. Previously, the old lady, for example, may live in an outhouse, only joining the rest of the family when she feels so inclined. Now this option does not exist. Hopefully, she can adjust to the rest of the family, and vice-versa. If she cannot, there can be disorder under Heaven! The problem is even worse if the older folks do not have relatives to live with. This problem also afflicts the not-so-old who are not married and, therefore, not eligible for HDB flats. I think we can all recognize that it is not so easy to find people of the same sex with whom to share a flat to satisfy the HDB rules and regulations. Another problem is that in the kampong situation a family may be able to grow some fruits and vegetables and to rear fish, chickens, pigs, etc, to supplement the meagre family income. Living in flats, however, the best thing to grow is probably cactus, especially during the dry weather we suffered recently. Another problem of flat-dwellers is that of loneliness. They miss their friends and the familiar haunts. The known landmarks are gone at a time when cherished social values are also being questioned as our society strives to industrialise and modernise. Perhaps this is only a transitional period as first-generation flat-dwellers did not grow up with each other. But privacy commands a very high premium when people have, of necessity, to live very close to each other. Another problem exists in particular with young children. They are more often than not confined to their flats, despite the presence of open spaces in the estates. In the kampongs children could go out of the house to play in the back or front yard with mother or grandmother keeping a watchful eye from within the house, while doing the housework. But not now. A mother just cannot look out or down and keep an eye on her child playing fifteen floors below on the play-deck, on the grass or on the empty ground under the flat. What can be done about these problems that arise from our improving housing situation? The HDB does have some flexibility even in respect of older estates. Some flats are being vacated as people move on to better ones. Others have vacated when it is discovered that they have previously-undeclared properties. Leases fall due. In the case of estates under construction provision can be made for improvements. I would like to propose the incorporation of certain units of flats, preferably low-rise (say, up to four-storeys in new estates such as those in Buona Vista), for the accommodation of problem persons - emotionally-disturbed, displaced and single older people. This will mean that they remain an integral part of the community, close enough to other people, including relatives who can visit them, care for them and contribute towards their maintenance. The hospitals would not accept these people. I have tried writing letters on behalf of them. They may create serious problems for their families, if they have such families. I believe it should also be possible to persuade retired nurses to work part-time within their estates to provide professional care for such persons. 4.15 p.m. Secondly, as we have basically broken the back of the housing problem, we should begin to pay some attention to the accommodation needs of single people. Until now, priority has been correctly given to families. But bachelors, male and female, are not unproductive, in the economic sense. As the recently appointed Malaysian Finance Minister pointed out, both he and his deputy minister, are bachelors! Some years ago I wrote about this subject to the HDB. Today I wish to raise it again with the Minister. I believe that we should now construct some bachelor units among the new housing estates and convert some of the older flats for sale or rental to bachelors who can satisfy the HDB that they are indeed economically productive. We have made it a national ideal to have small families. Now that families can find accommodation almost immediately if they are not unduly fussy about location, there is no reason why Government should not begin to cater for those who have, for the time being at least, not added to our population size. Thirdly, for those with low incomes, part of which are lost in resettlement when they leave the land, we should try to alleviate their problems, their hardship in the short-run by giving them hawkers' licences if they qualify, and by reserving some jobs in the estates for them and their families, such as car park attendants, sweepers and cleaners. Fourthly, how to increase neighbourliness? I am not sure how this ought to be tackled. We have to make collections of people into communities with their own distinctive character. Residents' associations have been tried. By and large, they have not proved to be spectacularly successful. The Member for Stamford several years ago proposed community halls for each block for the common use of residents as a meeting place. The Member for Leng Kee and I have tried this out in our constituencies and they work quite well. Community halls can very usefully supplement the larger community centres. They do provide a focal point for activities and more of them should be made available, both in the older and new estates. Finally, I turn to the problem of young children. Our gardens, zoos, reservoirs and beaches are solidly packed with people seeking the freedom from the confines of walls and seeking communion with Nature. I believe we cannot sever our link with Nature without doing incalculable harm to our emotional well-being. I am grateful that the HDB built a total of 1 7 gardens and playgrounds, big and small, in Buona Vista Estate in my constituency. I propose to build one more field, the Minister permitting. Our Government is not unaware of this problem. Land has been reclaimed from the sea to construct park-lands. Even the dead have been moved to create space for the living. Can more be done in the HDB estates? I believe yes. Many of the kindergarten classes are converted residential flats, invariably on the second floor. I would like to propose that parts of the ground floor, where they are empty, be enclosed for use as kindergartens. These should be adjacent to open spaces, part of which should be fenced, so that children can play there safely under the supervision of teachers. Mothers will be relieved. Children should have open spaces to play in instead of within another set of walls.

Mr Speaker. Sir, in putting my name down for this amendment to the Minister's salary, my intention is to draw the attention of the Hon. Minister for Communications and National Development to land acquisition in Punggol constituency and its problems. When the Paya Lebar airport runway extension work was to be carried out, certain parts of Tampines were acquired, resulting in certain areas of Punggol being acquired for the development of a Housing Board estate. Five years later, and as a result of pollution from pig-waste to the Kranji Reservoir, the Government again decided to acquire certain parts of Punggol for pig-farming industry. In both these acquisition cases, many families have had to be resettled. In the latter, especially in the areas of Lorong Buang Kok and Lorong Cheng Lim, many families holding farm licences are not allowed to retain their small plot of farming land because they are not bona fide farmers. The result is that they have to be resettled. Some are given compensation in the form of a three-room unit in an HDB estate and an ex gratia payment. Some of these families who have been resettled in the Punggol Housing Board estate poured out their problems on me. I do not mind it, because it is a problem I have to face. These families contend that they are bona fide farmers. But there is another adjective to the word "farmer", and that is. "efficient". I do not follow despite my looking into the dictionary as to what an "efficient farmer" in this respect means. Nevertheless, those farmers whom I know and who have been allowed to remain where they are have 3.000 or more head of poultry or more than 100 pigs. Sir, the basic problem lies in the fact that these people or families who have to move to Housing Board flats not only cannot adjust themselves but also find it extremely difficult to maintain themselves, let alone pay instalments for the purchase or rental of the HDB flat. The Member for Ulu Pandan pointed out that in their own old kampongs they could derive supplementary income from fruit trees, vegetables and poultry. These are the people who are now posing a problem to society, and it is due to the exigencies of Government requirements that they have to move out from where they were living for which they were compensated with an HDB flat. Beyond that, what is the future of their livelihood? In other words, what I am saying is that compensating a farming family with a three-room Housing Board flat will not solve the problem because that family has lost a means of livelihood which they were earning before. If I may be allowed to illustrate, let us take a family of father, mother, two sons and two daughters. With a poultry farm of 2,000 egg layers and a small plot of land for vegetable farming and some fruit trees; they spend a lot of time each day from morning till night looking after their poultry. They derive an income of, say. $400-S500. which is sufficient because they could have supplementary means of income from selling vegetables and fruits At the same time, they need not buy certain items of food Today we have this problem. I am given to understand that there are several thousand hawker stalls or pitches lying vacant because the department has stopped issuing hawker licences May I suggest to the Minister that priority consideration for hawker licences be given to these people to enable them not only to subsist but also to live and maintain themselves in an HDB flat

Mr Speaker. Sir, I wish to comment on the constant digging of roads that is going on in various parts of Singapore. In fact, figures which were given sometime ago show that 200 diggings are going on daily in Singapore. This is, of course, fantastically high. Obviously there is very little coordination, even though assurances have been given that the coordinating committee would deal with road diggings. Sir, some roads have been dug up so many times that there is a perpetual sign along the road saying that digging is going on either by the gas department, the telecommunications department, electricity department. sewerage department, water department or some other department. I quote Upper Thomson Road as an example. For the past six years, it has been dug and re-dug, re-surfaced, re-dug again and resurfaced, so many times. Nasty comments have been made on the digging of Upper Thomson Road. During the oil crisis, some people commented that the authorities were digging for oil! I cannot understand why this particular road must undergo endless diggings throughout the year. Something is definitely wrong somewhere, and this is only one of the many roads to suffer this problem. What does the coordinating body has to say about the diggings? Finally, the motoring public has to endure these diggings with great patience and, worst of all, they have to endure the very poor workmanship of resurfacing. Why is there no proper supervision when the resurfacing of the road is being carried out? Are the contractors paid as soon as the roads are resurfaced? Is there no proper authority to make sure that resurfacing is done properly so that the roads would be safe for all types of vehicular traffic? 4.30 p.m.

(In Mandarin): Sir, over the past decade the Housing and Development Board has done a great deal in terms of public housing for the people. With the efforts of the Minister and all persons concerned. Singapore has achieved much in public housing and enjoys a good international reputation. The Housing and Development Board has solved the housing problem of more than 50% of our population. So with this achievement the old problem has been solved and there should not be any more problem for the Housing and Development Board. But that does not seem to be the case because with a new environment new problems have arisen. Therefore. I would like to raise four matters for the Minister to consider. One is the rejection of applications for transfer to larger units. I have two examples to bring up. In the first case there is a family of three, husband, wife and daughter, living in a one-room unit. Ten years ago there was no problem, but today the problem has arisen because the daughter is a grown-up young lady of 20 years old. Problems begin to creep into their daily life. There is a great deal of inconvenience and this has necessitated the application for a transfer to a larger unit. But their repeated applications have been rejected on the ground that there is no bigger unit available The second case is similar. A family of four lives in a one-room unit; a couple and two children, a boy and a girl. The children are now grown-up, and the parents have made application for a transfer to a larger unit. The daughter is also married and there is a marriage certificate to prove it. And as the son-in-law wishes to stay with them they have a good reason to ask for a larger unit, but their application was rejected without any good reason. Sir, there are many vacancies in the thousands of HDB flats in Singapore. However, the civil servants in the HDB do not seem to pay much attention to these vacancies. They do not seem to be interested to house the needy in these vacant flats, resulting in a loss of revenue to the Government. I hope the Minister will pay attention to this problem. I have also received complaints that applications for transfer of flats have been made five years ago but the HDB is still unable to effect the transfer. As far as know, most of these applicants are living in one-room flats. They have applied for transfer to larger units because of a bigger family. They have about six or seven persons occupying one room. This is not only unhealthy hut also undesirable. So I would ask the Minister concerned to pay more attention to this The next question is whether the Minister will consider the abolition of the tender system for shops. Instead of the tender system, a proper rental rate should be fixed by the Government or by ballotting. I raise this matter because I understand that tenders for HDB shops have reached fantastically high levels. For example, in Toa Payoh, some shops have been tendered for over $3,000 a month. `when the floor area is only about 700 to 800 square feet. This works out to about $40 per square foot. about ten times higher than the most expensive rental in the commercial centre in the city. In the case of a restaurant, where the floor area is 1.800 square feet, the tendered rent is $5,000. It works out to about $30 per square foot What will be the result of these exorbitant rates? Well, since wool must con-,e from sheep, the result will be a greater bu-den for the consumers. There will be a higher rate of inflation. I appeal to the Minister to consider this very seriously, because if we allow this tender system to continue then rents will be higher, and such higher rents will in the end nullify Government's efforts in countering inflation. Thirdly, I would like to ask the Minister to consider the feasibility of building more HDB flats in the Sembawang constituency to meet the increasing needs of the people there. In Sembawang there are at present orly eight blocks of 3'room and 4-room flats, totalling some 720 units, built by the Jurong Town Corporation. These are inadequate to meet the present demand Furthermore. Sembawang is being developed into a large industrial estate, as provided in the Estimates Senoko in Sembawang has been zoned "Industrial". Very soon there will be factories coming up and thousands and thousands of workers will be working in these factories So, for the convenience of the workers and residents in the constituency. I appeal to the Minister to consider building more flats in the area so that they can live and work happily there.

Sir, I regret to note -

Mr Speaker, Sir, on a point of order. Some Members have already given notice to speak on specific subheads, but they all seem to be speaking now on this subhead.

Put a stop to this practice.

That is what you ought to do. Mr Sim. please carry on, bearing this in mind.

Thank you very much, Sir. As everyone is jumping on to the band wagon. I thought I would join in also. I regret to note that the Changi Airport Development which costs $129.6 million has been planned with total disregard for the welfare and livelihood of the fishermen directly affected by this project. 25 kelongs have to give way for reclamation. The removal of the kelongs will affect the livelihood of about 60 fishermen and their dependants.

I presume the Member for Changi will not raise this matter again later.

No, Sir. The manner in which the Fisheries Division carried out the clearance has caused much dissatisfaction among the kelong operators and fishermen who are affected. I strongly feel that the Fisheries Division is only interested in the immediate clearance of the kelong operators and fishermen from the site. The Division has no plan whatsoever to alleviate the immediate suffering of the people affected by the clearance. For example, on the 27th December last year kelong operators were informed that their licences would not be renewed. But later, on 11th February, 1976, they were given two weeks' notice to vacate their kelongs by the 25th February this year. Sir, even unauthorised hawker stall holders need more time to vacate. The Fisheries Division all the while had the intention to cease the renewal of these kelong licences, and yet they verbally told the kelong operators that they could repair their kelongs. The repair of a kelong easily costs over $20,000. This money is literally dumped into the sea without any hope of recovery. It has always been the case that there is no rapport between the Ministries involved. The right hand does not know what the left hand is doing. On 7th July, 1975. kelongs SE 27 and SE 62 were issued with permits to resite. What is fantastic is that kelongs SE 32 and SE 34 had their licences renewed on 19th January, 1976, but on 26th February, 1 976 the operators were told that their licences could not be renewed. Sir, much money and trouble would have been saved if the Fisheries Division had earlier informed the kelong operators concerned of the clearance. The compensation to be paid to the kelong operators is grossly inadequate. The compensation is based on the number of nibong poles used in its construction. Sir, this, in my opinion, is a ridiculous way of assessing the compensation. Nibong poles constitute only about 20% of the total cost of the structures. Most of the cost goes to the labour involved. Moreover, I was informed that the compensation was based on the old 1963 policies of payment, which should be obsolete by now. Displaced kelong operators were not given any immediate alternative site nor their workers given consideration for alternative livelihood opportunities. Most of the kelong workers are too old. - 50. 60 and even 70 years, and very hard for them to learn a new trade. The displaced Siglap fishermen had been allocated pitches in the HDB market in Bedok New Town. The Fisheries Division seems to have made no immediate attempt to assist these displaced Changi fishermen, likewise. On the other hand, the Agricultural Division had allocated alternative sites for bona fide farmers. I am sure the Fisheries Division can do the same for the kelong operators, otherwise I suggest that this Division be closed down. 4.45 pm. May I request the Minister concerned to consider the following pleas of the fishermen more and adequate compensation he awarded to kelong operators who are affected: alternative sites to be allotted to kelong operators or all displaced fishermen to be allotted stalls in hawker centres or markets: kelong operators who were served with non-renewal notices in 1974 be considered for compensation or resiting of their kelongs; enforcement action to be suspended with immediate effect until their livelihood is settled. I would like to caution the Minister concerned that, by declaring the site along the Changi sea coast as a restricted area, more inshore fishermen will be greatly affected again, and I do not know whether the Fisheries Division is aware of it.

Mr Speaker. Sir, let me take the comment of the Member for Toa Payoh first. If he were in this House yesterday he must have heard the exposition given by the Prime Minister in reply to the accusation of discourtesy on the part of public servants, raised by the Member for Katong. So I would not go further into that other than saying that where instances of discourtesy and rudeness can be pinpointed, action will be taken. The Member for Toa Payoh raised several points with regard to the tenancy of shops. He says that shopkeepers do change their trade from time to time and, because of that. HDB officers ask them to either revert to their original trade or to pay a revised rental based on the present standard rental for the trade The rentals and tenders for shops are based on the type of business done. Those who tender for coffee shops and provision shops have to pay high rentals. So if a person has tendered for a bookshop and in time changes it into a coffee shop or provision shop, he is being unfair to those who had tendered a higher rate for a coffee shop or a provision shop. Therefore, the rationale behind the action of the officers is that the tenant either reverts to his original trade or pay the new rental for the type of trade that he is going to engage in. I think this is quite fair. I come now to the accusation of high rentals. Who pays the rental? The public pays the rental. Who tenders? The public tenders. If a businessman tenders, he knows better than you or I what price to pay. They have been quite successful. We made a survey and found that 90% of those who tendered for HDB shops made their business pay. So this is not a rate that is fixed by the HDB. This is a rate fixed by the forces of supply and demand.

But they fleece the consumers!

We allow free market forces to play here. Free market fortes determine rentals. This is in reply to the suggestion by the Member for Sembawang that we should abolish the tender system. The system has been working well 90% of those who have tendered for HDB shops have succeeded in making it pay. This is a high percentage of success for any type of business. Achieving 90% success in any undertaking is a sure sign of a successful system. I can find no other system which will ensure a fairer deal. I come now to the points raised by the Member for Serangoon Gardens I think it is time for Members to stop listering to rumours I am not aware that Serangoon Gardens Estate is to be acquired, and do not think it is the policy of the Government to acquire a well laid out estate, then pull the houses down and build Housing Board flats. That is not the policy. Where a housing estate is well laid out and has established itself. I think we will leave it alone With regard to priority for farmers who are resettled from Ang Mo Kio, we can divide resettlement into different categories For instance. "efficient bona fide farmers". A bona fide farmer means a farmer who has been rearing a minimum of 100 pigs or 3,000 head of poultry and is making full economic use of the land. This is a bona fide farmer and if he is efficient he will be able to earn a reasonable income from his 100 pigs or 3.000 head of poultry. And on resettlement he will be given alternative land to farm elsewhere. While listening to the Member for Punggol, I was a bit confused because he says that these poor people were able to live because they were supplementing their income from farming. If their income from farming is only supplementary, they would not be full time or bona fide farmers.

Sir, on a point of clarification. I said that the supplementary income came from the fruit trees and the vegetables they grow.

They are not bona fide farmers then. So if they are not bona fide farmers, they are given the choice of either a Housing Board flat or cash in lieu. Some Hon. Members: No I

They are given a Housing Board flat or cash in lieu. In order to solve their employment problem, the Housing Board will be building two rural centres, one in Punggol and the other in Jalan Kayu. These rural centres will be built amidst a farming population so that those who are not bona fide farmers but part-time farmers can find work there if they want to. This is one of the ways to solve the employment problem of ex-farmers. Those people living in attap huts will be given priority in the allocation of Housing Board flats. Shopkeepers will be given priority to tender for shops in Housing Board estates. They will have to pay what we call "a rising rental", that is, during the first year of occupation they pay only 50% of the average rent which a public tenderer pays. For the second year of occupation they pay 10% more and by the sixth year they will be paying the full rent. These are the resettlement terms, and so priority is given to them in certain cases. It all depends on which category of resettled persons they come under. I hope that answers the query by the Member for Serangoon Gardens. As regards licences for hawker centres and markets, we have 32,000 hawkers on the road. We are going to resettle them in hawker centres and markets and they are given first priority. I know, everybody thinks that hawking is very profitable and so wants a hawker licence. So we have to be very careful. We do not allow every Tom, Dick and Harry to be a hawker. Only those who really find it difficult to make a living will be given very careful consideration. It is the Government's policy to move hawkers from the streets into hawker centres and markets. Street hawkers are given priority in the allocation of stalls in hawker centres and markets as this will improve the environment and make it easier to enforce clean personal habits among those who handle and sell food, Of course, consideration can be given to those who find it difficult to earn a living because of age or circumstances. But consideration will only be given to those over 40 years of age for a market pitch or a hawker licence. The Member also raised the query about those who are resettled from Ang Mo Kio to Sin Ming Road. He wants to know whether, when the time comes, they will be allowed to return to Ang Mo Kio. I think this is very speculative, By the time they have settled in Sin Ming Road for a few years they may not want to return to Ang Mo Kio. And by that time if they still think of returning, thereby displacing their roots again the matter can then be raised. The Member for Ulu Pandan is right. We have moved from the kampong to the city. We have moved from the pondok to high-rise flats, We have made economic progress. We are on the way to being an industrialised country. We are a commercialised city. And in that process, of course, many changes have occurred, one of which is that the Member is not now able to enjoy life sitting under a coconut tree in the moonlight, strumming his guitar or fishing with his toes. Some of the things that we have left behind are good and some are bad, but as the Member says, "There is no looking back". But in entering an industrialised, commercialised and urbanised environment we have new problems, some of which he has stated. In passing, the Member did mention that the Budget estimate for the HDB has gone up compared with 1974-75, the subsidy being $46 million as against $36 million for last year. This is one aspect of the Housing Board which very few people have looked into and are aware of or want to be aware of. To the average Singaporean, a landlord is a rich man. He owns houses and he rents them out. He collects rent and he is therefore a rich man. The Housing and Development Board being the biggest landlord in Singapore should, therefore, be the richest organisation in Singapore. And yet it has to get a subsidy of $46 million from the Government. Why? Because we are subsidising public housing. So I hope Members will note that. Though the HDB is the biggest landlord in Singapore, it is not making money. The Housing Board is being subsidised to the tune of $46 million for this year: it was subsidised $36 million last year As we build more houses, the subsidy will grow. The Member for Ulu Pandan says that the tenants are strangers when they move into Housing Board flats. Even if we should move 500 people into a kampong, they will be strangers. So it makes no difference. Whether or not he is going to be lonely, and whether or not he can make friends, depends upon his character. If he is an extrovert he makes friends easily. But if he is an introvert, he is going to be lonely whether in a kampong or in a Housing Board flat. As from a life of growing vegetables to a life in Housing Board fIat, we have gone into a new environment. We have progressed and so some of the past practices have to be left behind. It is nice to be nostalgic about this. But I think we have to adapt ourselves and I am very glad that he has pinpointed some of the problems ., the problem of loneliness, the problem facing bachelors and the problem of young children. 5.00 p.m. Children living in high-rise flats do pose a problem. I have visited a number of these high-rise flats. The blocks are quite close together and I feel claustrophobic. But in our experience we find that the children can easily adapt themselves. They play along the corridors. In the new housing estates the flats are twice the size of the old ones. So there is ample space. The children can play along the corridors among themselves. As they grow older they would go to the playground. But, of course, there is a need to provide more playing fields and more open space for the children. We will try to provide that as much as we can with our limited space. With regard to the old people. I have great sympathy for them because the old `family tradition is breaking down. We find that more and more old people are being left on their own, The Housing Board has tried renting its flats to the private Homes for the Aged so that they can bring the old people to live there. I have also asked whether it is possible to make use of the ground floor (which the Member has suggested should be turned into a kindergarten) to house these old people. If the old people have young members of their family living in the same estate, we will give them priority to be housed there. This matter is being looked into. As I have said, there is a pilot plan to rent some of the flats to Homes for the Aged. We have also gone a step further. If the old people so wish, we will try and accommodate them in places near their relatives or families, so that they can baby-sit their grandchildren. They can be a help to working mothers in looking after their children. As regards nurses, I think my colleague, the Minister for Health, would be very pleased if the Member can persuade retired nurses to help look after the sick, the aged and the children in the housing estates. These are good suggestions and will be looked into. It is not beyond our power and means to persuade the nurses to do so. Now, the problem of single people. The Member for Ulu Pandan must realise that priority should be given to applicants who have families living with them. We have a long waiting list of 90,000 applicants. But for the young single men and women with initiative, they should have no problem finding accommodation because we allow them to rent rooms from tenants or owners of Housing Board flats. They will find it easier to find such rooms now because, as I have said, the new flats are bigger. I think that should take care of their problem. We are not going to build Housing Board flats solely for single persons. I do not know whether or not they will create more mischief! With regard to finding jobs in housing estates, there are lots of vacancies for sweepers and cleaners in the Housing Board estates. If flat tenants find it difficult to get work, they can apply to the Housing Board for such jobs. There is no problem as the HDB is finding it difficult to fill these posts. In fact, we are encouraging people who live in the estates to take up these jobs. With regard to community halls to complement the community centres, this question is being looked into. It is our policy to build community halls to complement the community centres in all new Housing Board estates. The Member for Ulu Pandan is most fortunate in that in his constituency he has 17 fields and open playgrounds. Yet he still wants one more. If all Members agree. I will give him one. An Hon. Member: There are 65 constituencies.

Let me now come to the Member for Punggol. I have said something about resettlement and our attempt to place the affected people on some jobs. If a person is really willing to work, as my colleague, the Minister for Labour, has just said. "See the Employment Service." There are lots of jobs available. We have issued thousands of work permits. And yet the Member for Punggol has said it is difficult td find a job. We will find jobs for them in the housing estates which we are building in Punggol.

In the interim, what can they do?

They have not yet been resettled. Some of them may have been resettled.

They have already gone. There are the Punggol Estate and Jalan Kayu Estate.

They can find jobs there. If they want they can become cleaners for the Housing and Development Board. The Member can give their names to me. The Member for Anson talks about the digging of roads all over Singapore. We have to dig roads because the Housing Board is building so many houses and there are also many factories coming up. With economic progress we have to lay pipes for water and cables for electricity, sewerage and telephones. All these are different services, requiring different techniques in laying the systems. This problem has preoccupied not only me but also my colleague. the Minister for the Environment, for the last ten years. There is a coordinating committee to see that a road is not dug up soon after one service has been laid. But the peculiarities of the different services are such that we find it difficult to coordinate the work. There is one telephone to every six persons in Singapore. That is quite a high rate. Almost everyone in Singapore has a water closet now. All this means that if we do not dig up the roads to lay the services, we cannot have them. Of course, the road should, be dug as quickly as possible and there should be coordination. I can assure Members that there is a committee sitting, with the Director of Public Works presiding, and from time to time the Minister in charge will sit in to improve coordination. We have done all we can to ensure that there is as little hindrance as possible to motorists and, at the same time, to ensure that economic development is not hindered. Let me now come to the Member for Sembawang. We do allow HDB residents to move into larger flats. But there are certain priorities, such as for medical reasons or other extenuating circumstances. Wanting to get married is probably not one of the priorities. Another reason why applicants for transfers have to wait longer is that 3-room flats are very popular. Wherever possible, we allot such flats to those who have already been on the waiting list, Those who have not yet had the advantage of staying in Housing Board flats should be given first preference. After that we will then look into cases for transfers. With regard to the request for abolition of the tender system, I have replied to that earlier. Now, with regard to the question raised by the Member for Changi. Let me say that licences for kelongs are given on the understanding that they are on Temporary Occupation Licences, and may be revoked at any time. This is the understanding. I find it very difficult to believe what the Member has said. He may be quite naive to believe what he has been told. He said that on the 29th of January ` the kelong operators were told. "Yes, go on. You can repair your kelong." A fortnight later in February they were told, "You stop. We are acquiring it." He said that during that fortnight they had spent $20,000 repairing the kelongs, which finally went into the sea. They must be very efficient. If they are that efficient, we do not have to import fish. I do not think they have really spent $20,000 within a fortnight. He mentioned that 25 kelongs are affected but quite a number of them have already had their licences revoked since 1974. Yet they are still there. They know very well since 1974 that they have to leave. I believe some Members know that these kelongs are not genuine kelongs. They are not built to catch fish. They are there for something else. I have no knowledge of what they are there for. Some Members may wish to enlighten me on that. But as I have said, they are not there for fishing. However, for those who were given less than a year's notice, we are making an exception. We are compensating them with the cost of replacing the poles. But I do not believe that within the short period they had spent so much money. It is not correct to say that the compensation is unfair and that it should be enhanced. First and foremost, I do not think he is right in saying that it is unfair. Secondly, enhancing the compensation would mean that we have to enhance the compensation for other resettlement cases elsewhere. Here, I have got to say, "No" to him with a smile.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the Minister could have misunderstood me on the matter of rentals for shop-houses. I am not opposed to the tender system. What I am saying is that the rentals have been revised. The costs of building have increased over the years. It is, therefore, quite fair for the Housing Board to raise the minimum rental from time to time, and this will consequently affect the tender price. This is fair. In the tender form various categories of approved trade are listed, A, B, C, D and E. I believe there is a certain maximum rental for each category. But what these people are grumbling about is this. In Toa Payoh there is the old section and the new section. When a person tendered for a grocery shop on any other shop in the old section, the normal minimum rental was $185 p.m. This was way back in 1968. Some years later the minimum rental was increased to $280 p.m. But now the rental is about $320 p.m. However, if a person had successfully tendered for a stall in the old section of Toa Payoh and subsequently changes his trade to another trade but within the same category, he is asked to pay the rental which is currently in force. I think this is not fair. In Toa Payoh there are three Area Offices with three community halls. Two of them have already been turned into Car Park Offices. In the case of the third one in my constituency, one-third of it has been converted into a Car Park Office. So there are no facilities left for the people.

It is a question of choice. Do you want to have community centres, or do you want to have car parks? There were people who shouted for car parks, and so community centres have been turned into car parks. You can have one but not both. As regards rent, I think it is quite fair for the Housing Board to base it on the latest rent because the area may have flourished. Therefore, it is quite fair that the rent is based on the latest rates.

Sir, in view of the Minister's reply, I beg leave to withdraw, Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

I think this is a good time to take the suspension now. Thereupon Mr Speaker left the Chair of the Committee and took the Chair of the House.

I suspend the Sitting now and will take the Chair again at 5.50 p.m. Sitting accordingly suspended at 5.15 p.m. until 5.50 p.m. Sitting resumed at 5.50 p.m.

Debate in Committee of Supply resumed.

Head O (cont.) --

(In Mandarin): Mr Speaker. Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 0 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead BAA 1105.* (* The same amendment also stood in the names of Messrs Ho Kah Leong and Ch'ng Jit Koon.) Sir, the main task of the Public Works Department is to plan and execute the construction of our nation-wide network of public roads, the sewerage system and their maintenance. The PWD has very heavy responsibilities. Our network of public roads has all along been well maintained. The road surface is generally smooth and even, which goes to enhance our image. However, in recent years, there has been a rapid increase in the number of vehicles and also an increase in construction work everywhere. All this presents the serious problem of traffic congestion. If this problem is not solved quickly, it will certainly affect our daily lives and the further development of our commercial and industrial activities. In view of this, I would like to put forward two suggestions to the Minister to help solve the problem of traffic congestion. Firstly, we can build bicycle tracks along the main roads. At the moment, the Government is trying its best to reduce the number of vehicles on the road in order to facilitate a smooth flow of vehicles. In line with this objective we should encourage more people to use the bicycle as a means of transport. In order to encourage this the PWD should construct bicycle tracks along the main roads in order to provide safety to cyclists. If this plan is carried out positively and extensively, I believe. it will bring about desirable results. When that day comes, the whole workforce from the commercial and industrial sectors and even the public sector, including Ministers and Members of Parliament will be able to go to office on bicycles. This will not only relieve traffic congestion but it will also be conducive to our health and help us to economise. Secondly, I would like to ask the Minister whether he will consider changing the hours of work for all roadwork in the Central Business District. Generally roadworks are always carried out in the centre of the road and this takes up space and makes the roads even more congested. Why not change the hours of work to the night as it will considerably alleviate the serious traffic congestion in the City area, I would like the Minister to consider my suggestion seriously. If he thinks that this will increase our expenditure, then I would say that the higher cost is justified for the smooth flow of traffic in the CBD. This will also help our commerce and industry. Thirdly, the new road extension work in progress in the Thomson and Sembawang areas. I would like to ask how long is the road and whether there will be any ramifying roads in these areas.

(In Mandarin): Sir, under this amendment, I would like to raise the question of solving the problem of traffic congestion in Jurong. As we all know, Jurong is the industrial centre of our country. We can find hundreds of factories there and thousands of people working there, and their numbers are increasing. However, to the west of Jurong there is Jalan Ahmad Ibrahim, and the other road is Jurong Road. During peak hours in the morning and in the afternoon there is heavy traffic congestion in these roads. The Senior Minister of State had worked in Jurong before and I hope that he would take note of this and perhaps pay a visit to his old colleagues in Jurong so that he can be better informed of the situation which is now getting worse. Although I thank the Public Works Department for having done a good job with Jalan Ahmad Ibrahim and other roads which have been widened or improved. I feel the situation can be improved there to a great extent. Last year, touching on this topic, I suggested to the Minister that we could link up Jalan Buroh and Jalan Penjuru by a bridge so that we could have one more road to link up with Jurong town. The Minister then replied that his Ministry would consider this suggestion. I now raise the matter again to see what has been done after one year. Although the Minister is not here now but his Ministry still exists and I hope something will be done in this respect. I wonder whether any decision has been made in this regard. I hope the Senior Minister of State can help to solve this matter. 6.00 p.m.

Sir, let me first answer the questions raised by the Member for Sembawang. During the early 1960s bicycle tracks were provided in all new road projects and some of these tracks still exist in such areas as Queenstown, Commonwealth Avenue, Lornie Road and Thomson Road. But the result of a study of bicycle traffic shows that cyclists, like the Member for Sembawang, prefer to ride along the main carriageway instead of on the tracks provided for them. For example, during the Cycling Week you could see him cycling night on the open road and not on the track provided. Since then the provision of bicycle tracks has been excluded from all new road programmes of the PWD. I think we are all agreed that cycling is a good recreational exercise, but it is obviously less effective and less efficient than, say, buses. We have done a research which clearly shows that a bicycle on the road occupies as much as one-third of road space for a car. This means that three commuters on bicycles occupy road space equivalent to one car. On the other hand, the new Jumbo bus, for example, which occupies road space equivalent to nine cyclists or three cars can take a load of 70 to 80 passengers. Therefore, the bus is at least five times more effective than a bicycle as a form of transport. We are all agreed with the Member that cycling is to be encouraged as a form of exercise, but it is definitely not practicable as a mode of travel, in particular, into the congested City area. As a recreational exercise, the Member must be probably aware, since he is a keen cyclist, that we have provided cycle tracks along the new East Coast Park. He is welcome to use them whenever he feels like it. He has also made the suggestion that we carry out road repairs during the evening. The PWD is at the moment carrying out certain road maintenance works in the CBD, such as road resurfacing and painting of lines, white lines in particular, during the night or off-peak hours or during week-ends. However, in regard to excavation of roads for the laying of the various utility services such as electricity, water and gas, serious problems may arise if such work is carried out during the night. For example, in certain areas of the CBD where there are residents it would create a noise nuisance to the residents. It would also create the problem of unfinished work which, by the following morning, would cause a heavier traffic congestion, probably increasing the accident risks. Moreover, we may have the difficulty of getting people to work at night. The Member raised a third query in regard to the widening of Upper Thomson Road and Sembawang Road. The programme at the moment involves three stages. The first stage is the extension of Sembawang from Mandai Road to Jalan Sembawang Kechil. This stretch of road is approximately 4.511 metres long. The second stage covers from Upper Thomson Road at the Sembawang Hill Circus to Mandai Road. This is equivalent to 3,205 metres long. The final stage would mean the final construction from Jalan Sembawang Kechil to Admiralty Gate. This stretch of road is about 2.027 metres long. We have just only begun Stage I in July 1975.lt is expected to be completed in July 1976. The completion of all three stages will take us up to 1978. I have no figures to tell the Member how much it will cost. But if he is interested to know how much is the cost of Stage I as well as the other stages I will be very happy to supply him with the information if he will write to me. To come to the Member for Jurong, I am extremely sympathetic towards his observations because I used to travel along that road about a year ago. According to the PWD, a number of improvements have since then been made. It is granted that the previous Minister for Law and National Development did suggest that he would look into it. But there are three reasons why the Member's request cannot be entertained. First of all, as far as the PWD is concerned, the JTC is the authority for Jurong Town. Secondly, the matter was referred to the JTC but they felt that there was no justification at this stage to construct a bridge across this particular area. It is obvious that the cost of construction for such a long bridge would be prohibitive. Thirdly, although the JTC was not in favour or could not justify the construction of this bridge across, the PWD on its own has done as much as it could to widen the roads at Upper Ayer Rajah Road, extending West Coast Road into Jurong Town Hall Road, together with a number of other proposals. I regret that at this juncture the PWD has no intention, and it has no budget for 1976/77 anyway, to carry out this expensive construction project. I would suggest that, if the Member is really keen, he should convince the JTC of the need for this project and we can decide who is to foot the Bill.

(In Mandarin): Sir, first of all, I thank the Minister of State for his reply. He is very sympathetic to my view that there is the necessity to build the bridge across the road, but in view of the problem of a lack of funds, he has suggested that I should persuade the JTC to approve the project. I would say that the Minister of State would be more effective in persuading the JTC to implement my suggestion. He would be in a better position to take up this proposal than I. I still feel that the problem is there although, as I have pointed out, the road has been widened and improved upon. This goes to a certain extent to relieve the congestion there. However, in view of the fact that Jurong Town is being developed and more people are working there to work as more factories are being set up, we have reached the point where the situation needs further improvement in the most basic way. If the JTC and the PWD are not able to provide the funds for the work, then I suggest that both of them share the costs. I believe that since the Minister of State has some links or communication in Jurong with either the Singapore Manufacturers Association or other bodies concerned, he should be in a position to help.

Sir, while it is a compliment that I have more power than the Hon. Member, he must bear in mind that JTC comes directly under the Ministry of Finance and the Chairman may have more power than I do. However, I think it is a fain proposal. We will take the initiative by contacting JTC and see whether there could be an agreed formula, If it is necessary some formula could be worked out. After all, it is the Ministry of Finance that is funding it.

(In Mandarin): Sir, in view of the detailed reply given by the Minister of State, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Sir, before I speak on the next amendment on which I want to make some comments, may I crave your indulgence to say a few words in connection with the proceedings of this Parliament?

Mr Ho. I would rather that you move the amendment.

Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 0 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead BDA 1107*. (* The same amendment also stood in the name of Mr Ng Kah Ting.) I wish to say something about the proceedings of this Parliament. I would like to lay a complaint before you that in future -

Mr Ho, I would rather that you come straight on to your amendment on this subhead. If you have a complaint, could you please write to me in my Chambers?

I accept your ruling, Sir. I would like to draw the attention of the House to the extreme difficulty experienced nowadays by individuals and associations in seeking approval from the Building Control Division for a change in the utilisation of building premises. The Building Control Division appears to be absolutely inflexible, fussing over minor technicalities which are often irrelevant and stultify attempts to use premises for any other purpose. This creates frustration and indignation among the public. Let me give you a few examples. In my constituency, as a result of urban renewal, about half a dozen associations have been asked to quit their premises. These associations experienced great difficulty in obtaining suitable alternative locations and have thus been unable to move within the time specified by the Urban Renewal Authority. However, even when they found a suitable location their application to use the premises has been rejected by the Building Control Division on the ground that the association should not be sited in that locality. No real reason was given as to why the-location was unsuitable and consequently the impression is created that the decision has been made at the whims and fancies of somebody in the Building Control Division. Sometimes when a locality is approved by the Building Control Division, they will nevertheless insist that the third floor should be used instead of the second floor which is preferred by the association. If the third floor can be used, why not the second floor? What is the rationale behind such a thinking? It would, therefore. seem that on the one hand while the Urban Renewal Authority is driving the associations out of their premises in the name of urban renewal, the Building Control Division on the other hand puts obstruction in their removal to new premises. The associations are therefore in a dilemma, and I would therefore urge the Building Control Division to exercise some degree of flexibility and also to examine the rationale behind some of their regulations. 6.15 p.m.

Mr Speaker, Sir, in filing an amendment to this subhead, I merely wish to seek the clarification of the Minister concerned with regard to the building plans that are being sold by his Ministry. With these plans, one would be able to proceed to build a temporary house, say, with three rooms and a sitting hall. As I mentioned earlier in this Chamber, there are several farmers who have been given small plots of land in Punggol to continue with pig farming. But they are facing some difficulty with regard 10 the erection of their temporary building which has to be strictly in accordance with the detailed plan. For example, if one obtains a building plan for a house with three rooms and a hall, one finds that the kitchen, the bathroom and the toilet are all sited together. But there is no modern sanitation ii that area, and I think Hon. Members can just imagine that at meal times what flavour the smell would give to their meals.

Aroma!

Or aroma, as my good Friend, the Member for Jalan Kayu, has said. In this respect, could the Ministry then allow such toilet facilities to be sited outside the building rather than insist on the strict requirement that it should be sited in the building together with the bathroom and the kitchen? Another point is the roof eaves which has a protrusion of about three feet. I have met no less than 20 farmers from areas like Chua Chu Kang and Cheng San who complained to me that they had tried to ask the Building Control Division to allow an extension of the protrusion to the front part of the building but without any further support from the ground to, say, about eight feet so as to avoid the rain. Incidentally we have been having some very heavy rain these days. Since the protrusion to the eaves is only about three feet, whenever it rains especially when it is heavy, windows have to be shut, and according to one farmer his house has been turned into a little pond. Since all these resettled farmers have brought with them money to begin a new means of livelihood, pig farming, and since the houses are of a temporary nature, surely the Ministry could allow a certain amount of flexibility, such as extension to the front part of the building, if the alteration does not cause any extension of the ground or floor area. In this connection, the latrine too should be allowed to be sited outside the house rather than in the house. It is most inconvenient and unhygienic because there is no modern sanitation in these areas. Most of all, one can just imagine that a great part of the area is entirely devoted to pig farming. I sincerely hope that the Minister concerned would kindly consider my appeal on behalf of those farmers who are there, as well as those who will be coming to join them and they have come to see the place and have also made suggestions.

Sir, I would like to support the sentiments expressed by the two Hon. Members who have spoken before me. First of all, I fully agree with the point raised by the Member for Punggol. I think there is something basically not quite right with the standard plan prepared by the Building Control Division. They seem to have overlooked the fact that in all those areas where that standard plan is supposed to be applicable, there is no modern sanitation. So it is preferable that we should allow them to erect the toilet and bathroom away from the main building. There is no doubt that there is a very strict and rigid adherence to the rules and regulations as mentioned by the Member for Bras Basah to the extent that some of these cottage industries are suffering. I think we ought to draw a line somewhere. We ought to support certain cottage industries and not discourage or ban them, especially if they are situated in the rural areas. If there are no complaints from the neighbours and if they are not polluting the environment, either in terms of noise or air pollution, they should be allowed some flexibility. I have come across a number of cases where, in order to supplement their earnings, the families sub-contract work from garment factories. They bring the garments back home to sew. The housewives and daughters join in to make a bit of extra money. Yet the next moment the Building Control Division comes along and tells them to stop. As far as I can see, they are contributing to our economy and they are not disturbing anybody at all. All this type of activity is going on in the rural areas where the houses are situated a fair distance from each other. I think all these points ought to be taken into consideration. The Division should not just say, "There is only one set of rules irrespective of the environment." There ought to be some distinction on the type of commercial or economic activities that might be permitted even in residential districts.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise to support the point made by the Member for Jalan Kayu. At a time when we are facing economic difficulties I do think that we should not be too rigid in the application of rules and regulations, especially in the use of buildings or, as he has described them, cottage industries, or even to have self-employment at home. If we are too rigid, then I think we are going to exacerbate the problem of unemployment.

(In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, several MPs from the rural areas have already spoken on the problems of housing and housing control. I would like to place on record my support for their sentiments expressed in this House. Sir, we always face such problems in the rural areas, for example, problems of alterations, renovations or repairs. If these people have to engage an architect to draw up a plan, it will cost them a lot of money. So they buy the standard plan available from the Building Control Division but such plans have certain restrictions on the land area which should not exceed 1 .000 sq, ft. But in the rural areas many of the families have more than 10 persons each, and all of them are crammed into a space of 1.000 sq, ft. I think this is too much. The Member for Punggol has raised this point and I fully endorse his suggestion that we should not be rigid and allow them to build the latrine outside the house. If built inside, the smell is not only there at meal times but also when they sleep. I do not know whether the plan designers have drawn up such plans in their own air-conditioned offices or whether they have really seen life in the rural areas. We can ask them: what is the reason for insisting that the latrine should be built within the four walls of the house?

Sir, let me, first of all, answer the query on the rigidity of the Building Control Division in approving applications for change of use of buildings. The records of the Building Control Division show that in 1974. 465 or 55% of applications for change of use, out of a total of 848, were granted. In 1975, 698 or 62% of applications, out of a total of 1,119, were approved. In other words, the flexibility that the Member for Bras Basah is asking for is liberally granted, as far as change of use is concerned. I think all Members here will appreciate the important need for the control of a change of use. Otherwise all kinds of nonresidential use will creep into residential areas, thereby adversely affecting the amenities of the residents. We are- equally aware that it is totally unrealistic to completely brush aside applications for nonresidential uses, many of which may provide useful services to the community such as those illustrated by the Member for Jalan Kayu and strongly supported by the Member for Whampoa. As far as the small type of community service is concerned, such as bringing home a few dresses to sew, I do not see any involvement in a change of use of the premises. It is only in a situation where, say, in a floor of a residential estate you have seven or eight sewing machines and five on six seamstresses employed on a daily basis, then the question of a change of use arises. 6.30 p.m. In this sort of situation I regret to say that flexibility cannot be exercised. But in those situations which the Member has mentioned, I am definite that consideration will be given. Let me assure the Member for Bras Basah that if any of his constituents is aggrieved by the decision of a competent authority like the Building Control Division, he can appeal to the Minister.

We will give it very sympathetic consideration.

Let me repeat that we will give very sympathetic consideration to cases where rejection has been based on small technicalities, as he has implied. Let me come to the question of why we have allowed the second floor of a building to be used as premises for an association and not the third floor. As I am familiar with the position of the URA in his particular constituency, let me assure him that there is coordination between the URA and the BCD. For example, when there is a deadline for a particular resident to be moved out, extension is liberally given if there is strong justification. In fact. I am very familiar with this matter because the letters would first come to the URA. They then go to the BCD and on BCD's advice, or vice versa, extension is given in most cases. If the second floor of a building is allowed to be used by an association, I am with him that there is no justification to turn down an application if the association prefers to occupy the third floor. But more often than not I think the reason is that if we allow the premises to be used by an association, it involves a change of use and, therefore, the application is turned down: it being a residential area. But if the Member can give me the particulars of the case, I would be very happy to look into it, To come to the Member for Punggol. He has mentioned about the aroma filling the dining room. My Minister has asked me to reply to him. It is very unfair to put the toilet outside and expect one's neighbour to inhale the aroma. Let me say that the building plan given to the rural constituents is meant, in the first place, as a guideline. One must bear in mind that the plot of land is under TOL. I am with the Member that if, for example, the plot of land is of an indefinite size then, in fact, the Building Control Division may allow a person to put up more than one building. But the plot is on TOL and it is of a certain standard size. The recommendation is for a particular type of house, a building with three rooms, plus kitchen and toilet. It is planned to fit into that particular TOL plot so that there is a reasonable boundary with one's neighbour. I happen to know this matter quite well because I have received complaints from one or two rural constituents. I am in sympathy with their view that it is unfair to expect them to employ an architect to change a particular plan, because if they get an architect who knows all the regulations on boundary requirements and so on and so forth, he can draw up a plan entirely different from the guide plan from the Division. If any particular constituent in a rural constituency has a plot of land which is of a certain size and there is justification for constructing more than one building or an extension to the building, as I have indicated, I would be happy to look into it.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I think the Senior Minister of State for National Development has been misinformed. I wish to make a correction. With regard to permission for a temporary building on agricultural land, there is one house or a temporary building on every two acres or nearly a hectare of land. What I am trying to impress upon him is that that part of Punggol has been designated a pig farming industrial area. As I have mentioned, the pig farmers from Chua Chu Kang and Serangoon Gardens have already been given small plots of land. On the question of architecture, I have some knowledge about building structures and I believe the Senior Minister of State knows well that using the official plan is much simpler because it can be simply bought from the Planning Department. No architect would say, "All right, I will draw up a building plan for a three-room house, one hall, a kitchen, a toilet, etc.", if it is going to be a temporary structure. The fees would be prohibitive. On the question that it is unfair to have the toilet facilities erected outside the house, it should be remembered that there will be a proliferation of pig farms over all the designated areas in Punggol. I have mentioned just now that more than 20 persons have come to see me. Each of them has been given a small piece of land of about one or two acres, or maybe three acres, all on Temporary Occupation Licence. All I am asking is this. They have appealed to me to solve the problem which they are facing. I will bring up other problems under other amendments when the time comes. But if the Senior Minister of State would like to visit Punggol. I would be too glad to organise for him a tour of the pig farms as well as to see the buildings which are being put up. The farmers are complaining about the buildings and said that they should be allowed to alter them so that the eaves of the roof can protrude a little bit. It is not an extension, because extension implies extending the floor area, This is by way of shade. It can probably be called that way. They wish to keep off the rain because of the nature of the building plan. The plan requires the eaves of the roof to be three feet and no more. When they appeal for permission to extend the eaves, it was not approved. They had to keep to the plan. The same thing applies to the toilet. I think I am standing on home ground when I say that these are their problems. It is a request. I am appealing. I am not criticising. There is something wrong with the building plan. It is a genuine grouse. Moreover there is going to be a new pig farming industry, and perhaps by the end of 1977 the entire population of Singapore may have to depend on Punggol for pork.

Mr Speaker, Sir, while I stand corrected for the misinformation that was given to me, my colleague here, the Minister of State for Communications understands that the Master Plan (Rural Zone) allows one temporary dwelling house on a plot of land of not less than one acre, This is merely to retain the rural character of the area concerned. But I understand the point raised. It is a reasonable request, if you are talking of the extension of the eaves. If the request does not affect the boundary and its regulations then there is no reason why we should not consider it.

In that case I must thank the Senior Minister of State for having been enlightened by his colleague, the Minister of State for Communications. I do not want to quibble over the question of the Master Plan and the number of housing units on an acre of land. I would just like to say that I am grateful for his reply with regard to the protrusion for the eaves. However, he has still not given a reply on the matter of sitting the toilet facilities outside the building. I think the Minister for National Development is getting excited and wishes to speak. I will give way to him.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the building plan from the Building Control Division has been drawn up by a professional architect. I do not think there is anything wrong with the eaves protruding three feet out. If the Member were to think seriously, allowing the eaves to protrude eight feet out from a house which is about 10 feet high, the eaves would reach the floor! No doubt it will prevent the rain from coming in, but it will also prevent the light from coming in, So the plan is drawn up proportionally and is architecturally correct. I think it fills all the needs. If the eaves should protrude eight feet out without any support, it also constitutes a danger to the occupants. I think there is a very good reason why an extension to eight feet is not allowed. Farmers are farmers, they are not architects. As regards whether the toilet facilities should be placed outside or inside the house, I do not know whether it is fair to place your toilet nearer to one's neighbour or to oneself. If everyone wants to have his toilet nearer to his neighbour and not next to his own kitchen, then we will be back to square one.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I am not disputing that the architect is night on is wrong. My question is: can consideration be given to their request, to site the toilet outside? And the Minister of State has said that he is prepared to consider it, but the Minister now says. "No". Regarding roof eaves, I will go a step further. I am by nature optimistic. If the eaves protrude eight feet out, it does not mean that they will come straight down: It depends on the angle, on elevation as we call it. It can be supported from the ceiling not from the ground.

It must be a funny-looking house.

The farmers want it that way. It is the farmers who are staying in the house. It is not I who will live there. That is the difference. Let us not quibble about it. The farmers themselves have asked for it. If the roof is slanted at, say 160 degrees or 90 degrees, that is an entirely different matter. But this is a question of the eaves protruding eight feet, which can easily be done. There is no problem. I think the Senior Minister of State for Communications can give a better explanation why the eaves can protrude to eight feet without touching the ground. We can even protrude it to 1.5 feet without support from the ground.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I am reminded of the crooked man who lived in a crooked house, all in a crooked way. If we are going to permit that kind of a building here, then there is no point in setting up the Building Control Division, Neither should we have architects. A building is put up not only for the purposes of dwelling but also for its aesthetic effect. The landscape should not be marred by a crooked house, a leaning house or a leaning Tower of Pisa. That is why we have the Building Control Division.

Sir, the house is to be occupied by a farming family who has made this genuine request. Let us not get excited and start talking about a man with a crooked mind who thinks in a crooked way and walks in a crooked manner, runs in a crooked style and also talks in a crooked way. I am talking in a straightforward manner. It is a question of the farmers asking me to appeal on their behalf. They are farmers from another constituency. They are not from my constituency. A good number of the farmers in my constituency have already gone to live in Housing Board flats. I have already put this case forward when I spoke on the amendment to cut the Minister's salary by $10. 6.45 p.m. I am appealing once again. They say. "We want the eaves at the front of our house extended by another 8 feet." I said, "For what?" They said, "Just let us have another 8 feet to keep us away from the rain."

Mr Speaker. Sir, I have just now indicated that there are other requirements, such as regulations for boundary. We will take note of the point and my Minister has agreed that he will consider the Member's request when it is submitted for consideration.

Sir, Confucius said, "Saying without thought is labour lost." I am quite satisfied with the reply of the Minister of State, and I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn,

(In Mandarin): Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 0 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead DAA 1107*. (* The same amendment also stood in the names of Messrs Lee Yiok Seng, Ng Kah Ting and Ho Kah Leong.) Sir, I would like to touch on the fall in prices of chickens and eggs. The Primary Production Department has contributed much to the promotion of agriculture and animal husbandry. In view of our limited land area, its contribution is even more meritorious. Very soon, there will be many people moving into the Punggol area. Our agricultural sector is able to provide poultry, pork and fish for almost the whole population of Singapore. However, there is a phenomenon that the production of eggs is in excess of demand. So a situation has been created where the farmers engaged in poultry keeping have suffered some losses, In my constituency, there are also a number of farmers who keep poultry. They complain to me that based on the retail price of eggs they are now getting 5 cents per egg less than before. In view of this, they feel that the heavy production of eggs is glutting the market. I would like the Minister to pay attention to this. I would request him to take some practical measures to help promote the sale of eggs and find markets for such eggs so that the poultry farmers need not incur an unnecessary loss. I mean, he should try to get markets abroad so that the eggs could fetch a better price, thus helping the poultry farmers to live better and to be able to carry on with poultry keeping. 6.49 p.m.

Mr Lee Yiok Seng.

I am not speaking. Sir.

I am also not speaking, Sir.

(In Mandarin): Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, the Member for Sembawang, in speaking on the Primary Production Department, has taken good care of our agricultural sector, But judging from the situation of the farmers and fishermen, I feel you will agree with me - you are also an MP for a rural area - that these people are like second class citizens, being faced with certain difficult and pitiful situation. You will agree with me when I say that they are subjected to hardships when they are forced to resettle, not just once but, even a few times thereafter. We should pay much more attention in giving them better cane than we have ever done. We have heard from the Members here that we could have done much better, It seems that even the request for the extension of the roof-eaves is not very well taken. I feel that this sort of treatment is not fain to our farmers and fishermen. In order to be a farmer or if one wants to engage in agricultural activities, one must have a piece of land in which to carry out such activities. After we have talked for so long, we are still at a loss as to whether anything can be done for these farmers. It seems that the final decision rests with the Primary Production Department. If the Department decides that one is a bona fide farmer, then perhaps one can be allotted a piece of land. If the Department decides that one is not a farmer, then one is unable to get any piece of land. The Department is also vested with the power to decide how big is the piece of land that can be given. Sir, I used to receive complaints about abnormal or undesirable acts in regard to the allocation of land by the Primary Production Department, such as allotting land to so-called farmers who are actually not farmers and vice versa. If a so-called farmer does not want the land, then he can be given a flat by the HDB. There were also cases where people were given many times more compensation or a larger piece of land than others. There were other cases where genuine farmers were not allotted any land at all. These are the incidents that I have to mention. Genuine farmers could not get land whereas pseudo-farmers were allotted land. This happens usually in a resettlement exercise of the farmers. There were quite a number of complaints that after a farmer has moved out, on the following day the farmhouse is demolished and there is nothing left as evidence to support the farmer's claim. There are no records to trace. Some farmers have complained that they have suffered great losses. If more notice could be given, they would not have lost as much. In certain cases, the Department would delay sending its officers to assess the value of the farm and agricultural produce. And when they do turn up, there would be very little agricultural produce left to be assessed. So very often this farmer would be adjudged not a farmer. But other farmers are smarter. They know that the Department would send somebody over, as they got wind of it or speculated on certain information received in advance. So they organise their poultry and pigs in advance and stock them in their farms so that when the assessor or officer turns up, they will get a higher assessment and be given better compensation, Here, I would like to ask the Minister what is the criterion for judging whether a person is a farmer on not a farmer? How is this judgment exercised? Secondly, is the decision of the Primary Production Department final? Is there no higher authority to decide thereon, or is the Department's decision subject `to any higher authority on appeal? Thirdly, what is the grade of the officer sent out by the Department to make on-the-spot inspections? What division of officers are being sent out for such purposes? Sir, on another point, what is the procedure for appealing against any such decision? I would like the Minister to answer these questions.

Sir, I can imagine what the Member for Jurong is suffering, because I have a similar experience in my constituency of Potong Pasir .--, imagine an aged man being asked to leave the land he has worked on for years and years. During the time that an assessment of his activities was made, he was unfortunately hospitalised and was unable to work on his land. Sc) the assessment by the PPD was "Nil". Immediately after he recovered of course he could not just hang around and wait for his land to be taken over by the HDB for development - he had to work. That was pant of his life. Without work, he would have died. So, he tilled the land and his vegetables started growing. But before his vegetables could be harvested, he was told that he had to move out and that he would not be paid a single cent for all the vegetables he had grown. I have made an appeal to the Resettlement Department. and they turned it down saying that "the Primary Production Department does not consider him a bona fide farmer." Once again, I appeal for a stay of execution so that he be allowed to harvest his vegetables and sell them in the market. No compensation, never mind that, so long as he could get something worthwhile from the sweat of his brows, his darkened and shrinking body. 7.00 p.m. I hope that the Hon. Minister will consider this appeal of mine and allow the farmer at least to let his vegetables grow large enough for sale in the market, or pay him compensation for the vegetables that he has grown.

Sir, I am just wondering whether I could be permitted to speak on resettlement of the farming community. I have intended to raise it under my Amendment (9), but since so much has been said on resettlement and what I want to speak on, in particular, is resettlement of the farming community, could I have your indulgence to speak now?

No, Mr Hwang. You can raise it under the proper subhead when it comes up, because the debate now is on the Primary Production Department.

The point brought up by the Member for Jurong relates to compensation, and the point raised by the Member for Potong Pasir is also related to resettlement of the farming community.

Mr Hwang. I would rather you raise it later on, if you do not mind. Yes, Dr. Tan.

To answer the Member for Sembawang on the Primary Production Department doing something to help poultry farmers in a situation where eggs are flooding the market, I would say that, being familiar with poultry and pig farming myself, his claim of a loss of five cents per egg is highly exaggerated. If such a situation is true, the poultry farmer must by now be a bankrupt. Let me assure him that the price of eggs, like the price of pork, is dependent on the supply and demand. In fact, it is neither the intention nor is it desirable that the Primary Production Department should interfere with the market forces by any form of direct control. But indirectly the Primary Production Department does try to help the farmers by teaching them how to bring down the cost of production, how to improve their feeding techniques, better husbandry techniques, and even providing an effective animal health service. In addition, the Department also monitors at all times the prices of animal feed and feed stuffs, and the price fluctuation of eggs and pork. If there is a situation such as what the Member has mentioned, the Primary Production Department makes an indirect attempt by talking to both the animal stock feed manufacturers, the farmers and the relevant associations. In other words, the role of the Primary Production Department in this case is an unofficial and indirect one. The Member for Jurong has made a few allegations on the unfair decision taken by the PPD in the classification of what we call "genuine" or "bona fide" farmers. He even alleged that there was perhaps some wrongdoing in the sense that information had leaked out to certain farmers who would then know exactly when a PPD officer would be coming to make an assessment. Let me assure the Member that if he could submit details of his information to us, we will definitely look into the allegation. To come back to the question as to what are the criteria used to differentiate between a bona fide farmer or an efficient farmer, and a non-bona fide farmer, the Minister has indicated just now some general guidelines. We say that if a farmer could rear 100 pigs or 3,000 head of poultry and do it reasonably well, then he would be a genuine farmer. He must grant the PPD technical officer the ability to assess whether he is an efficient farmer or not. I think that is reasonable because if the officer is familiar with animal husbandry techniques, the type of housing, the type of management and the way they feed their animals, he can quite safely conclude whether that farmer is efficient or not. The general criteria for assessment are this figure of 100 pigs or 3,000 head of poultry, and also at the same time the management of that particular farmer. The second point queried was about the assessment for compensation. I would like to tell him that the Primary Production Department has a set rate of compensation which has been revised upwards on 1 St April, 1975. I am in no position to tell him exactly what grade of officers go to the farms to make assessments of a durian tree, a rambutan tree, etc. However, I shall be happy to supply him the information any time he wants them. As regards the unfair demolition without any consideration for an extension of time, this could be answered together with the query by the Member for Potong Pasir who asked whether sympathetic consideration could be given to allow a vegetable farmer to harvest his vegetables so that he could sell them. Under normal circumstances the answer is yes. But if that particular area is required urgently, for example, an immediate construction of roads, then the Authority is in no position to grant an extension of time because of the urgent need by the relevant competent authority. Under normal circumstances where there is no urgent requirement. then in all cases a reasonable extension of time is given. As regards the procedure for appeal, there is a provision that if they are not happy with regard to specific items of compensation, they can write directly to the Ministry or, if they feel strongly, to the Minister concerned. We have received a few appeals arid these are being investigated. If the investigations reveal that there is unfair assessment of the various items, then there could be a decision to upgrade the amount of compensation. With regard to compensation and to whether a farmer is bona fide or not, we have to adopt certain criteria. If we do not start off somewhere, there is no way to assess whether or not a farmer is entitled to it, In all cases of resettlement, whether he is a bona fide farmer or not, some form of compensation is given. For example, if at the time of census-taking and even if he is an illegal squatter, priority as far as rental is concerned is also given to him. Most farmers are happy in the sense that they feel that they qualify as bona fide farmers and so would be entitled to alternative land for farming. I think the main problem, as my Minister has indicated earlier, is that due to a shortage of land we have to encourage intensive pig farming, and in this respect we regret we cannot liberally grant a non-bona fide farmer the privileges of a bona fide farmer.

(In Mandarin): Sir, I do not quite agree to his answer. I should think that it is his responsibility to find out why there were such anomalies. This is his duty, not mine. Perhaps due to some discrepancy in language interpretation, he has not given me a satisfactory reply. I was saying that there were some people who had been farmers, and this fact could be confirmed by the Citizens Consultative Committee members. When such people wanted to co-operate with the Government authority in resettlement enforcement, they reduced their agricultural activities. So when the assessor came, the produce of course would be assessed less, and such people were adjudged as non-farmers. These people have complained to me about this. When I mentioned this to the Authority concerned, no favourable consideration was given. What I am trying to say is that you can ask the CCC members to confirm whether or not such people are genuine farmers.

As a layman I am very sympathetic towards the farmers regarding their status. While it is appreciated that the CCC or the Management Committee can support a claim, the definition of a bona fide and efficient farmer, as I have indicated, is a technical one. In the case that he has mentioned, if a farmer initially keeps 3,000 head of poultry but due to some reason or other he has reduced it to 2,000 at the time the Primary Production officer arrives to make an assessment, then he is automatically disqualified for the definition of a bona fide farmer. In farming language, it is unlikely that a bona fide farmer would reduce his stock of 3.000 head of poultry because 3.000 is considered the minimum number to really break even. As my Minister indicated sometime earlier, that could only be a supplementary type of work. 7.15 p.m. Let me give some simple statistics. For example, a farmer has 3,000 head of poultry and assuming they produce 3,000 eggs. Let us also say that this farmer derives the whole of his income from these 3,000 head of poultry. At 10 cents per egg per day, he will find that his margin of profit cannot be more than 10%. At most, assuming that he is so efficient that the 3,000 head of poultry lay 3.000 eggs, at any one time he can sell them for $360 and. cleverly makes a profit of 10%, which is $36. I am not suggesting that some of the CCC members are not farmers. They are, but they must appreciate that we must draw a line somewhere. To cut short the argument, I have indicated that if the Member feels strongly that he has got a case where at the time of census instead of 3.000 poultry the farmer had only 2,800 then I think flexibility could be exercised. If, on the other hand, at the time of census he had only 2,000, then I think it is very difficult for him to argue the case out. So I would appeal to him that if he still feels strongly about those cases. please write to us and we will have another investigation made. As regards my point about asking CCC members to help us, assuming that the Primary Production Department should now investigate those allegations that these members have made, there is no way of investigating because the officer does not know where to begin. He must have some clue or information to start with. All that we are asking from these members is that if they can give us that information under confidential cover, or even make it anonymous if they feel like it, it could enable us to start somewhere. Our officer cannot lust go to a particular area, say, Jurong or, for that matter, any rural constituency, without knowing how or where to begin. So please do not get me wrong when I say that we do not have the intention to investigate. We have, but they must feed us with a clue as to which direction we can move.

(In Mandarin): Sir, I have given the Minister certain useful tips. Such incidents would happen to those farmers who are affected by urgent resettlement. They have to collect and move a substantial part of their farm produce and implements hurriedly. So the following day when the houses and agricultural implements are demolished there is no more evidence to support any claim. Sir, I have mentioned that certain farmers due to circumstances have reduced their production. In view of the situation, could the Minister be flexible and give special consideration to such cases and not just beat about the bush about the definition of 3,000 or 2.000 head of poultry?

If the Minister's interpretation is correct, and that is, a farmer is classified as bona fide by the Primary Production Department but it now says that he is not a bona fide farmer, then I think the Primary Production Department should be asked to explain. If my understanding is correct. I think what the Member for Jurong is suggesting is that the person has all along been a bona fide farmer according to our definition, but at the time of assessment, for some reason, he was disqualified because the number of pigs or poultry has been reduced. I am saying that much depends on what the range of difference is. If it is within a reasonable range, some flexibility could be exercised and I think we can look into the matter. Perhaps to convince the Member for Jurong, if he feels strongly about it, please send the case to us and we will look into it.

(In Mandarin): Sir, I thank the Minister of State for having given me a detailed reply. I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The following amendment stood in the names of Messrs Sim Boon Woo and Ng Kah Ting (5) That the sum to be allocated for Head 0 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead DEA 1111.

Mr Sim Boon Woo is not here. Mr Ng Kah Ting.

Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 0 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead DEA 1111. Sir, I wish to draw the attention of the Minister to the lack of marine life in the Serangoon River due to pollution from the Ministry of the Environment. Sir, you are aware that I was more or less compelled to shorten my question yesterday because I intended to broaden the aspect of pollution problems which resulted in the fishermen in Punggol having to lead a hard life. Sir, the Ministry of the Environment has another dumping ground in Tampines constituency, which is situated near the estuary of the Serangoon River. Every day many lorry-loads of trade refuse from the City are carted by these Environment lorries and dumped there. The refuse being dumped there naturally pollute the waters of the Serangoon River because of the tides that come in and recede. When the tide comes in it comes up right to the banks, and when it recedes it washes the refuse away. As a result, there is less fish and prawns in that area. So the livelihood of fishermen who fish in that area is threatened. I think that not only the fishermen from Punggol but also fishermen from Tampines and Jalan Kayu constituencies are faced with this problem. Another problem, Sir, which they face is this illegal otter trawling. In the past I had occasion to bring to the attention of this House to the damage done to the nets as well as the threat posed by these illegal otter trawlers which go into the waters with long drag-nets without marine lights and cutting off the little fishing lines that were laid by the fishermen. Today, I still receive complaints of the operations of these illegal otter trawlers. I wonder whether the Minister would care to look into this matter. Another point is in regard to the Fisheries Division. We have read in the newspapers that the Division is trying to encourage fish breeding in our waters, especially in the Singapore Straits or the kelongs. It is a pity to hear from the Member for Changi that a good number of the kelongs have to be demolished. I was under the impression that the Fisheries Division is actively encouraging these kelong owners to breed fish in their kelongs. I think this is a good move because we lack such food supplies and have to import them. Just now we heard an active discussion about the glut of eggs resulting in the farmers losing money. That should not be so because the Government department concerned is indirectly trying to get a fairer price and the price also fluctuates according to supply and demand. But in this particular case. Sir, fish also is like a staple food, as we have to import no less than 80% to 90% of our needs. At the moment, we have two fish markets, one at Jurong and the other at Kangkar which is in my constituency. With these remarks, Sir, I wonder whether the Minister would care to elaborate to this House the type of activities covered by the Fisheries Division.

Sir, I presume that the Member for Punggol in the first part of his query is referring to the Lorong Halus Dumping Ground of the Ministry of the Environment, which is situated along the Serangoon River. Yesterday the Minister for the Environment has indicated to the Member that bunds have been built along the river bank as a means to prevent waste from being washed down into the Serangoon River. If the Member feels strongly regarding the pollution control procedures or matters, my Ministry will be happy to take it up with the Ministry of the Environment. I was told that at the mouth of the Serangoon River the fishermen are catching crabs. I do not know how true this is. According to the Ministry of the Environment, the pollution is not all that bad. As I have indicated, if the Member feels strongly he can refer this matter to the Ministry of the Environment. 7.30 p.m. As regards illegal trawlers, the Primary Production Department has not received any complaint on this matter and I have no information to offer. If the Member can supply me information on the trawlers' activities, we can look into the matter. The third matter which he wishes to seek information is the Fisheries Division which, as he has correctly pointed out, is playing an extremely important role in ensuring a sufficient supply of fish for Singapore. The Fisheries Division has done a few things in that direction. Of immediate relevance would be the type of research work that is being carried out in the Division, in particular the freshwater laboratory called the Aqua Culture Unit. This is a relatively new field. The intention is to rear freshwater or aquarium fish for production, just like the traditional Chinese method of culture. This particular unit is looking into the artificial breeding of udang gala and soon hock, a variety of carp. The Division is also looking into the possibility of cage-net breeding of Chinese carps in the reservoirs and garoupa near and around the costal waters. It is also looking into the artificial breeding of fingerlings by culture. They are all at different stages of research and development. We hope that something will come out of these research programmes. But, as the Member has indicated, the main activities are at the Jurong Fishing Port and the other fishing centres, that is, the Central Fish Market at Jurong and the Kangkar Fisheries Centre. There is a question on the Jurong Fishing Centre by the Member for Jurong. I think I can sum up by saying that the activities of the Central Fish Market at Jurong have increased tremendously in terms of encouraging trawlers to bunk at this particular fishing centre. It has also encouraged other indirect or related activities, such as the provision of deep-freeze facilities. It has also a fish meal factory nearby. It is trying to encourage related facilities in that particular centre so as to enable more fishing trawlers to call at Singapore. The Member may know that we do buy fish from the Russian, Japanese, and Taiwanese trawlers and also from Thailand. I have figures to show that over the past year there was an increase of total gross tonnage of almost 77.636 tons over the previous year. There is also an increase of unloaded fish, approximately 1 7.4%, over the previous year. I have more or less summarised the more important points on the activities of the Fisheries Division. But if Members are interested to have more details, I have them all here.

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sin. I must first thank the Senior Minister of State for National Development for his detailed reply. However, he has mentioned that his Ministry has not received any complaint of illegal trawling. If that is so, I shall send him a written complaint later today. On the second point, the Minister for Law and the Environment mentioned yesterday that the Ministry was building bunds at the Tampines dumping ground. A lot of damage has already been caused to marine life there. It is only because someone has stood up and said "Look, pollution is affecting marine life. The fishermen cannot get much of a catch, and as a result, they are faced with a serious problem", then something is being done. But I am taking this one step further. I say that even though bunds are built, the rubbish is still being dumped there. If the Senior Minister of State would care to go to the place, he will find a lot of rubbish floating at high tide. This is a genuine case. Now, with regard to the fishermen who catch crabs in the mangrove swamps. They have to get a long piece of wire to catch the crab in its hole. I am talking about the fishing problem they are facing. Most of them use small lines. If I can use the Malay word, with your permission. Sir, the net is called "jaring". It is just a net with a half-inch span in width and about 10 metres in length, at the end of which is attached a small light. The net comes in with the tide. The net is thrown into the water, and there are usually four or five nets. Later when the tide goes down, they would just go round and pick up the catch of fish and prawns. The catch is getting less now, and this is their complaint. I have seen how they do it. It is my earnest hope that since this complaint has been laid before the House, the Ministry would look into the matter. If an assurance is forthcoming, I am prepared to withdraw my amendment.

Sir, the Member is championing the cause of the fishermen in his constituency. As far as anti-pollution measures are concerned. I have said that he could bring the matter up directly with the Ministry of the Environment. As far as the Primary Production Department is concerned. I have indicated that we would be very happy to pursue the matter further with the Ministry of the Environment to satisfy his request.

Sir, it is not a question of satisfying my request. It is a matter of grave concern to the fishermen because their livelihood is affected. However, since the Minister of State has said that he is prepared to look into the matter, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 0 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead AAA 3011 Sir, I have a simple question to ask of the Minister. I believe that free water supply at public standpipes has already ceased a few years ago. How is it that last year there was such a vote and this year there is also a vote of $20,000 for free water supply at public standpipes. I am under the impression that nothing is for free. How is it that today we still see a vote of $20,000 for the provision of free water supply? I should be very grateful if the Minister would care to reply.

Sir, the provision under this subhead is to meet expenditure, as the Member has indicated, for the supply of free water at the remaining public standpipes and outdoor taps in the rural areas. Our policy as mentioned by him still stands. There are only two standpipes today at Jalan Betek, off Lim Chu Kang, and five outdoor taps at Rifle Range Road which cannot be dismantled for the time being as they are for use by the residents in that area who have no other source of water supply. To give an indication of how our policy has been implemented, the number of standpipes has been progressively reduced from 2,471 in 1966 to two in 1976. As and when alternative water supply is available in these particular areas, the remaining standpipes will be removed.

The answer given is satisfactory. I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Mr Deputy Speaker. Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 0 be reduced by $10 in respect of item (a) of subhead AAA .3020*. (* The same amendment also stood in the names of Messrs Yeo Choo Kok, Hwang Soo Jin, Ho See Beng and J.F. Conceicao.) Sir, I had reason to complain once before, outside this Chamber, of shoddy and poorly finished work by contractors which were accepted as "completed work" by the Housing and Development Board. I do appreciate the tremendous pressure on the Housing and Development Board to deliver more and more flats to meet the increasing demand for them. Notwithstanding this pressure, the Housing and Development Board should be more vigilant in ensuring that it will not accept from contractors any flat that is poorly finished. After all, tenders are called for the construction of flats suitable for occupation and are paid for as such. Proper supervision of construction and inspection before acceptance from the contractors will not appreciably increase the cost of flats. Proper finish of the floors, walls and hinges of doors, windows, etc, is not going to delay construction that long either. In any case, poorly finished flats have to be redone before occupation, and that takes time too. I had also previously talked about workers and contractors lacking work ethic, lacking pride in their craftsmanship, etc, which accounted for this sorry state of affairs. What I ask is that the Housing and Development Board should be a little more vigilant in their supervision of contractors. 7.45 p.m. Another area where the HDB can help the new flat owners is to be a little more careful in the selection of authorised contractors for renovation work in HDB flats. Some of these authorised contractors farm out their work to numerous unauthorised sub-contractors who cheat innocent flat owners by shoddy workmanship or not completing the work in time after having received payment or refusing to hand over the keys until their demand for additional payment is met. Whenever such reports are made to the Housing and Development Board, the Board should not brush them off saying that it was a private arrangement between the contractor and the flat owner. Investigations should be made and recalcitrant contractors should be barred from tendering, and blacklisted. Sir, another area of comment is that the Housing Board lets out parking lots to residents on a six-month basis. Recently, when the Government decided to increase road tax for cars in order to reduce the car population in Singapore, a car owner decided to conform with the Government policy and deregistered his car and so took it off the road. Yet, when he approached the Housing Board for a proportionate refund of the unused parking charges of four months, his request was turned down. Here is a car-owner who has deregistered his car in accordance with Government policy and yet his money was not refunded. If a cash refund cannot be made, the amount of refund could at least be used to set off his monthly payment to HDB for conservancy charges, etc. The Government is setting a good example in this respect by making a refund of unused road tax payments if the cars are deregistered, and the road tax surcharge was also adjusted downwards in respect of cars above seven years old after representations had been made. My third complaint is in respect of land set aside in housing estates for community centres. I am told that the Ministry of Finance takes a long time to approve payment for the land to the Housing and Development Board. I will have more to say about this when we come to debate the provisions for the Ministry of Finance. In the meantime, let me say that plans for construction of the community centres could not be submitted to the Planning Department because the Housing and Development Board, as land owner. refuses to endorse such plans. This causes a deadlock and a long delay, and the entire project will be at a standstill because of the Housing Board's refusal to endorse. If the land set aside for a community centre is accepted by the People's Association as a suitable site, then I do not see any difficulty for the Housing Board to endorse such a plan. Surely the HDB is not worried that the Ministry of Finance would not pay for the land. In any case, even if there is a dispute between the Ministry of Finance and the Housing Board in respect of payment, the HDB can always stop its construction. In any case. Sir, the HDB gets money from the Ministry of Finance.

Mr Deputy Speaker. Sir, as housing developers, there is no disputing the fact that the HDB has lived up to its name so much so that today half of Singapore's population are housed in HDB accommodations, a fact that has been referred to by a number of Hon. Members in the House today. It may sound a little farfetched, but someone did remark to me recently that half of Singapore is in effect, ruled by the HDB. Although this was made more in jest than in seriousness, it does lead me to think that there ought to be a serious review of the role and the function of the HDB. Whilst the development aspect of the Board's function will remain important for some time to come, equal if not greater emphasis should now be placed on the provision of better maintenance services. Over the years we have heard of numerous grouses against the unilateral actions taken by the Board's administration. Many of these grouses, if not all, are to my mind well justified, suggesting that the Board is either not giving sufficient attention or simply not equipped organisationally to provide an acceptable standard of maintenance services. Residents generally are agreed that considering the not inconsiderable monthly maintenance and conservancy charges paid by them, the services provided ought to be better. This has also led to doubts as to whether the basis adopted in the costing of all such charges is, in fact, equitable and realistic. I am not a firm believer in statistics which it is often said can be used to prove anything depending on your own standpoint. It is nevertheless interesting to note that according to a sample household survey conducted in 1968 to find out residents' reaction to change in living conditions since their relocation into HDB flats. 75.2% interviewed at that time considered that from the point of cleanliness of neighbourhood, the change' was for the better. However, by 1973 a similar survey conducted by the HDB revealed that the percentage has dropped by 26 points to 49.2% and from the point of cleanliness of building, only 49.3% agreed that the change was for the better. There is no comparative figure for 1 968 in regard to the latter item. The figures quoted by me are contained in pages 356 and 357 of the HDB sponsored publication entitled Public Housing in Singapore. Admittedly the position may have changed somewhat over the last two years but is it for the better? I leave Members to draw their own conclusion. For some years now the HDB has been invariably chaired by a private individual working on a part-time basis, but for the time being the Permanent Secretary of the Ministry is the acting Chairman. I do hope that this will become a permanent feature as by having direct control of the activities of the `Board by a senior Government officer. there will be numerous advantages. First, there is greater awareness and appreciation of the thinking of the political leadership. Secondly, being a senior Government officer, he can more easily coordinate the activities of the Board with those of the other Government departments - from overall planning down to day-to-day administration. Greater coordination will go a long way towards ensuring unnecessary wastage, delays and, above all. comprehensiveness in services. The apparent lack of comprehensiveness in planning resulting from lack of proper coordination has given rise to a number of anomalies and shortcomings. Take, for example, Toa Payoh, a town of not less than a quarter million people. There was not a police station in sight when it was first completed. In no time it was to acquire the dubious reputation of being the Chicago of Singapore. Another example is to be found in the location of the Jalan Kayu Post Office at the newly completed HDB estate. This post office is tucked away in such an odd and inconspicuous corner some distance away from the market and shopping centre. The explanation given to me was that the requirement of the post office was not taken into consideration at the planning stage. By the time the post office asked for a suitable site, all shop premises had been taken up. In planning the estate, it is also obvious to me that no attention was paid to the unavoidable impact on the traffic situation in the neighbourhood resulting from overnight expansion in population. This has caused serious congestion and increasing number of road accidents at the traffic junction close by. Had a little thought been given to this aspect during the planning stage, it would have been possible to widen a small stretch of one side only of Yio Chu Kang Road bordering the HDB estate without too great a cost if carried out when the construction of the estate was still in progress. As things stand at this very moment, I have been told that the situation can only be remedied in 1977 when the PWD proposes to widen the entire Yio Chu Kang Road. In the meantime, the junction remains a serious hazard to road users. In the planning of a housing estate, one would have expected the Board to take into account the needs of all Government departments. Many will obviously like to decentralise their services by setting up offices or sub-offices in newly established population centres so as to provide on-the-spot service and in the process help to alleviate the serious problem of traffic congestion in the Central Business District, where most of them are situated at present. The present attitude of the Board would, however, appear to be that if I can let out all the shops to the private sector at good rentals, let me do so first and think of the Government departments later. This over pre-occupation with money-making to the extent of overlooking the need to provide essential services on-the-spot is surely not right. I am shocked to find out recently that the going rate for renting a shop in Toa Payoh Central, is $10 per sq, ft. I think the Member for Sembawang was exaggerating when he said that it was $40. I think $10 is already bad enough. This must be the highest rate anywhere in Singapore. Well, I can understand it is all a question of supply and demand, as the Hon. Minister explained earlier, which determines the level of rentals and the Board obviously takes the view that if people want to pay more and in the process kill themselves, it is their own business, let them. But I do wonder to what extent has this sort of high overhead in rents affected the price levels of goods and services and ultimately the cost of living of the residents, the majority of whom are wage earners and belong to the lower income group. All in all, I think there is need and I submit an urgent need for the Board to be put under more direct and stringent control of Government and whoever is running the show should be made aware and constantly reminded of the wider implications which their work entails and that is they are involved not just with bricks and mortar but with homes that people live in who expect the environment and the quality of life to go on improving. 8.00 p.m.

Order. Moment of interruption. Thereupon Mr Deputy Speaker left the Chair of the Committee and took the Chair of the House.

Sir, I beg to report that the Committee of Supply has made further progress on the Main and Development Estimates for the financial year 1st April. 1976 to 31st March, 1977, and ask leave to sit again tomorrow.

So be it.

Resolved. "That Parliament do now adjourn." - [Mr Lim Kim San]. Adjourned accordingly at Eight o'clock p.m.