Hansard, 1983-12-20

Under the provisions of clause 2(d) of Article 46 of the Constitution of the Republic of Singapore, the following Members have been granted permission to be or to remain absent from sittings of Parliament (or any Committee of Parliament to which they have been appointed) for the periods stated:- Mr Sia Khoon Seong (Moulmein) - from 17th to 25th September and from 2nd to 16th December, 1983. Dr Tony Tan Keng Yam (Sembawang), Minister for Finance and Minister for Trade and Industry - from 17th September to 3rd October and from 16th to 19th October, 1983. Maj. Fong Sip Chee (Kampong Chai Chee), Minister of State, Ministry of Culture - from 17th September to 12th October, 1983. Mr S. Rajaratnam (Kampong Glam), Second Deputy Prime Minister (Foreign Affairs) - from 22nd September to 23rd October, from 28th October to 27th November and from 28th November to 27th December 1983. Mr Howe Yoon Chong (Potong Pasir), Minister for Health - from 23rd September to 22nd October, 1983. Mr Eugene Yap Giau Cheng (Mountbatten), Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Labour - from 2nd to 15th October, 1983. Mr Tan Soo Khoon (Alexandra) - from 4th to 15th October, 1983. Mr Lee Khoon Choy (Braddell Heights), Senior Minister of State, Prime Minister's Office - from 5th to 8th October and from 12th to 22nd December, 1983. Dr Chau Sik Ting, P.B.M. (Thomson) - from 10th October to 8th November and from 7th to 30th December, 1983. Dr Tay Eng Soon, P.B.M. (River Valley), Minister of State, Ministry of Education - from 10th to 20th October, 1983. Encik Sidek bin Saniff (Kolam Ayer), Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Trade and Industry and Minister for Social Affairs - from 16th to 19th October, from 14th to 17th November, from 29th November to 3rd December and from 4th to 18th December, 1983. Mr Ng Kah Ting (Punggol) - from 17th October to 9th November and from 12th to 28th December, 1983. Dr Wong Kwei Cheong, P.B.M. (Cairnhill), Minister of State, Ministry of Trade and Industry - from 17th to 19th October, from 3rd to 9th November, from 15th to 17th November, from 29th November to 4th December and from 11th to 26th December, 1983. Mr Lim Boon Heng (Kebu n Baru) -from 18th to 30th October, 1983. Mr Tang See Chim (Chua Chu Kang) - from 19th October to 23rd November, 1983. Dr Lau Teik Soon (Serangoon Gardens) - from 24th to 28th October and from 21st to 30th November, 1983. Dr Augustine H.H. Tan (Whampoa) - from 25th October to 1st November and from 9th to 15th November, 1983. Mr E.W. Barker (Tanglin), Minister for Law and Leader of the House - from 27th to 31 st October, 1983. Mr S. Chandra Das (Chong Boon) - from 27th October to 12th November, from 13th to 16th December and from 22nd to 28th December, 1983. Mr S. Dhanabalan (Kallang), Minister for Foreign Affairs and Minister for Culture - from 6th to 7th November, from 22nd November to 1st December, and from 28th December, 1983 to 3rd January 1984, Mr Lau Ping Sum (Yio Chu Kang) -from 6th to 18th November and from 19th to 31st December, 1983. Mr Sia Kah Hui (Paya Lebar) - from 8th to 12th November, 1983. Dr Ang Kok Peng, B.B.M. (Buona Vista) - from 14th to 18th November, 1983. Mr Lim Chee Onn (Bukit Merah) - from 16th to 24th Novemberand from lstto 3rd December, 1983. Encik Abbas Abu Amin, P.P.A (Pasir Panjang) -from 16th to 22nd November and from 14th to 16th December, 1983. Encik Mansor Haji Sukaimi (Kampong Kembangan) - from 18th to 30th November and from 14th to 25th December, 1983. Mr Liew Kok Pun (Boon Teck) - from 20th to 26th November, 1983. Mr Lee Yock Suan (Cheng San), Minister of State, Ministry of Finance - from 20th to 25th November and from 5th to 11th December, 1983. Mr Teo Chong Tee (Changi), Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for the Environment and the Minister for Social Affairs - from 20th to 27th November and from 26th to 30th December, 1983. Prof. S. Jayakumar (Bedok), Acting Minister for Labour - from 21st November to 1st December, 1983. Dr Koh Lip Lin (Nee Soon) - from 23rd to 29th November and from 25th to 29th December, 1983. Mr Phua Bah Lee (Tampines), Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Defence - from 24th to 30th November, 1983, Mr Teh Cheang Wan (Geylang West), Minister for National Development - from 28th November to 3rd December, 1983. Dr Wan Soon Bee (West Coast), Minister of State - from 29th November to 3rd December and from 15th to 22nd December, 1983. Mr P. Selvadurai (Kuo Chuan) - from 29th November to 30th December, 1983. Mr Goh Chok Tong (Marine Parade), Minister of Defence and Second Minister for Health - from 4th to 8th December, 1983. Mr Chua Sian Chin (MacPherson), Minister for Home Affairs - from 4th to 31 st December, 1983. Mr Lee Yiok Seng (Bukit Panjang), Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for National Development and Government Whip - from 5th to 31st December, 1983. Mr Bernard Chen (Clementi) -from 5th to 9th December, 1983. Mr Yeo Toon Chia (Ang Mo Kio) - from 5th to 12th December, 1983. Mr Ong Teng Cheong (Kim Keat), Minister - from 7th to 27th December, 1983. Mr Lai Tha Chai (Henderson) - from 10th to 28th December, 1983. Dr Yeo Ning Hong (Kim Seng), Acting Minister for Communications - from 11th to 15th December, 1983. Mr Chai Chong Yii (Bukit Batok) - from 12th to 21st December, 1983. Dr Lee Chiaw Meng (Tanah Merah) - from 15th December, 1983 to 1st January, 1984. Dr Yeoh Ghim Seng, B.B.M., J.P. (JOO Chiat), Speaker - from 16th to 28th December, 1983. Mr Tan Cheng Bock (Ayer Rajah) - from 18th to 22nd December, 1983. Mr Chin Harn Tong (Aljunied), Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Home Affairs - from 19th to 23rd December, 1983. Encik Wan Hussin Zoohri (Kampong Ubi), Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Health and Minister for Culture - from 19th to 24th December, 1983. Mr A. Rahim Ishak (Siglap) - from 1st January to 30th June, 1984. Mr Jek Yeun Thong (Queenstown) - from 1st January to 30th June, 1984. Mr J.F. Conceicao (Katong) - from 1st January to 30th June, 1984. Dr Chiang Hai Ding (Ulu Pandan) -from 1st January to 30th June, 1984. HWANG SOO JIN, Deputy Speaker, Parliament of Singapore

The following Bills were assented to by the President of the Republic of Singapore on the date stated: 6th October, 1983 (i) The Public Utilities (Amendment) Bill; (ii) The National Statistical Commission of Singapore (Repeal) Bill; and (iii) The Mass Rapid Transit Corporation Bill. HWANG SOO JIN, Deputy Speaker, Parliament of Singapore The House being met, the Clerk at the Table informed the House of the absence of Mr Speaker from this day's sitting. Whereupon Mr Deputy Speaker proceeded to the Table and took the Chair, pursuant to the Standing Order.

Order. I would like to take the opportunity, which is the first that has presented itself, of referring to the death of Mr Hon Sui Sen, the former Minister for Finance and Member for Havelock, which occurred on the 14th of October, 1983. It was with profound shock and deep sorrow that I, and I am sure, Honourable Members heard the news of Mr Hon's death. I desire, on behalf of the House, to record with regret an expression of our sense of the loss we have sustained and our deep sympathy for the family of the late Member.

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, it is with a heavy heart that I pay this tribute in memory of Hon Sui Sen. From August 1970 to October 1983, he was the Finance Minister. He steered our economy through two oil crises. But for a mild hiccough of the low 4% growth in 1974, he secured an average of 8 1/2% real growth for this period. In his unassuming way, he never claimed any credit for it. In truth he had worked for the 11 years previous to 1971 to help lay the foundations of this success. As Permanent Secretary (Economic Development) in the Finance Ministry from 1959, Chairman EDB 1961 - 68, Chairman and President DBS 1968 - 1970, he helped Goh Keng Swee to work out the strategy for our economic transformation. At a micro-level, he was Chairman of nine companies the Government held equity in:- National Iron & Steel Mills Ltd Jurong Shipyard Ltd Sembawang Shipyard (Pte) Ltd Keppel Shipyard (Pte) Ltd Neptune Orient Lines Ltd Jurong Shipbuilders Ltd Singapore Electronic & Engineering Ltd The Insurance Corporation of Singapore Ltd Singapore Petroleum Company He was also a Director of INTRACO. In 1970 I was confronted with the awesome prospect of moving Goh Keng Swee from the Ministry of Finance to Defence. The Ministry of Defence needed him to move from the first stage of basic military training to the second stage of weapons systems and brigade structures. I was in a quandary. An inadequate Finance Minister would be a disaster. There would be no money to pay for any defence build-up. Goh Keng Swee proposed Hon Sui Sen. He had retired from the permanent secretaryship in 1966 and was enjoying his work in DBS. I drew upon my friendship with him. It dated back to 1942 in Japanese-occupied Singapore. For about a year he had stayed with me in Norfolk Road sharing a room, Then inflation made his fixed salary as a civil servant meaningless. He went back to join his wife in Penang. I visited him in Penang in 1944 and stayed for several days with him in his family home at Logan Road. In 1945, after the British returned, he came back to Singapore with his wife and young daughter. He stayed with me in Oxley Road for several months before he moved into Government quarters. In the early 1950's, after I returned from England, we started to learn Mandarin together at his quarters in Cantonment Road, sharing a teacher. We have been good friends for so many years. He could not refuse me; he could not say no to public duty. But he was a reluctant politician - a technocrat before the word was defined to mean a well-qualified Minister who did not come up through the political rough and tumble. I remember his look of incredulity, his astonishment, in the counting room at the Singapore Polytechnic in Prince Edward Road in the 1972 General Elections. His unknown opponent had secured 26.8% of the votes. I comforted him. It was no insult to him. It was in the nature of the system and of the pressures of life in a society where those who did not get what they wanted vented their frustrations through the anti-vote. In 1976 he wanted to stand down. In 1980 he again wanted to retire. On each occasion I persuaded him to soldier on and to prepare his successor. In 1979 he allowed Goh Chok Tong to prepare and to present the Budget. It was no easy task. He was in charge. He was responsible and knew that I expected him to ensure that no major error was committed. He made minimal changes to the draft Budget speech and sent it on to me. In fact, I made more textual changes than he did, though we left the tax measures unchanged. The next two times, in 1980 and again in 1981, with Goh Chok Tong, there were little textual changes. In 1982 and 1983 he allowed Tony Tan a free hand with no amendments. I also left the text unchanged. Hon Sui Sen was a big man. It will not be easy to find another Finance Minister to repeat this delicate exercise in on-the-job training with the Budget. It was only possible because it was Hon Sui Sen, and because he and I understood each other well. In early 1975 he had urged me to talent scout for his successor. Over lunch he recounted a conversation he had with the then Chairman of Shell (Singapore) J.J. Gerzon. At his level and age, Gerzon said that his most important task was to identify, test, and train his successor. I pressed Hon Sui Sen to do likewise. He did. He helped me talent scout both Goh Chok Tong and Tony Tan among others. In his 13 1/4 years the per capita GDP of Singapore more than doubled from $2462 in 1970 to $5752 in 1982 at 1968 dollars; Singapore's official reserves went up by over six times from $3.1 billion in 1970 to $18.9 billion in 1983. Personal income tax rates have been reduced and reliefs for CPF greatly increased. My relationship with him was close and easy. We both shared a common basic philosophy, that hard work deserves to be rewarded, that the free market should determine the value of products and services, that savings should be encouraged over consumption, and that savings should go into investments which yield the most secure long-term dividends. That is not to say that he was averse to well-calculated risks in new industrial or commercial ventures. The wide-ranging portfolio in Temasek Holdings, testify to his eclectic and catholic approach. From a capital worth of $197 million in 1970, Government equity in wholly-owned and joint-venture companies are $2.03 billion in 1983. He brought a powerful intellect to bear on our economic and financial problems. His academic training was in the hard sciences. Born in Balik Pulau, Penang, he was educated at St Xavier's Institution. He was the top student for the Senior Cambridge Certificate Examination in all Malaya in 1932. He went to Raffles College in 1935. In 1938 he got a Class 1 Diploma in Science, doing Chemistry, Mathematics and majoring in Physics. He was appointed to the Straits Settlement Civil Service for which there were only two recruits each year. His first duty was as a Police Court Magistrate. Then he became a Deputy Collector of Land Revenue, before the Japanese occupied Malaya and Singapore. He was to specialize in Land Office work until he rose to become Commissioner of Lands in 1957. He had no academic grounding in Economics. His theoretical training in Economics was late in life when he was sent on attachment to the World Bank in 1960 for several months. What he had was high helicopter quality as the Shell appraisal system would term it: a strong power of analysis, and the imagination and sense of reality to match. For his excellent work in the Ministry of Finance and the EDB he was awarded the Meritorious Service Medal in 1962. For his outstanding contributions in starting up so many economic ventures he was awarded the Distinguished Service Order in 1967. His Land Office experience was of inestimable value to me when the British were about to withdraw from their bases in 1968. He knew the value and the uses that land could be put to. He was familiar with the different titles under which the British War Office occupied various parcels of land in Singapore - some to which they had proper title, having paid for it in private purchases, and others, the majority, which had been made available for defence use by the Government of the Colony of the Straits Settlements, and later the Colony of Singapore. He urged me to obtain the transfer and surrender of all lands, whatever the title, together with all buildings and fixtures. The British were in an apologetic frame of mind and generous in wanting to help Singapore survive the shock of withdrawal. They handed over all the real estate they held with all buildings and fixtures. This was the essential capital for a rapid development of dockyards, factories and new housing estates. We turned adversity to advantage. Hon Sui Sen set up the Bases Economic Conversion Department and, as its first Commissioner, started converting and commercialising the Sembawang Naval Base, Seletar Airfield, REME workshops in Ayer Rajah Road, and barracks in Blakang Mati, now Sentosa. Much of this success was under his direction. That Singapore made 13% growth at real prices from 1966 to 1973 is no mean achievement. That for the 10 years, from 1973 to 1983, in spite of two oil crises, Singapore could make an average of 8% growth, is a near miracle. The average growth rate of the developing countries for this period was 4.2% according to the World Bank. He was a prime mover in most of the big decisions that generated this growth. He was a deeply religious man. Honourable Members will remember him as an unassuming, modest man who never bore malice to anyone. He was an even-tempered man. Members will remember that he never lost his cool in this House. His good friend from Raffles College days is Tan Teck Chwee, now Chairman of the PSC. He summed up nearly 50 years of friendship thus: 'He was a very devout Roman Catholic who lived his life on the high moral principles of his Church. 'Though he was studying science, he read widely the liberal arts. 'He was thoughtful in his actions but a man of few words. 'I feel that he was a stoic as in the nearly half a century I knew him, he had never expressed any frustration or disappointment with anything in life. He would apply himself unassumingly and assiduously to any work he was assigned. 'He was absolutely devoid of jealousy of others - be it power or wealth. 'His tolerance of the foibles and weaknesses of his fellow men and his loyalty to all those who worked with him or under him almost verge on a fault.' I agree with this assessment, including the last point, that he sometimes allowed loyalty to subordinates to go to great lengths. Sim Kee Boon, Head of the Civil Service, described his characteristics as: 'His loyalty to his staff was almost legendary - both as Chairman of the EDB and later as Minister in charge of personnel. 'Despite tough pronouncements and fierce defence of tax or unpopular measures in Parliament, Hon Sui Sen always had a caring, soft other side to his personality. This is revealed in the Treasury files whenever matters affecting people's welfare are concerned. 'In the eyes of the Civil Servants he was an officer and a gentleman.' Goh Chok Tong was in NOL from 1969 to 1977. From 1974 to 1979 he was Managing Director responsible to Hon Sui Sen as Minister for Finance. Slowly NOL turned from red to black balance sheets. Goh Chok Tong remembered him thus: 'NOL had not done well. It was losing money every year in its first five years, But never once did I hear a complaining word nor see a displeased face when I met him occasionally as part of NOL management team. Instead, he was ever ready to pump in more money into the company. He took a long view. He showed faith in people. 'This point was reaffirmed later when I had more occasions to attend his meetings with Government-owned companies. Once he had picked a management team he would back it. He never discouraged. He always encouraged. He never blamed others for losses. He tried to offer suggestions to solve them. He thought big, never small. 'I have never seen Mr Hon angry or heard him raise his voice. Annoyed yes. The mere trace of annoyance in his voice or in his minute was enough to buck up his officials. The words were not harsh, but to know you have let him down or caused him annoyance was enough to make you feel bad with yourself.' Mr Deputy Speaker, this would be an insincere tribute if I did not add that there were occasions when I took a less kindly view of the mediocre and the pedestrian who worked faithfully for him occupying key appointments. On such occasions, I moved by transferring the responsibility for the portfolio to a less forbearing taskmaster. Such operations were never pleasant. Whilst he accepted my view that the able and talented must be emplaced in top positions in all key departments and agencies, he was prepared to settle for less than the best when they tried hard and he thought them adequate. His approach was more kindly and gradual. But even though the reshuffle pained him, he acknowledged my right to act differently. I have lost a close personal friend of more than 40 years, and an exceptionally able Minister for Finance. I still find it difficult to talk of him in the past tense. When I saw him on Tuesday afternoon on the 11th of October, I thought he had several more years. So did he. We bantered. I said that the average life span of the Singaporean male was 69. He was only 67. He countered my argument by quoting his genetic inheritance. His father had died at 53. His mother at 63. Heart failure, he said, was a good way of going compared to many other illnesses. He added that he had no intention of going just yet. Then we turned to more cheerful subjects. On Friday, the 14th of October, at 4.10 pm, whilst talking to E.W. Barker, I was sent a note that he had chest pains and was back in intensive care. At 4.45 pm, I walked in to see him at the Coronary Care Unit in Singapore General Hospital as a Catholic priest walked out. Yet he was as calm and composed as he was on Tuesday. He was at peace with himself. He was prepared to face his Maker. After 10 minutes of conversation I left to see someone else at the hospital. I went back to see him again about an hour later, at 10 to 6.00 pm. A team of doctors was trying to bring up and control his blood pressure. His eyes lit up in recognition as he saw me. The doctors then engaged his attention. I left as he was answering checks by the doctors. At my office at 7.00 pm I was told he had died at 6.30 pm, some 40 minutes after I left. What did those who knew him well think of him? Two of his friends, one a Dutchman, Dr Albert Winsemius, and another a Japanese, Mr Norishige Hasegawa of Sumitomo, travelled all the way from Amsterdam and Tokyo within hours of hearing of his death to pay their respects to him and to console his family. They had only 2 days between the death and the funeral. The normal duty of friendship and the demands of protocol did not require them to come such long distances. I met them at and after the funeral. They came because they had deep regard and affection for a warmhearted, good and sincere friend. The House will want me to send his wife and family its sympathies at their great loss. His was a happy marriage to Annie Voon. They were devoted to each other. They had four daughters, Joan, Elizabeth, Vivien and Brenda, all graduates, all married. There are 11 grandchildren. He has a close three-tier family, with one daughter and her family living with him. His home in Malcolm Road was, he jocularly told me, a creche-cum-child care centre. Over one lunch last October, he explained how easy it was to learn to change children's nappies. He helped look after his grandchildren. I had recounted my clumsy inexperience with my own grandchildren. He was a good man whose whole life has been one of service for the welfare and wellbeing of his family and of his country, and least of all himself. His sudden death was a grievous loss for Singapore.

As a mark of respect to the Late Member, I propose that the House observe a two-minute silence. The House rose and paid respect.

3.02 pm

asked the Prime Minister what are the compelling reasons for denying the electors in the constituency of Havelock their right to elect their own representative to Parliament following the vacancy created by the death of their former representative.

Sir, the General Elections must be held in another two years. They are likely to be held earlier. Before then, Havelock, an inner urban constituency, because of declining population, is likely to be merged with other constituencies. It makes little sense to hold a bye-election.

Supplementary question, Sir. Would the Prime Minister say what was the reason for the amendment to the Constitution way back in 1965, taking away the requirement for the vacancy to be filled within three months?

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, 1965 did not see such an amendment. He goes by what he reads. The Member for Anson, as a member of the learned profession, should not go by what he reads in the press. The legislation on elections was governed by laws which were promulgated in 1959, and I remember distinctly that when the then Member for Sembawang died in August of 1962, we did not have to hold an election because there was an evenly divided House of 25 Members on each side until we held the General Elections in September 1963. When we became part of Malaysia, Malaysian laws then applied to Singapore. When we were separated from Malaysia, we re-adopted the 1959 practice which does not require us to hold an election or bye-election within three months. There are variations in as many countries as there are running the first-past-the-post system.

Would the Prime Minister explain why it was necessary to go back - if that was the practice before the Malaysian Constitution came into effect -because the Malaysian Constitution contained a requirement that the vacancy be filled within three months? Secondly, how long does he expect to leave the seat vacant? The Prime Minister has spoken about dwindling constituents and the need to redraw the boundaries of constituencies. How long does he expect to leave the seat vacant? Thirdly, does he not agree, Prime Minister, that appointing a caretaker Member of Parliament is to stand the principle of parliamentary representation on its head?

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I find it tedious and tiresome to have to explain the simple elementary rules of parliamentary practice. There is no requirement. There never was a requirement to hold a bye-election, and we decided to go back to the practice of 1959 because of my experience. As I have explained, the House was evenly divided, 25 on each side, and we governed with firmness and fairness from August 1962 to September 1963, for 15 months, and we won the General Elections. I can assure the Member for Anson that we will govern with firmness and fairness between now and a date before the end of 1985. 1 have already given him the answer when the General Elections will be held, how long it will be, and if there is any further information which will be helpful to him, I will contrive to ensure that he is duly informed and given as much notice as all other Opposition parties.

I am afraid the Prime Minister has not answered my question. Does he not agree that appointing a caretaker MP when the citizen electors have a right to elect their own representative is to stand this principle of parliamentary representation on its head? And one final question before I sit down. Did he appoint this caretaker MP as Secretary-General of his party or did he appoint him in his office as Prime Minister of the Government and, if so, under what powers?

I am standing no principle on any head. The laws are as set out in the Constitution. There is no reason why the people of Havelock should have a bye-election. There is no reason why anybody should be looking after Havelock under the Constitution. There is no reason at all. For purely grassroots purposes and to ensure that the vote will be forthcoming in the General Elections, I have thought fit, both in my capacity as Secretary-General of the PAP and in my capacity as Prime Minister, to ask Mr Lee Yiok Seng, the Member for Bukit Panjang, to nurse the constituency. And it is completely open to the Member for Anson to set up his branch there and to meet us there in the General Elections. I expect him to do so; or he is wasting the time of this House and the time of the public.

Question No. 2, Mr Jeyaretnam.

Just another supplementary question.

I thought you said that was your last question.

Well, arising out of the Prime Minister's last answer -

Well, you are getting to be a bit irrelevant to your original question, I am afraid. There are altogether 23 Questions today.

With respect, Sir, may I ask this question?

Be it the last one then.

Is the Prime Minister frightened of the result of any bye-election? He has asked us to meet him. Well, why does he not name the date?

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, there is a certain amount of make-belief which is necessary parliamentary interchange. But the plain fact is: if he expects us to take him seriously, he must comport and conduct himself on realistic assumptions. This is a Government with a secure base. It will have not the slightest compunction, when the moment is ripe, to declare all seats vacant and to meet all-comers.

asked the Prime Minister whether there are any plans to increase the number of electoral constituencies for elections to Parliament and if there are such plans whether a committee has been set up or will be set up to re-draw the boundaries of constituencies and whether political parties will be consulted or invited to serve on the committee.

As there have been population shifts away from the old centres of population into the new towns, my Office will appoint an Electoral Boundaries Delineation Committee consisting of civil servants. Their report will be presented to this House. On previous occasions in 1967, 1971, 1976 and 1980, no political party served on the Committee. Until there is a credible Opposition party, this will continue to be the practice.

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, does the Prime Minister not accept that what he may have done from 1962 to 1983 should not form the basis for any future conduct of elections? Now, since 1981, will the Prime Minister accept that there is a Member from an Opposition party in Parliament? And is it not time that political parties were consulted on the question of elections instead of keeping it as a preserve to himself, the Prime Minister.

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, make-belief is to a certain extent necessary. We treat the Member for Anson with the necessary courtesy -

Do you?

- and extend him the sense of importance which he, as the lone Opposition Member, feels he deserves. But if he wants us to take him seriously as a person who represents the Opposition, the alternative government, then he must comport himself as such. There must be element of credibility. I find it impossible to believe that any Committee can benefit in any way from having his counsel in its private deliberations. I think there is much more value in having the deliberations out in the open than in the same futile, utterly irrelevant series of questions which leads nowhere. And inevitably he knows because he has no destination, no particular objective when he sets out this question. So I will find it much more useful, and so will the other members of this Committee who have had long years of delineating constituencies (the Member for Anson has no idea how delineations take place) and I will find it much more useful to have his contributions in this Chamber, not in the committee room.

The Prime Minister speaks about credibility. Does he not accept that the credibility of a political party is to be judged by the electorate, by those who make the decision, and not by the Prime Minister?

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, the Workers' Party is heavily in debt and in danger of being wound up.

Just answer the question.

That he had won an election in October 1981 is B.C.; and that his very existence constitutionally as a Member is in doubt is a fact.

What are you referring to?

Sir, I am no more than pointing out to the Member that if a party is wound up because it does not pay its debts, then the representative of that party in this House ceases to be a Member. And if he wants us to take him seriously, he has to take himself and his party seriously.

Is he not in danger of bringing in court proceedings? Is there a law for himself and another law for others?

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I do not wish in any way to prolong the agony for the Member for Anson. But he has this irresistible urge to inflict damage upon himself. If he wishes us to accord to him the position of an alternate Prime Minister, then he must comport himself and his party in a way which leads us to assume that he is serious in his purposes. But when he conducts himself with utter disregard for rules of decency and honesty and truthfulness, then I think we have the right to have all our dealings with him out in the open, not in committee.

These are serious allegations of dishonesty against me.

They are.

Would you put it on paper?

I have.

Put it on paper and send it to me.

I have indeed. That he is a continuous purveyor of untruth has been found so by the courts. He is under charge -

There you are, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir. The Prime Minister asked that I comport myself. Is it not time that the Prime Minister comported himself? He keeps referring to court proceedings -

He is reminding -

Do we not have a Standing Order that says, "No mention or reference shall be made to any proceedings in courts?"

Yes. I am afraid I do not agree with him. It is many years since I practise the law. I am in no way prejudicing any court action against the Member. I am pointing out to him that when case after case in which he has been involved either personally as plaintiff or defendant or accused person or as advocate, his conduct has been less than exemplary, we have the right to treat him with a large question mark.

Would you like to appoint a commission of inquiry?

An utter and absolute waste of time. We will conduct the inquiry each time he comports himself and brings his questions into this House.

Why do you not comport yourself?

Mr Liew Kok Pun.

asked the First Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Education whether educational streaming has brought about an improvement in the performance of pupils in the Normal and Extended streams at the Primary School Leaving Examinations over the past few years.

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, last year the first batch of pupils who were streamed into the Normal stream in 1980 sat for the Primary School Leaving Examination. Their pass rate was 93.6%. However, if retained pupils from previous batches are included, the overall PSLE pass rate in 1982 was 87.3%. This year, the second batch of Normal stream pupils achieved a pass rate of 93% at PSLE. If those in the first Extended stream batch and retained pupils from previous batches are included, the overall pass rate is 87%. The overall pass rate for the last batch of pupils in 1981 who were not affected by streaming was 81.7%. Thus, the overall improvement has been about 6%. However, the major impact to be expected of streaming is the reduction of the dropout rate. As at October 1983, a total of 2,080 pupils dropped out of the primary schools. In contrast, the number of dropouts in 1978, the year before streaming was introduced, was 8,900. The reduction is more than four-fold. With streaming, the weaker pupils are given a chance to complete their schooling, either in the Extended or the Monolingual streams, whereas previously many were retained and forced to drop out when they became overaged.

asked the First Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Education whether the Ministry will take over full responsibility for the education of the educationally subnormal children in Singapore and, if not, whether the Ministry will provide material, financial and other forms of assistance to the Association for Educationally Subnormal children so that the Association can fulfil its educational role.

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, the Government has given and will continue to give assistance to voluntary organizations in the education of the educationally subnormal and other handicapped children. The Government's policy is to encourage the efforts of the voluntary organizations which are running the special schools and to support them wherever possible. The Ministry of Education seconds teachers to the special schools at the rate of one teacher for every 25 pupils. The Ministry of Social Affairs provides instructors for the School for the Blind and the School for the Deaf. The Ministries of Social Affairs and Health give annual grants to the special schools to meet part of their recurrent expenditure. Presently, 66 Government teachers, five relief teachers and 11 instructors are deployed to the special schools. Seven of these teachers are in schools run by the Association for Educationally Subnormal Children. The total Government subsidy per pupil in the special schools taking into account the grant provided, the teachers and instructors provided, is $1,879 per pupil in 1983. This is 47% more than the subsidy of $1,274 per pupil in the regular primary schools in 1983. In terms of physical facilities, three school buildings have been made available to the special schools at nominal rental. Two of these schools are run by the Association for Educationally Subnormal Children, At the request of the Association, the Institute of Education will be conducting a course for special education teachers, including teachers of the educationally subnormal from January 1984. The course is a three-year part-time course leading to the Certificate in Special Education.

A supplementary question, Sir. In view of the long waiting list by parents of ESN children and the long waiting time - I understand some as long as three years before they can get a place - will the Minister consider providing the Association for Educationally Subnormal Children the facilities in terms of classes and teachers so that they can effectively carry out their programmes?

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, we will favourably consider the request of the Association for Educationally Subnormal Children when they approach us.

To ask the First Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Education if he will report on the progress of implementation of the "Gifted Project" and state what representations or reservations have been expressed to the Ministry concerning the project and from whom; and what solutions or modifications will be made by the Ministry in view of such representations or reservations.

Encik Mansor Haji Sukaimi.

Question No. 5, Sir.

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, the selection examinations at both Primary 3 and Primary 6 levels have been successfully carried out. One hundred Primary 3 pupils have been selected. Offers have been made to the parents of these children for them to join the gifted education programme. The results of the Primary 6 selection examination are being processed now. Pupils who have been selected for this programme will be informed sometime during this week. The schools involved are ready for the programme. The 30 teachers for the gifted classes have been selected and will undergo an induction course with our consultant, Dr Phua Swee Liang, towards the end of December. Teaching activities for the gifted programme have been worked out by the project team. The team members, together with the project consultant, will be working very closely with the teachers in the implementation of the programme. Concerning representations and reservations expressed, these have come mainly from parents whose children are involved in the project. The main concern of many of the parents of the selected Primary 3 pupils was the distance of Rosyth and Raffles Girls Primary Schools from their homes and the difficulty in arranging for transport for their children. The pupils come from all over Singapore, ranging from Woodlands, Pasir Ris and Jurong. However, since this is a pilot project and the number of pupils involved is small, it is not possible to have more than two schools involved at this stage. The Ministry is arranging chartered buses for these children. Some parents also expressed concern about the possible harmful effects of the programme on their children. This may arise if the children are given too much to do or if they are over-pressured by their own parents. Another fear was that the children might become arrogant. These concerns have arisen in gifted programmes in other countries, With proper curriculum, teaching methods and close cooperation between teachers and parents, they can be overcome. Some parents have asked how teachers are selected and trained. There are, in fact, very few formal courses anywhere on teaching the gifted. The teachers will be working very closely with the project team and the project consultants. This is the approach used in other countries, such as Israel. The teachers have been selected on the basis of their teaching ability and their commitment to the programme.

To ask the Minister for Home Affairs if he will give the reasons for launching Operation Senjata and an evaluation of the operation, and whether the publicity which accompanied the operation was necessary.

Mr Ng Kah Ting.

Question No. 6.

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, there was a sudden upsurge in crimes, particularly robberies, housebreakings and thefts of motor vehicles for the first 10 months of this year as compared to the same period in 1982. In recent months, the situation has been aggravated by the occurrence of several violent crimes in which firearms were used. A feeling of insecurity and unease among the public was developing. Police therefore had to respond, and decided to launch a series of intensive island-wide anti-crime operation code-named "Operation Senjata" which was timed for the festive season, when crime could be expected to increase. The overall objective was to keep up pressure on potentially criminal groups, to emphasize our efforts to maintain law and order, and to serve as a reminder to criminal elements that tough action will be taken against them. The specific objectives were: (1) to increase police presence on the ground and thereby help strengthen the feeling of public security and order; (2) to intensify discreet checks in locations which have been found to have habitually attracted criminals, and thereby deter crime; (3) to intensify efforts in apprehending specific targets wanted in connection with major offences committed in recent months. The operation was certainly a success in meeting these objectives. First, the operation which deployed uniformed officers drawn from the Divisional Police, Police Task Force, Volunteer Special Constabulary and non-operational Commands, had increased public perception of Police presence and enhanced public confidence. 3.30 pm

Order. End of Question Time. Copies of the answers (See section 'Oral Answers to Questions Not Reached' (Cols. 273 - 294) to the Questions not reached shall be sent by the Hon. Ministers to whom they are addressed to the hon. Members who asked the Questions and to the Clerk.

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, permit me to make what must be deemed a rather unpopular statement regarding the increase of hospital, outpatient, and dental fees and the rationalization of the way some of these fees are charged. For as long as my Ministry of Health is required to provide up-to-date and progressively better medical and health services to keep pace not only with the rapidly advancing medical science and technology but also to satisfy increasingly sophisticated public demands, and for as long as there is inflation causing escalation in wages and running costs of hospitals and clinics, I am afraid regular revisions of hospital, outpatient, and dental charges will be necessary. I have circulated to Members of the House a Schedule (Cols. 295 - 304) setting out the main changes in hospital, outpatient and dental fees that will be implemented with effect from 1st January, 1984. When my Ministry announced the last revision of fees which took effect on 1st January, 1983, it stated that fees should keep pace with improved services and rising running costs, as otherwise there could not be any improvement in our health care services. Fee increases, however, would be gradual and would take into account Singaporeans' capacity to pay for health care. Schedule - REVISION OF HOSPITAL, OUTPATIENT AND DENTAL CHARGES, MAXIMUM FEES PAYABLE BY CLASS B2 AND C PATIENTS PER ADMISSION OR SPECIALIST OUTPATIENT ATTENDANCE (Cols. 295 - 304) Reason for fee increase For this reason and taking into account the increasing recurrent expenditures on medical and health services, which expenditures are likely to exceed $340 million for the current financial year and estimated to increase to $390 million for the next financial year 1984, it is necessary for regular upward revisions to be made to the fees and charges for services provided by our hospitals, outpatient clinics, and dental clinics. For this revision minimal increases will be made in respect of fees charged at the outpatient and dental clinics. These slight increases are set out in items 9 and 10 on pages 3 and 4 of the Schedule that has been circulated to Members. Itemized charges for hospital services There will also be readjustments of fees and charges for the various services pro- vided by our hospitals. I must emphasize that in the Government hospitals, with the exception of the daily meals that are different, all the medical services, investigations, X-rays, laboratory tests, surgical operations, and treatment are the same for all classes of patients. Currently Class A and Class B1 patients are charged fees in respect of professional treatment and prescriptions, X-rays, laboratory, and other investigative tests and services. Class B2 and Class C patients have hitherto been paying only an all-inclusive daily ward fee which covers all these services. This implies that the daily ward fee includes the cost of meals and all the other services whether supplied or not. For proper accounting purposes, each item of service rendered should be costed and charged. With effect from 1st January, 1984, a separate daily meal fee will be charged. The principle is that while Government can continue to subsidize heavy health care services, the Ministry of Health should not be burdened with the job of subsidizing the provision of meals in the hospitals. Class A and Bl patients will pay a separate daily meal fee of $15, while Class B2 and C patients will pay a daily meal fee of $5. This daily meal fee, however, will not be levied on patients in intensive care units, neither will it be levied on the chronic and mentally ill patients. Same services for all Classes Apart from the separate daily meal fee, logically for all classes of patients only one scale of fees should be levied in respect of professional services, investigations, surgical operations, and treatment. But this will clearly cause much hardship to people, many of whom may not be able to afford the full Class A medical treatment and surgical operation fees in the public hospitals. Present Government policy is to ensure that the hospital fees for Class A should reflect actual recurrent costs. This means that our hospitals can recover run- ning costs but will not be able to recover capital and equipment costs even from the Class A patients. In respect of Classes Bl, B2 and C patients, they will be subsidized up to 25%, 75%, and 85% respectively of Class A rates for the various treatment, surgical operation, X-rays, laboratory, and investigative services. Further, it is likely that even after such heavy subsidies some hardship can still be caused to a small number of patients. Because of this, for the next few years at least, my Ministry will fix maximum levels of charges for Class B2 and Class C patients, beyond which levels the charges will be borne by the Government. Class Bl patients will not enjoy this privilege, but they will pay at the reduced rate of 75% of Class A charges. Thus Class B2 and Class C patients should not be put to excessive difficulty in meeting the revised hospital charges. Fees payable by Class B2 and Class C patients It is necessary that I elaborate on the increased hospital charges that affect Class B2 and Class C patients. For a long time now these patients have paid a minimum all-inclusive fee per day in our hospitals. But with effect from 1st January, 1984, this will change. A separate daily meal fee of $5, as I have said, will be levied in addition to the present daily ward fee of $20 for Class B2 in hospitals other than the Singapore General Hospital, (where the daily ward fee is $30). Class C patients will pay a daily meal fee of $5 in addition to the daily ward fee of $10. In respect of professional treatment, prescriptions, X-rays, laboratory tests and other investigations, Class B2 and Class C patients will pay 25% and 15% respectively of Class A rates. To lighten the burden of Class B2 and Class C patients, they will pay only up to a fixed maximum on a per admission or per specialist outpatient attendance basis as specified in Appendix I (Cols. 303 - 304) to the Schedule circulated to Members. This maximum ceiling will apply to the groups of services and investigations, tests, irrespective of the number done per admission or specialist outpatient attendance. Appendix I - MAXIMUM FEES PAYABLE BY CLASS B2 AND C PATIENTS PER ADMISSION OR SPECIALIST OUTPATIENT ATTENDANCE (Cols. 303 - 304) As regards surgical fees and medical treatment charges, Class B2 and Class C patients will pay up to a maximum of $200 and $120 respectively for an operation; and $40 and $25 respectively for all the necessary tests and investigations per admission regardless of the complexity of the operation or the number of X-rays, laboratory procedures, investigations and tests that were carried out. In the Singapore General Hospital, Class B2 and Class C patients undergoing surgery will pay up to a maximum of $215 and $129 respectively due to higher operating theatre and equipment costs. Perhaps a simple illustration will bring out the extent of subsidy to Class B2 and Class C patients. A Class A patient staying for six days in hospital to undergo surgery of a serious nature will be charged in excess of $2,200 in a hospital. For the same kind of surgery and treatment a Class C patient need only pay $248. The treatment and operation are exactly similar, so too is the length of stay in hospital. In the same way, while a Class A patient will be charged $4,300 (or $4,900 at SGH) in surgical operation fees alone for a major operation; but for a similar major operation a Class B2 patient need only pay the maximum surgical fee of $200 (or $215 in the SGH) while a Class C patient pays $120 (or $129 in the SGH). Assistance for the poor Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I wish to emphasize that no Singaporean will be deprived of medical treatment merely on the ground of financial hardship. The genuinely poor can continue to apply for remission of medical fees and for welfare assistance. A medical social work service is available in all our hospitals. The Child Psychiatric Clinic and the School Health Services as well as the general psychiatric outpatient clinics will also have medical social workers to assist patients with their emotional, social, and financial problems. Accouchement fees Accouchement fees have been raised to reflect increased costs. To discourage large families, there will be an increase of $50 for the third order birth and $100 for the fourth and subsequent birth for all classes of patients. Item 8 on page 3 (Cols. 299 - 300) of the Schedule sets out the various charges in respect of accouchement fees. Reduction of fees In respect of certain laboratory tests and investigations where automation and electronic technology have replaced laborious manual work and thus drastically reducing costs and saving time, the benefits achieved will be passed on to the patients. In this respect, many of the laboratory and investigation test fees have been reclassified and lowered. There has also been a rationalization of these investigative and laboratory test charges into eight groups with a range from $5 to $40. Concessions Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, my Ministry is conscious that some categories of patients will require more assistance. Radiotherapy patients, for instance, will need treatment daily. Such patients will with effect from 1st January, 1984, no longer be required to pay the attendance fee of $12 at each radiotherapy session. This fee will only be paid when they attend the designated specialist outpatient clinic for review by a doctor periodically. My Ministry estimates that this concession will result in a reduction of revenue of $1 million a year, but as a consequence many patients will be able to save between $240 and $480 in attendance fees depending on the length of treatment. Patients who require follow-up attention at the outpatient dispensaries (OPDs) for minor procedures, dressings, or injections without the need to see the doctor in attendance, currently pay the full attendance fee of $4. This OPD fee will now be raised from 1st January, 1984, to $5. But where patients are not attended to by the doctor and only receive minor procedures, dressings, and injections from the nurse in attendance, the fee is reduced to half, i.e. $2.50 per attendance. Patients who attend the hospital specialist outpatient clinics (SOCs) will be advised to obtain their dressings or injections at the outpatient dispensaries nearest their homes. This will save them considerable time, money, and travel expenses. If, however, they choose to return to the specialist outpatient clinics in the hospitals for dressings and injections, they will have to pay the full specialist outpatient clinic attendance fee of $10 (or $12 at the Singapore General Hospital). The intention of the Ministry of Health is to reduce the congestion and long queues at the specialist outpatient clinics and to make better use of the outpatient dispensaries nearer the patients' homes where the running costs are lower. Senior citizens aged 65 and above and children under 18 years of age who are not employed, as well as students in schools and junior colleges, will continue to enjoy a 50% concession in respect of outpatient dispensary fees. They will also enjoy similar concessions for dental treatment. No change in A & E and SOC fees, and charges for the mentally and chronically sick In spite of increasing running costs, the current Accidents and Emergency Units. Specialist Outpatient Clinics and other prescription fees at these clinics have not been increased. Treatment of the mentally and chronically sick will continue to be heavily subsidized by Government. They will pay the nominal daily fee of $2 and $5 respectively now levied on Class C mentally and chronically sick patients. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, these increases that I have outlined are minimal in order to ensure that the subsidies that are paid out for hospital and health care will not be increased beyond the policy guidelines that are laid down by the Government. Regular revisions in fees will be unavoidable if we are to improve the services provided by our hospitals and clinics in the light of rapidly changing and improving scientific and medical discoveries and in view of continuing increases in recurrent expenditures. My Ministry, as I have said earlier, will take special steps to ensure that these increases will be gradual and will bear in mind the Singaporeans' capacity to pay for health care.

May I remind hon. Members that they may only raise questions but not debate on the statement?

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, may I put all my questions to the Minister at this one rising? Is the Minister aware that contrary to what he has told the House -that in the present charges, the ward fee was only $6 and there was a prescription fee of $2.50 and laboratory fee of $1.50, making in all $10 - is he aware that the Ministry has been collecting $10 regardless of whether there were any laboratory or X-ray tests done?. Is the Minister aware that these fee increases are staggering for Class C patients, without even taking into account the laboratory and X-ray fees which are 15% of Class A fees? They represent something like 85% increase on the present fee. Does the Minister know how much revenue the Government now hopes to collect? I have had this answer from the Minister for Finance - how much revenue the Government hopes to collect from the increase in the registration fees for cars and in the road licences -

Mr Jeyaretnam, that is not relevant to the Statement.

I wish to ask why is it not possible for some of the charges for Class C patients to be met out of the substantially increased revenue which the Government is now collecting? Has he thought about that? Has he consulted the Minister for Finance about using some of those monies to pay for these Class C costs? The Minister for Finance's answer was that these monies would be used for the provision of services.

Could you please confine your questions to the Statement?

These are the questions that I have asked, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir.

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, as far as I know there are only two questions. One is whether I am aware that the current fee of $10 is made up of $6 for this, $2.50 for that and $1.50 for the other. That might have been in the colonial times. But now, ever since 1st January, 1983, the $10 was just an all-inclusive charge for Class C. And I have explained just now in my Statement that this is unsatisfactory because in order to control costs we have to itemize and cost every item so that we can decide what to charge. Otherwise there will be no financial control of the subsidies. He also asks whether or not I am aware that this is 180% of the present charge. I am more than aware of this. But, as I explained to him the last time, his reference to percentages i& totally irrelevant. If I were charging 50 cents before and I now raise it to $1.50, 1 will be increasing it by 200%, making it 300%. It is irrelevant. If last year I did not charge anything, and this year I increase it to 1 cent, I will be charging one billion per cent or maybe more. So all these are irrelevancies. Then he brings up the question of taxes for motorcars. I have nothing to do with those things. So I cannot answer him, Then he asks what is the increase in fees. I have given you the figures. This year the cost to the Government or the Ministry of Health is $340 million. Next year it will be $390 million. And I am quite sure that the year after, it will be more. So every year it will be more, We are saying that since these are the people receiving the treatment and the services, they should bear part of the cost. He asked one relevant question. What will be the amount of increase in revenue that will arise from these increases in charges for hospitals and clinics? The figure is in the region of $15-$16 million which does not contribute to make-up the increase between $340 million and $390 million. I hope he is satisfied.

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, all fee increases are painful to bear but my questions to the Minister are designed to find out whether these particular increases are bearable to the patients involved. The first question is: since the Medisave is not to be introduced until April next year, why can he not wait until then to implement his fee increases? Why is he so impatient? Secondly, what is the rate at which he is reclassifying the wards from C to B1, B2, A and so forth? Because this would have a direct bearing on the people who can enjoy the Class C wards at the lower rates. Thirdly, does he have any figures to show this House what is the percentage of workers and their families who are covered by company medical insurance schemes? Yet another question is: when does he intend to implement the means test whereby patients will not be admitted to Class C wards because they are able to pay for the higher class wards?

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, as regards the increase in fees, I am well aware that there will probably be people who feel that they are being charged too much. But, as I tried to explain, if you want the services to improve, it is unavoidable that these fees will have to increase. As regards the question why we are so keen to implement it even before the Medisave comes into force, I have indicated that we will try to make regular but gradual increases. Since the last one was 1st January, 1983, it is a good date to have it on 1st January, 1984. The difference is three months. In my Statement, I have also referred to the assurance that I gave that medical services will be provided to people even though they cannot pay, Those who are poor can ask for write-off of their medical charges and we have done this regularly. I think the Member for Whampoa has experience in writing to my Ministry and some of the appeals that he made on behalf of the patients have been very sympathetically considered. We are not the monsters that you imagine us to be. In any case, every appeal for help goes directly to the medical social worker stationed in the hospital. And -I am quite sure the medical social worker has been trained to be sympathetic to the poor. So that assurance having been given, we will probably meet with some people who claim that there will be difficulty. But I think that these problems can be ironed out. As regards the question, what is the reclassification of wards from C to B to A, our decisions are more dictated by the demand. And paradoxically, there is more demand for A and B1 wards than for C wards. At the moment, 70% of our hospital wards are C and we find that we cannot satisfy some of the B1 wards and better B2 wards. So there will be gradual reclassification. But I can assure him that even after all the reclassification, there will be 50% C wards. As regards the means test, we are not very sure whether we want to introduce it at all. It depends on how this present increase works out and whether or not many people who claim that they want to go to C, although we know that they come in big cars, still insist on C. But with this rationalization of rates, there may not be the kind of people who want to go to C. My feeling is that they want to go to C now because the present rate structure is totally inequitable. I go to A. I want to save face. I pay $4,900. If I go to C, I pay only $248. The rate structure is totally skewed, lopsided. So we are not very sure when or even if we want to introduce the means test.

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, it was my past experience to announce the Ministry of Health's increases and charges, but I would like perhaps to assist the Minister for Health by asking him a few pertinent questions. Can he inform us what proportion of the Ministry of Health's revenue will arise from patients after the revision from taxes paid into the consolidated fund, what is the estimate in percentage increase in revenue after the revision and the percentage increase in MOH expenditure? If I calculated correctly, he said it was estimated to be 14.7% in 1984. Could his Ministry, perhaps from the point of good housekeeping and accounting as well, inform the House whether bills would be itemized according to bed charge, meals, professional fee, prescriptions, laboratory fees, X-ray fees, operation fees, radiotherapy, physiotherapy? Would he also indicate the percentage increases in expenditure for maintaining wards, for maintaining dietary services, prescriptions, laboratory and X-ray services, operating services, radiotherapy and physiotherapy services? In this way we have a clearer idea whether the increases in fees in these different items are proportionate to increases in expenditure.

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I would like to say that, apart from the last question asking for details which are not yet available, the other three questions can be answered; except, of course, the part about the tax revenues that are paid into the consolidated fund. That is not within my purview. With the increase in fees, instead of collecting a revenue of $91 million from the patients, the estimated collection will be $97 million when we upgrade certain wards, and $106 million when we impose the new charges. Therefore, it is slightly more than the 14.7%. We intend first to cost every item - bed space charge, meal charge, prescription charge, nursing attention charge, X-ray, laboratory, various other costs and then itemize them and charge the A-class to expect at least recovery of costs. So the A-class will reflect the actual cost. For the B1 we will charge 75% of the cost. For the B2 we will charge 25% of the cost. For the C we will charge 15% of the cost. But, in addition, as I say, the B2 and the C-class patients will have the cut-off so that it will not give the charges an extra burdensome character. As to what percentage of total revenue these various tests will constitute, I cannot give him the answer. I probably will want to work it out before giving it to him later. 4.03 pm

"to amend the Banking Act (Chapter 182 of the Revised Edition)", presented by the First Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Education (Dr Goh Keng Swee); read the First time; to be read a Second time on the next available sitting of Parliament, and to be printed.

"to amend the Companies Act (Chapter 185 of the Revised Edition)", presented by the Ag Minister for Labour (Prof. S. Jayakumar); read the First time; to be read a Second time on the next available sitting of Parliament, and to be printed.

"to establish the Construction Industry Development Board, to provide for its functions and for matters connected therewith", presented by the Minister for National Development (Mr Teh Cheang Wan); read the First time; to be read a Second time on the next available sitting of Parliament, and to be printed.

"to amend the Statutory Boards (Taxable Services) Act (Chapter 149 of the Revised Edition)", recommendation of President signified; presented by the Minister for Finance and Minister for Trade and Industry (Dr Tony Tan Keng Yam); read the First time; to be read a Second time on the next available sitting of Parliament, and to be printed.

"to amend the Post Office Savings Bank of Singapore Act, 1971 (No. 13 of 1971)", presented by Dr Tony Tan Keng Yam; read the First time; to be read a Second time on the next available sitting of Parliament and to be printed.

"to amend the Factories Act, 1973 (No. 6 of 1973)", presented by Prof. S. Jayakumar; read the First time; to be read a Second time on the next available sitting of Parliament, and to be printed.

Order for Second Reading read. 4.08 pm

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." Singapore's water resources are limited and must be developed to its full potential to meet our increasing demand for potable water. Stringent measures to prevent pollution of the watercourses and reservoirs will therefore be necessary so that our water supply is safe for consumption. This is especially so when many of our reservoirs are in unprotected catchments where only limited housing development and clean industries are allowed. Preventive measures have been taken whereby all industrial, trade and residential premises will need to comply with the pollution control requirements. However, there is a growing threat of contamination of our water resources through the indiscriminate dumping of toxic waste, which originates from the processes of industrial and trade establishments. This could have very serious consequences. An entire reservoir built at substantial cost may have to be written off altogether. There could be serious health implications as the toxic materials could be carcinogenic or cause long-term health effects. Outside of the catchments, efforts to clean up the rivers and canals to bring back marine life would be negated if such illegal dumping is unchecked. Only in April this year, a substantial quantity of toxic waste was found to have been dumped in the Kranji Catchment. The waste, containing mainly copper chloride, had leached through the ground and into a stream which flowed into the Kranji Catchment. A sample analysis of the water in the polluted stream indicated a high copper concentration. Fish kept in this water died within a few hours. A high level of copper in human beings can lead to brain damage. Another illegal toxic dump was found the following month in May, just outside the Kranji Catchment, which contained nickel, copper, chromium, lead and zinc compounds. These chemicals, if consumed in sufficient quantities, can cause damage to the nervous system, internal organs and the brain. It could also lead to other long-term health hazards which are yet unknown or even death. A case in point is the highly publicised Love Canal in the United States where the population of an entire town suffered from various diseases associated with drinking contaminated water. Fortunately, the two local incidents were discovered in time to prevent contamination of the reservoirs. However, these serve to illustrate the vulnerability of our water resources to such wanton acts by irresponsible individuals and companies. It is, therefore, important that we have sufficient penalties to deter people against the indiscriminate discharge of toxic wastes. The existing Water Pollution Control and Drainage Act, 1975, does not have penalties that sufficiently discourage such indiscriminate discharge which can cause untold damage. The Bill before the House is to provide these deterrent penalties to protect our population and water resources. The new section 14A of the Act will prohibit the discharge of toxic substances into any inland water and persons convicted of such an offence will be liable to a penalty of up to $10,000 fine or six months' imprisonment or both for a first offence. Mandatory imprisonment of between one month and one year will be prescribed in addition to a fine not exceeding $20,000 for a second or subsequent offence. For a third offence, the Minister may by order direct the person to cease with the process or business were the toxic substance is being produced. The present penalty is only a fine of up to $5,000 for the first offence, and up to $10,000 for a subsequent offence. A new provision has been included to provide that where an offence is committed by a body corporate with the consent, connivance or due to neglect on the part of any officer of the body corporate, he will also be guilty of the offence. The Minister will also be empowered to make regulations on storage, removal and disposal of toxic wastes. As the proposed penalties are heavy, no prosecution shall be instituted without the consent of the Public Prosecutor to prevent excesses in the enforcement. Sir, I beg to move.

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

Order for Second Reading read. 4.18 pm

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." Sir, this is a short Bill which seeks to amend the Notaries Public Act in two respects. First, it amends section 5 of the Act relating to the revocation of appointment of a notary public in cases of misconduct. At present, that section only has application where the notary public has been struck off the roll of advocates and solicitors. The Bill amends that section so as to enable the Attorney-General, who is the appointing authority, to also revoke the appointment of a notary public who has become a bankrupt or made an arrangement with his creditors or who has been found to be guilty of professional or other misconduct. The professional or other misconduct for the purposes of revocation must be of such a nature as to render, in the opinion of the Attorney-General, the notary public unfit to practise as such. This amendment is dealt with in clause 4 of the Bill. Secondly, the Bill inserts a new section 5A to the Act to enable the appointment of a notary public to be revoked in certain other circumstances where no misconduct is involved. These are where the notary public himself requests that his appointment be revoked (e.g. when he is leaving Singapore for good), or where he has ceased to practise as an advocate and solicitor for a continuous period of more than two years. This amendment is contained in clause 5 of the Bill. Clauses 2 and 3 are purely formal amendments and have no substantive effect. Sir, I beg to move. Question proposed.

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I rise really on a point of clarification. The Minister has said that the present position is that the Attorney-General may revoke the appointment if the notary public has been struck off the roll of advocates and solicitors, and then he said that the Bill is designed to extend this power to give him the power to revoke the appointment if the notary public has been found to be guilty of such professional or other misconduct. What I would like to know from the Minister is, who is the person contemplated for finding the advocate and solicitor guilty of such professional or other misconduct? Is the Attorney-General made the arbiter or judge of whether a particular advocate and solicitor is guilty of professional misconduct and therefore empowering him to revoke? Or is it intended that he can only revoke the appointment if the notary public has been found guilty by a disciplinary committee of the Law Society and has been censored by the High Court of three judges but who have not struck him off the roll of advocates and solicitors?

Mr Jeyaretnam, I am just wondering whether you wish to make a declaration. This is a Bill on your particular profession.

Yes.

Would you not wish to make a declaration of your interest?

I do not know what that question means. I am not a notary public.

All right.

The Minister must know that.

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I would be reluctant to give an interpretation of the provisions in anticipation of any questions which may come up for interpretation in the court. But if I may respond to the Member's question. I would have thought that it follows that a person who is found guilty of such professional or other misconduct must have been so found by such persons and according to such procedures as are prescribed in law -

Disciplinary committee.

Whatever the procedure is as provided for in law. As I read it, the provision does not lead to automatic revocation but gives the discretion to the Attorney-General to decide whether such professional or other misconduct, in his opinion, renders him fit to continue to serve as a notary public.

If the Minister says that he is not quite clear or is doubtful as to how the courts will interpret this, would he say what is the intention of his Ministry? Is it the intention of his Ministry that it should only be after the disciplinary committee has found the advocate and solicitor guilty and a court of three judges has censured him, or does it intend to enlarge that? If it is the former, would the Minister accept an amendment to paragraph (c) of clause 4?

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, if there is any confusion, it cannot be in my mind, and I never said that the Ministry is not clear or there is a doubt. What I said is that we in Parliament should avoid giving a legal interpretation of a Bill, which interpretational question may arise before the court. I have already said that this Bill does not amend the Legal Profession Act. It amends the Notaries Public Act. I think that should be sufficiently clear.

It is not.

Question put, and agreed to. Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House. The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. - (Prof S. Jayakumar). Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed.

Order for Second Reading read. 4.25 pm

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." The purpose of this short Bill is to protect secret or confidential information relating to the affairs of certain statutory bodies and Government companies which are specified in the Schedule. The Bill prohibits the unauthorized disclosure of such information by existing as well as former members, officers, employees and agents of these specified organizations. The organizations specified are those which handle sensitive documents and information, the improper disclosure of which could be detrimental or damaging to the national or public interest. Although we have the Official Secrets Act, that Act does not extend to the disclosure of information which is concerned solely with the affairs of a statutory body or a Government company. There is no general provision dealing with the protection of secrecy of information received or generated by statutory bodies and Government companies (except where official secrets entrusted by the Government are involved). Further, no provision exists which prohibits former officers and employees of such organizations from making unauthorized disclosure of information. This Bill seeks to remedy the situation so that the secrecy and confiden- tiality of sensitive information of such organizations can be better protected. The inclusion of the statutory bodies and Government companies in the Schedule has been made with great care. Only those statutory bodies and Government companies handling or likely to handle sensitive information which warrants protection by penal sanction have been specified in the Schedule. As a safeguard, the Bill also provides that no prosecution will be instituted without the written consent of the Attorney-General. Sir, I beg to move. Question proposed.

Mr Deputy Speaker, you do not want me to make any declaration that I have no pecuniary interest in this Bill.

That is up to you. I was just reminding you earlier on.

Mr Deputy Speaker, this Bill seeks to throw a veil of secrecy over all affairs of a statutory body or a Government company. The Minister has set out the purpose of this Bill. That is quite evident from the Bill itself, that it seeks to throw a blanket, as it were, over all affairs of a statutory body or a Government company. What the Minister has not tried to explain to this House is why it is considered necessary to enact this Bill at this stage. He has referred to the Official Secrets Act. That Official Secrets Act spells out clearly the circumstances in which a person may be prosecuted for divulging information which he should not divulge and which information is considered to be detrimental or prejudicial to the safety or the national interest of Singapore. This Bill does nothing like that. It does not go out to spell any circumstances under which the man may be prosecuted, the man or woman. It virtually gives a carte blanche to the Attorney-General to decide whether anyone should be prosecuted or not for disclosing any information on the affairs of a statutory body or of a Government company, however innocuous, however trivial the information or document may be. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, claim is often made that in Singapore we have a democratic Government, that all our public affairs are conducted democratically. It is the essence of democracy - I do not have to remind Members of this House and the Minister - it is the essence of democracy that the conduct of public officials and the affairs of statutory bodies and companies should be subjected to the scrutiny of public opinion so long as whatever is subjected to their scrutiny does not endanger the safety of Singapore. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, clause 3 of this Bill makes it an offence for any person to disclose to any other person any secret or confidential document or information which he has obtained or to which he has access by virtue of his position as such member, officer, employee or agent. One might suppose that it is only a secret or confidential document or information that it is intended to be protected by this Act. But that begs the question, Sir, because who decides whether such information is confidential or secret? Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, if I may illustrate what I am saying. After I became a Member of this House, I tried to obtain some information from the Prime Minister's Office, and my precise inquiry was whether I may be supplied with the rules of the Residents' Committees. The official that I spoke to at the Prime Minister's Office said, "Oh, these rules of the Residents' Committees are not available to any person." So I had to remind him firmly that I was not just "any person but I happened to be the Member of Parliament elected by the voters of Anson." After some haggling over the phone, he said, "Well, it is all confidential, but if you want, you write in. So I had to write in and eventually, of course, I got it. But is that the sort of thing - rules designed to regulate the activities of the Residents' Committees are not to be disclosed, it would seem, even to a Member of Parliament if he does not happen to be in the official group of Members of Parliament in that club? There is yet one other instance, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir. Again, about three months after I was elected, I wrote to the Ministry of Social Affairs asking whether I could be supplied with a list of persons in my Constituency who were receiving public assistance. And what did I get? "Oh, no, you can't be supplied with that list." This is the sort of thing I get, but I am becoming used to it, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir. Now it would appear that we are going to extend all this even to Government companies and statutory bodies. If this Bill becomes law, and I am sure it will, it would mean that the public may not get any information about the affairs of a Government company or a statutory board. They will be told quite blandly, "I am sorry. If you look up the Statutory Bodies and Government Companies (Protection of Secrecy) Act, 1983, you will see that we cannot disclose any information." Why is it necessary to keep all the activities of statutory bodies and Government companies under wraps? As I have said, if we are as we claim, a democratic society, should we not open the doors wherever they can be opened without detriment to our national safety, without prejudice to our national interests? Should we not open the doors not only of Government Ministries but also of statutory boards and Government companies to public scrutiny? Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, in many countries there is this freedom of information available to a member of the public. Members may know that in Australia they have just passed quite recently a Freedom of Information Act under which any member of the public can telephone any Ministry or department and require information and he has got to be supplied with that information, unless the information falls within the exception laid in that Act. Should we not be thinking along those lines if we claim to be a democratic society, or should we as it were wrap the blanket more closely around ourselves so that nobody may even be able to look into what we are doing? Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, it has been said that the discovery of what has been known as Watergate which led to the downfall of the President of the United States was only possible because information was made available and it had to be supplied. Is that not the sort of society that we should be aiming for, so that the public are kept informed of what the various Government companies are doing, what the Ministries are doing, what the statutory boards are doing? One might say, "Well, the statutory boards put up their reports. You get the information in the reports if you look at them." Do we get the correct information? I have had occasion before this to refer to the Annual Reports and the Financial Accounts and Statements of the Housing and Development Board. I have complained not once but twice that those Financial Accounts do not tell the whole story about the Housing and Development Board's activities. I have referred to the profits that were secreted away, and I see that even in the Report for the year ending 31st March, 1983, those profits derived by the Housing and Development Board from its MND Holdings have not been consolidated in the accounts. It would appear that I can just go on talking in vain. I say, Sir, that rather than introduce a Bill to cover up all affairs and activities of Government companies, we should really have a Bill making available information. Some of these boards are public utilities. The public would want to know what they are doing. They are entitled to this information. What is sensitive about their undertakings? What about the Government companies? Should we not know what they are doing? After all, the taxpayers are the shareholders. Are the shareholders not entitled to information? Why are we closing the doors? Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I say that this Bill is thoroughly bad in principle and I shall vote against this Bill.

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I shall be very brief because the hon. Member for Anson has given a lengthy speech based totally on a wrong reading of the Bill. Inadvertently or otherwise he has interpreted the Bill's intention as weaving a veil of secrecy over all affairs. He asked why should this Bill hinder the right of any one to ask questions about the organizations named in this Bill. If he had only taken the trouble to read the Bill carefully, this Bill does not say anywhere in any of the provisions that any of the statutory boards or a Government company is barred from divulging any information. What is the gravamen of this Bill? It relates to unauthorized disclosure of secret or confidential information by a person who was in the employ or is in the employ of a statutory board. The issue is whether a person who was in the employ of a statutory board or a Government company, without authority of the statutory board or a Government company, should have the right to freely disclose to a third party confidential or secret information: The issue is not the right of the Member for Anson or anybody else to ask questions. The record speaks for itself. Other Members of this House and the Member for Anson at past sessions had not been prevented from asking questions, Questions for Oral Answer, Questions for Written Answer, and to raise matters during the Budget or other Sittings to elicit information and response from Ministers. So all this edifice that he has erected about sinister motives of this Bill is completely unfounded. The issue again is very simple. If a person was or is in the employment of a statutory board or a Government company and has access to secret or confidential information, should our law permit him, without the authority of his employer, to divulge this information to whomsoever and in whatsoever circumstances? The Member for Anson seems to think that it is permissible. If that is his view, well, he is entitled to it. This Government cannot continue to let the gap in this law remain unfilled, and the purpose of this Bill is simply to ensure that persons in employment cannot resort to unauthorized disclosure of secret or confidential information without the penalty of the law.

On a point of clarification, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir.

Yes.

I have not misread the Bill, if it may please the Minister. The Minister talks about unauthorized information. But that is begging the question: who decides whether any information is autho- rized or unauthorized? Of course, the company will decide - something which it does not want the public to know - to say, "Well, this is unauthorized, my dear boy. We cannot breathe a word of this to anybody else." Why should the company be made the sole arbiter of what is authorized and what is unauthorized? That is my point.

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I do not propose to dwell on this. If the Member for Anson has his way, the employee would be the arbiter of what he is entitled to disclose, and that we cannot have.

We can take it to court. Question put, "That the Bill be now read a Second time."

I claim a Division, Sir.

We will take a Division. The House divided: Ayes, 43; No, 1; Abstention, 1. Ayes No Abbas Abu Amin J.B. Jeyaretnam Ahmad Mattar Ang Kok Peng E.W. Barker Chan Chee Seng S. Chandra Das Bernard Chen Eric Cheong Yuen Chee Ch'ng Jit Koon S. Dhanabalan Fong Sip Chee Goh Chee Wee Goh Chok Tong Ho Kah Leong Ho See Beng Abstention Howe Yoon Chong Hwang Soo Jin M.K.A. Jabbar S. Jayakumar Koh Lip Lin Lau Teik Soon Lee Yock Suan Liew Kok Pun Lim Boon Heng Lim Chee Onn Othman Haron Eusofe Phua Bah Lee Ayes (cont) Rohan bin Kamis Saidi Haji Shariff Seah Mui Kok Sia Kah Hui Sia Khoon Seong Sidek bin Saniff Augustine H.H. Tan Tony Tan Keng Yam Tan Soo Khoon Tay Eng Soon Teh Cheang Wan Teo Chong Tee Wan Soon Bee Eugene Yap Giau Cheng Yeo Choo Kok Yeo Ning Hong Yeo Toon Chia Question accordingly agreed to. Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House. The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. - [Prof Jayakumar]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed.

Order for Second Reading read. 4.58 pm

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." In the Budget statement on the 4th of March this year, it was announced that stamp duty on cheques was to be abolished from the 1st of April 1983. The collection of stamp duty on cheques, including travellers cheques, besides imposing an additional cost to banks and tourists alike is anachronistic, particularly when other methods of payment by credit cards and Giro do not attract stamp duty. The abolition of duty has already been affected by notification in the Gazette. The Stamp Duties (Amendment) Bill, 1983, seeks to make consequential amendments. The amendments consist mainly of deleting the word "cheque" whenever it appears and those provisions, namely, sections 9, 44 and 45 relating to cheques in the Stamp Duties Act. Sir, I beg to move.

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

Order for Second Reading read. 5.00 pm

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." The purpose of this Income Tax (Amendment No. 2) Bill is to give legislative authority to the income tax concessions announced in the 1983 Budget Statement, Opportunity has also been taken to include two other amendments to the existing legislation. It was announced in the 1983 Budget Statement that with effect from Year of Assessment 1984, the chargeable income of any author or composer would be not more than 10% of the gross royalties and other payments received from local publishers for the right to use the copyright in any literary, dramatic or artistic work. Any company wholly owned by such authors or composers would also be able to enjoy this concession. Clause 2 of the Bill provides for this. Another Budget concession is the exemption from tax on income derived from syndicated offshore loans, where the syndication work is carried out in Singapore, for the next five years beginning 1st April 1983, and for such further period as the Minister may approve. Clauses 3 and 8 amend sections 13 and 43A of the Act to empower the Minister to make regulations to provide for this. Clause 4 amends section 13B of the Act to allow dividends declared from the exempt income of such syndicated offshore loans to be also exempt from tax in the hands of shareholders. With effect from 1st April 1983, if the periods of use of private hire (SZ) cars by any company or business enterprise exceed in aggregate 183 days, the whole amount of the rentals and other expenses incurred will be disallowed for purposes of tax deduction. If the rental periods overlap, the overlapping periods will be counted once only for the purpose of determining the 183-day limit. In order to make the amendment effective, it is now necessary to include the use of other SZ cars by his employees as an employer's own use in computing the 183day limit for the purpose of claiming expenses on the use of SZ cars. Similarly, the use of SZ cars by his employer or co-employees would be taken into account in determining the employee's claim for deductions on the use of such cars. These are provided in clause 5. Clause 6 amends section 19A of the Act to provide for 100% depreciation allowance in the first year to be claimed on expenditure incurred on any computer or office automation equipment from Year of Assessment 1984. Residual allowance in respect of such equipment will also be available for full set-off. With effect from Year of Assessment 1983, the earned income relief will be increased from $2,000 to $3,000 for persons above 55 but below 60 years of age and from $3,000 to $4,000 for persons aged 60 years and above. Clause 7 provides for this as well as to allow handicapped persons of 55 years and above to claim earned income relief of $2,000 by virtue of his handicap in addition to the earned income relief of $3,000 or $4,000, depending on his age. The enhanced child relief for the specially qualified married woman is now the normal child relief plus 5% of the woman's annual earned income for each of her first three eligible children. Clause 9 amends the fifth Schedule to the Act to provide for this to take effect from Year of Assessment 1983. I now move on to two other amendments to the existing legislation. Clause 3 amends section 13 of the Act to extend the Minister's power to exempt from tax remittances of income from abroad to cover remittances from countries which have double taxation arrangements with Singapore. This will enable full tax exemption to be granted in those cases where the double taxation arrangement only provides for a reduced rate of tax. The amendment to section 19A of the Act has been enlarged to enable the Minister to approve enhanced depreciation allowances for any balance of expenditure incurred on such equipment by a taxpayer, notwithstanding that he had previously claimed normal depreciation allowances in respect of that expenditure. These are provided in clause 6. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I beg to move. Question proposed.

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, before I speak, perhaps I had better say that I benefit by this amendment to clause 7, being over 55. So having declared my interest, may I speak. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, as the Minister has said, this Bill seeks to give legislative effect or authority to concessions made in the Budget for this year. What the Minister forgot to say was that these concessions were made purely to the rich. I do not want to repeat what I said in my Budget speech. There are two concessions here - enhancement of allowances for those who are 55 and those over 60 and also to the married women who are specially qualified persons. Mr Deputy Speaker, as I tried to point out in my Budget speech, and as has been pointed out in letters after the Budget speech and the debates in this House, these two concessions are discriminatory. They favour the rich as against the poor. We have just been told this afternoon that those entering Class C wards will have to pay substantially higher charges. Whereas we are all too ready to impose charges on the poor for hospital care and treatment and for other services given to them because we say we cannot go on giving free services; the revenue cannot afford it or for whatever reasons. On the other hand, it would appear we are equally ready to hand back to those who do not need these concessions large sums of money. We have been told in the Budget that the loss to the revenue would be about $1.4 million in the concession given to married women who are specially qualified persons. I see now that this concession was probably brought in to prepare the way for the Prime Minister's appeal in the National Day Message to lure the specially qualified women who were not married yet to marry to get these concessions. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I say that these concessions that were made, I do not want to repeat, are thoroughly objectionable. They are discriminatory based on wealth. And I say it is a shame that this Government should continue to bring in concessions for the rich whilst loading the poor with higher fees and costs for services given to them. For those reasons, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I shall oppose this Bill.

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, the purpose of this Bill is to give legislative authority to the concessions which have already been approved in the 1983 Budget Statement. The purpose of this debate today is not on those concessions itself. They have already been passed. I do not propose to waste Members' time by repeating the arguments again. If the Member for Anson is sincere in not wanting to repeat what he has said in the Budget Statement, he should not have stood up. Question put, "That the Bill be now read a Second Time."

Division, Sir.

Again? This was fully debated at the last Budget session.

It is to give legislative effect now.

Well, so be it, if you so prefer to waste the time of the House. Ring the Division bells. The House divided: Ayes, 40; No, 1; Abstention, 1. Ayes No Abbas Abu Amin Jeyaretnam, J.B. Ahmad Mattar Ang Kok Peng Barker, E.W. Chandra Das, S. Cheong Yuen Chee, Eric Ch'ng Jit Koon Chor Yeok Eng Fong Sip Chee Goh Chee Wee Goh Chok Tong Ho Kah Leong Ho See Beng Abstention Howe Yoon Chong Jabbar, M.K.A. Hwang Soo Jin Jayakumar, S. Koh Lip Lin Lau Teik Soon Lee Yock Suan Liew Kok Pun Lim Boon Heng Lim Chee Onn Othman bin Haron Eusofe Phua Bah Lee Rohan bin Kamis Saidi Haji Shariff Seah Mui Kok Sia Kah Hui Sia Khoon Seong Sidek bin Saniff Tan Keng Yam, Tony Tan Soo Khoon Tay Eng Soon Teh Cheang Wan Teo Chong Tee Wan Soon Bee Yap Giau Cheng, Eugene Yeo Choo Kok Yeo Ning Hong Yeo Toon Chia Question accordingly agreed to. Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House. The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. - [Dr Tony Tan Keng Yam]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed.

I propose that we take a break now. I suspend this Sitting and will take the Chair again at 5.50 p.m. Sitting accordingly suspended at 5.22 p.m. until 5.50 p.m. Sitting resumed at 5.50 p.m.

Order for Second Reading read.

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." Sir, there are two aspects of the proposed amending legislation. One concerns the COWEC Scheme or Company Welfarism from Employer's Contributions. The second concerns the Approved Residential Properties Scheme. I shall deal with each of these separately. COWEC Scheme Sir, the concept of using a portion of the employer's contribution to CPF for benefits provided by the companies to employees was outlined and discussed in this House in March this year. The proposed amendments, now before the House, particularly clause 4 which introduces two new sections, are to facilitate the implementation of the COWEC Scheme and to provide for certain safe-guards and penalties. We are living in an age of economic uncertainties and increasing protectionism. For Singapore to survive in this harsh economic climate, our products and services must have an edge over that of our competitors. Productivity must therefore be the cornerstone of our economic growth. One of the means of increasing the productivity will of our workers is to enhance the nexus between the employee and his employer. Employers must be encouraged to provide directly for the welfare of their employees who will then know that they are cared for by their employers and be willing to upgrade themselves and contribute to the well-being of their companies. It was with this in mind that the National Productivity Board promoted the COWEC Scheme. Under this Scheme, an employer will be allowed to pay CPF contributions at a reduced rate of 36% of the salaries instead of the full rate of 46%. The 10% which would otherwise have been contributed to the CPF will be retained by the employer and paid into a trust fund to be set up by the employer for the benefit of the employees. Rules must be dr,awn up governing the amount of contributions payable by the employer into the trust fund, the time period within which the contributions must be paid, the interest payable on late payments, and the management, investment and use of the trust fund must be drawn up. The employer must also furnish a bank guarantee in favour of the CPF Board so that the Board can recover the contributions retained by the employer should the need ever arise. Sir, the COWEC Scheme therefore is intended to forge a link between workers' efforts and good management. Experience elsewhere has shown that absence of such linkage leads to erosion of the will to work and to improve. The COWEC Scheme is one way of enhancing the nexus between the employees and their company. Under a pilot scheme, 10 companies have agreed to participate in the COWEC Scheme. It must be emphasized that the Scheme will be a voluntary one for both employers and existing employees. We shall use the pilot scheme to build up our experience so that we will gradually learn and broaden its scope. The new section 40A deals with the powers of the CPF Board, the obligations of the employers participating in the Scheme and the protection of contributions paid under the COWEC Scheme. The CPF Board will be empowered to approve any welfare scheme which provides for the payment of pensions, gra- tuities or other pecuniary or welfare benefits by an employer to his employees. Any such welfare scheme which has been approved by the CPF Board will be called an "approved employees' scheme". An employer who has established a scheme will be entitled to pay a reduced rate of CPF contributions in respect of employees who are members of the scheme. The Board will also be empowered to revoke any approval given under the section. The section also requires the employer to furnish to the CPF Board audited accounts in respect of the approved employees' scheme, comply with the rules of the scheme, pay contributions in accordance with the rules, obtain the prior permission of the CPF Board before amending the rules and furnish such returns and other information which may be required by the CPF Board. An employer who fails to comply with any of these obligations imposed under the provisions will be guilty of an offence and liable on conviction to a fine not exceeding $5,000. If an employer is convicted for failure to pay contributions to the scheme, the court can also order him to pay the outstanding contributions and interests due thereon. All contributions paid into an approved employees' scheme will enjoy the same protection against creditors, etc., as CPF contributions. Approved Residential Properties Scheme The second aspect of the Bill relates to the Approved Residential Properties Scheme. This aspect of the Bill concerns Approved Residential Properties Scheme under which CPF moneys can be used to pay the purchase price of a private residential property or to redeem an outstanding mortgage loan on the property. The present section 14 of the CPF Act was enacted in 1981 for purposes of implementing the Scheme. It creates a charge on a residential property which has been purchased with CPF moneys to secure the repayment of the moneys withdrawn, including the interest that would have accrued to the Member's account if the withdrawals had not been made and provides for matters relating thereto. Since the inception of the Scheme, Sir, more than 10,000 members have withdrawn over $500 million. The experience gained in implementing the Scheme has shown that certain improvements can be made to the present section to overcome certain practical and legal problems encountered by the CPF Board, to save legal fees and other costs and to reduce the time taken for processing applications. Clause 3 of the Bill repeals and re-enacts with amendments section 14 of the Act to achieve this. If I may just touch on a few of the important changes. First, where a property is owned by more than one person, the charge created under the present section 14 does not extend to the estates and interests of the co-owners who do not use their CPF moneys in respect of the property. Consequently, a co-owner who wishes to use his CPF moneys can only be allowed to withdraw up to 80% of the value of his share in the property instead of the value of the whole property. However, there have been applications under the Scheme by members, especially those who owned a property jointly with the spouse who was not a CPF member, to withdraw up to 80% of the value of the entire property. To meet this difficulty, the CPF Board had to require all the co-owners to execute a legal mortgage in favour of the Board. This, however, involves the payment of legal and stamp fees and other costs. Under the proposed new section 14, the charge created by the section will extend to all the estates and interests of all the co-owners of the property provided the co-owners give their written consent to the CPF Board. In this way, it will enable any of the co-owners to withdraw his CPF moneys up to 80% of the value of the whole property without the co-owners having to execute a legal mortgage in favour of the CPF Board. Under the present section 14 any housing loan which is disbursed by a financial institution after the borrower has withdrawn his CPF moneys under the Scheme will rank, in terms of priority, after the CPF Board's charge for all the moneys withdrawn and authorized to be withdrawn as well as the interests that would have accrued to the member's account if the withdrawals had not been made. However, most financial institutions have no objections if the principal loan given by them ranks after the Board's charge in respect of the CPF moneys withdrawn. On the other hand, they are reluctant to give adequate housing loans to borrowers who also want to use their CPF moneys, if their principal loan or any part thereof ranks after the Board's charge in respect of the accrued interest. The CPF Board has no objections in allowing the full amount of the loan given by a financial institution to rank before the Board's charge in respect of the accrued interest. This will make it easier for members to obtain adequate housing loans. However, because the present section 14 does not allow the Board to postpone its rights, the Board had to require the financial institution and the member to execute certain legal documents to protect the Board's interest. This involves the payment of legal fees and costs and may also delay the processing of the application. Thus, the new section 14 will allow the CPF Board to give another mortgagee's or chargee's rights priority over the charge created by the section if the Board deems fit. The other changes are technical improvements of meanings and clarification of interpretations. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I beg to move. Question proposed. 6.02 pm

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, ever since the Committee on Productivity published its report in 1981, there has been concern among workers over the proposal to hive off a part of the employee's CPF into some welfare fund. The Central Provident Fund (Amendment) Bill, when passed by the House, will allow employers to implement the COWEC scheme. Although the COWEC scheme has been discussed by the National Productivity Council, the workers are largely ignorant of the scheme. I must add that there are also many employers who are equally ignorant of the Scheme. The COWEC scheme needs wider publicity and explanation to the workers at grassroots level. While the top union leadership understand that the objective of the Scheme is to promote a closer, stronger link between employers and employees, the rank and file members, the ordinary workers, have not quite grasped this. Everyone who is going to be affected by the Scheme should first know what it is about. What does it entail? How will they benefit? Therefore, before the COWEC Scheme is implemented, there must be an active effort to inform all workers, in a simple and straightforward way, so that they fully understand the Scheme. They should be assured that they will not lose out if they participate in the COWEC Scheme. Most of our workers know about CPF. They know what returns they can get out of the CPF contributions. Many of them also depend on CPF contributions to pay for their HDB flats. When we propose hiving off part of it to form COWEC, there will be concern among them over whether COWEC can be used to pay for their HDB flats. Since the number of workers who are paying for their HDB flats is not inconsiderable, it would be wise to give a categorical reassurance once again that COWEC will help workers pay for their homes. COWEC is something new and, naturally, workers will compare the new scheme with existing benefits that they enjoy. Some of the questions that our workers will ask include:- First, how does COWEC affect the CPF Scheme? Secondly, what can workers expect to benefit from COWEC? Will these benefits be the same as existing benefits, but paid for by their own CPF funds? Thirdly, how does COWEC work? Are there examples of proposals that have been worked out which the Minister can reveal that would help explain this? Fourthly, how will the workers' interests be safeguarded? Will workers have a say in the management of the COWEC Fund? Will the Central Provident Fund (Amendment) Bill that we are discussing contain safeguards? What happens if the COWEC Fund is mismanaged? When details are made known, I am sure our workers will have more questions. If the COWEC Scheme is to be successful, we have to clear the doubts of the workers in the factories. It is only when they fully understand, can they be motivated by such a Scheme. The objective of the COWEC Scheme is to strengthen the link between employers and employees. As such, the management must see the Scheme as beneficial. Yet, we find that at the moment some of them throw cold water on the Scheme. They regard administering the COWEC Scheme as an extra burden, extra responsibility. Such an attitude reflects their attitude towards their employees. Even if the Scheme were to be compulsory and handsome returns are gained from the COWEC Fund, there will not be any loyalty because the attitude of the employers does not merit loyalty. We must remember that the Scheme is meant to help strengthen the link between employers and employees, and this will only be achieved with the right management attitude. Perhaps the sceptical employers will change their attitude if they understand what COWEC is about. An active effort to explain it seems very necessary. 6.08 pm

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, the proposed amendments to the Central Provident Fund Act provides for the introduction of the COWEC Scheme which allows the employers to retain part of its CPF contributions in a trust fund which can be used to provide welfare benefits to its employees. As I understand it, the objective of the Scheme is to strengthen the nexus between the company and its employees. It is hoped that through the COWEC Scheme, the employees would identify their well-being closely with their employer and this would help to inculcate a sense of commitment to their work and loyalty to the company. While I subscribe to the ideal of the Scheme and what it sets out to achieve, I wish to register the following points for the consideration and clarification by the Minister:-

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I propose to be brief. May I say that I share what has been said by the previous two speakers, and I wish to ask the Minister by way of clarification as to how the agreement of the workers is to be obtained to this approved employees' scheme. As he has said and as it appears from the Bill, the worker is to be given an option whether he wishes to join in the scheme or not. Is the obtaining of the approval of the worker to be left to the company, or is it going to be obtained by a body outside the company, for example, the Registrar of Trade Unions or somebody in the Labour Ministry? Will the Board or the Ministry ensure, as has been pointed out quite adequately, that before any worker exercises his option whether to join the scheme or not he is adequately and truthfully informed of the whole scheme, what he stands to gain by it and what are the disadvantages, if any; a proper balance sheet, as it were, drawn up in simple language to explain to him so that he can fully understand and exercise his option in a meaningful way, so that he is not misled by the company or the employer who may be only too anxious to have his contributions to the Board reduced. 6.15pm

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I would like to make two points on the COWEC scheme. First, I agree with my colleague, the Member for Pasir Panjang, that there is an urgent need to provide more information to workers about this scheme and to explain carefully the implications of the scheme to them. It is important for the companies which propose to introduce the scheme to ensure that their employees clearly understand the scheme before it is implemented. Secondly, I feel that it is useful for the employees to be allowed to make suggestions on how the COWEC fund should be operated. More specifically, what types of benefits they want the company to provide out of this scheme? In this way, the benefits will be more relevant to their needs. It is important for management to demonstrate clearly that it has the employees' interest and welfare at heart. This should not be taken for granted even when a company operates a COWEC scheme. It will not be easy to develop the nexus between the employee and the employer in any company or organization, especially if the employer does not show sincerely its care and concern for the employee. While top management may be genuinely committed to the welfare and well-being of their employees, middle management may be not so enthusiastic and often are more task orientated than people orientated. Top management must always check their middle management officers and the supervisors to ensure that they will treat their subordinates with care and consideration. This will help create mutual trust and confidence. Unless they are able to motivate their subordinates, it will be difficult to increase productivity. The existence of a COWEC scheme in the company will be of no avail unless middle management and supervisors are properly trained and can perform their responsibilities properly.

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I wish to thank the Members who have spoken on this Bill, in particular the Members for Pasir Panjang, Boon Lay and Geylang Serai, who have demonstrated their sincerity in the subject by staying behind to listen to my responses. Sir, my colleagues have made several points, I have made a note of the various points and comments which they have raised, all of which I take it to be in the direction of constructive suggestions. This is a new scheme. It is experimental in a sense, the success of which will be known in time to come. If it succeeds, it will trigger off other similar schemes. So we need as many constructive suggestions as possible. It may not be possible for me to reply to each and every one of the various points mentioned, but I will endeavour to do my best now. The general point made by all three hon. Members was the need for maximum publicity, information and knowledge about this scheme to be disseminated to all levels of workers, especially the grassroots level. This is a point which is well taken, for I would agree that the more that is known, the more will misconception be dispelled, and the greater the support will come forth from the workers. Considerable effort at publicity has, in fact, as Members will know, been already done - talks, seminars, symposiums, press articles and more recently a very simple brochure or pamphlet has been published. I take the hon. Members' point here to be whether more can be done and more should be done. The answer to that must, of course, be yes, and efforts will continue in that direction to disseminate as much information as possible to clarify as many questions as there are. So I wish to give my assurance on that. The second point raised by the Member for Pasir Panjang was that he attached importance to the need to give an assurance as to how this would impinge on existing home ownership schemes and whether they would be adversely affected. There, too, I should reassure hon. Members, and through them to those outside who will be interested in the scheme, that the employee in a COWEC scheme will not be adversely affected in respect of the housing scheme or any other approved scheme under the CPF. That is to say, if the balances in his CPF account are insufficient for him to participate in the housing programme, then his balances in the COWEC scheme will be used, and this is a condition under which the CPF Board will approve various COWEC schemes. This is a point which has been reiterated in all cases where proposals have come forth. So that assurance I gladly give. More than one hon. Member have stressed that everything turns on employer/ employee relationship and positive cooperation between management and the employees - the necessity to consult. This again is very important. A funda- mental feature of the scheme is the element of voluntariness both for the employer and for existing employees. Because it is voluntary, obviously both the employer and employees must be persuaded that it is in their interest to do so. This requires a fairly high level of collaboration and cooperation. So this point is also one which is valid and one which we in the Ministry of Labour as well as the National Productivity Board will not fail to bear uppermost in our minds. The Member for Boon Lay asked whether this would in any way adversely affect existing benefits which are enjoyed by the employee. Here again, I need to stress that the scheme of COWEC emphasizes that all benefits under COWEC must be over and above current benefits. And this will be ensured by the approving authority in process of approving the scheme through a comparison of the proposed benefits with a list of existing benefits. So I can give him that assurance. The Member for Boon Lay also asked this question that while under the COWEC scheme the employer is required to obtain a banker's guarantee for the 10% or principal sum which will be invested in a trust fund and whether a similar requirement can also be imposed in terms of a banker's guarantee for the interest. We have given thought to this. Theoretically, it will be possible to insist on a banker's guarantee for the interest on the principal sum. But the intention of the Government in implementing the COWEC scheme is to give considerable flexibility to the participating firms in devising as wide and varied a range of benefits under the COWEC scheme. If we imposed a requirement of a banker's guarantee, this could be done but it may reduce and constrict the flexibility and the range of benefits that would be provided. But I think the Member for Boon Lay would be pleased to hear that of the 10 companies which are participating in the scheme, nearly all of them, in their tentative proposals sent up for approval, have not only provided for banker's guarantee for the 10% principal but have also provided for guarantee for the CPF interest. So I think that those 10 companies have set a pattern which will be very difficult for other companies to depart from. The Member for Pasir Panjang and I believe the Member for Geylang Serai also, stressed the importance of managerial staff and middle management staff being well versed in the scheme. This is a point which has not escaped us and several workshops have been conducted by the NPB, precisely to ensure not only the letter but also the spirit of the scheme will be thoroughly understood by those in charge of implementing it. Finally, the Member for Pasir Panjang asked for some indication as to the types of benefits or schemes which may be covered by the COWEC concept. There are basically two types of schemes. One type is a scheme whereby the investment income from the principal sum is devoted exclusively for retirement. Under this scheme, in addition to the 10% principal sum, all incomes will be kept for retirement. To give you one illustration which is interesting: one of the companies under this scheme has a proposal whereby if the employee resigns within five years of employment, he would not only have the 10% returned to his CPF account but also the interest. But if he serves more than five years in the company, then he will enjoy increasingly a proportion of net investment income. This will serve to encourage the employee to remain loyal and to foster a link between the employer and employee. The other type or category of benefits involves retirement benefit plus various other benefits. For example, in addition to the retirement funds based on the 10%, the investment income could be used for various benefits such as educational allowances, scholarships, medical benefits, various group activities, recreational activities, life insurance premiums, long service cash withdrawal and similar benefits. I apologize to the Members if I have not dealt with all the other points but I hope this covers the main points that they have raised.

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

Resolved, "That at its rising today Parliament do stand adjourned to a date to be fixed." - [Prof S. Jayakumar].

Sir, I beg to move, That Parliament do now adjourn. Question proposed.

6.31 pm

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I have obtained the right to raise a matter of great public interest on the Motion for the Adjournment today. The recent steep increases in road taxes, additional registration fees (ARF) and preferential additional registration fees (PARF) have generated a great deal of unhappiness among car owners, potential car owners and the non-car owning public as well. Car owners became even more aggrieved when the increase in petrol prices followed the road tax increase. With effect from 1st January 1984, car parking charges will also be increased. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I feel that the Ag Minister for Communications owes the public a full and clear explanation of his Ministry's land transport policy, particularly on private car ownership, traffic management measures to ensure a smooth flowing traffic on our roads, even during peak hours, and the upgrading of the taxi and bus services. Statements such as, "it is not the Government's intention to prevent people from owning cars" and "the problem is not car ownership, but traffic congestion", need to be more clearly explained. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, in land-scarce Singapore, there is indeed the obvious need to control the car population, as we need our premium land for our housing and industries. Having said that, I feel that the Ministry of Communications should work out a total or comprehensive solution to tackle this problem. Fiscal measures work on the assumption that they will be adequate enough to discourage potential car owners as well as encourage existing car owners to give up their cars by making it expensive to own and maintain private cars. However, the car owners value the mobility and freedom of movement which a car can give them and may well make sacrifices of other needs and pleasures to continue to be able to own cars. Their cars make travelling convenient for them. Besides not all areas in Singapore are easily accessible by public transport services. These factors should be carefully weighed in the formulation of the land transport policy and particularly the question of private car ownership. Sharp increases in road taxes and other fiscal measures increase the financial burden of the car owners to maintain their cars but by itself it is rather doubtful whether it will eventually help curb the car population. Since 1972, fiscal measures were introduced from time to time to curb the increase in the private car population. Yet the number of cars brought into our roads continue to increase. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I would be grateful if the Acting Minister for Communications will give this House his considered assessment of how confident he is on the effectiveness of the recently imposed fiscal measures to check private car ownership increase. Could he also enlighten the House on other measures which he has considered but were kept in reserve. It was reported that he has a repertoire of some 35 ways to check the increase in car ownership. In my discussions with my community leaders and constituents on this issue, they have expressed the view that the Government should first look at other ways to curb car population. They have asked why a system of quotas for purchase of new cars cannot be introduced. They pointed out that the easy availability of car loans on attractive terms for car purchases have encouraged or persuaded many to purchase cars. Why has the Government not tighten this availability of soft loans up to the full purchase price as a way to discourage purchase of cars? They have also asked why the Government has not considered restricting purchases on replacement basis only, that is, on a one-for-one basis. In this connection, is the present PARF system effective and, if not, how could it be improved so that car purchases will be mainly on the PARF basis of replacement only? These are some of the more common measures which have been raised, and I hope the Minister for Communications will explain why they are not considered feasible or appropriate. The fiscal measures have affected both car owners as well as non-car owners. It came during a period when there are increases in the charges or rates administered by other Ministries as well. We have just heard today that hospital charges will be revised from the 1st January 1984. Could the Acting Minister for Communications enlighten the House whether he has assessed the inflationary impact of the fiscal measures introduced to control the car population? In my discussions with my constituents, some have pointed out that the increase in the maintenance cost of a car brought about by road taxes and petrol price increases will start a chain reaction leading to increases in the prices of essential goods and services. This will make life difficult for the workers, particularly the low wage earners. Why should they suffer because of the need to control the car population? As I have mentioned above, it was said that car ownership is not the problem. Rather it is the traffic congestion on our roads. The Acting Minister has stated that the current private car population is large enough to cause severe traffic congestion on 12% of our key roads during the peak periods. Yet the Acting Minister has not come out with any traffic management proposals to solve this traffic congestion problem. The fiscal measures will not be able to do much to clear the traffic congestion quickly. It is crucial that the Ministry of Communications work out a plan to alleviate the traffic congestion which is counter productive and causes unnecessary lengthening of travelling time to and from work and fuel wastage. Perhaps the Minister can explain how much land we can afford to set aside for road space, car parks and related facilities. What are his Ministry's plans to maximize the utilization of the existing road space? This may require more innovative measures like the Areas Licensing Scheme (ALS) and there is the speculation that this Scheme will be extended if the road congestion does not improve. The Acting Minister has hinted of more drastic measures if the fiscal measures do not work. It will be better if the traffic management measures could be considered together with the fiscal measures so as to give those who want to buy cars and those who can be persuaded to give up their cars ample notice of what is in the future for car owners and the price which they would have to pay to maintain their cars. The fiscal measures, traffic management measures and improvements in public transport systems must be taken together, not separately. The private car population amounts to 42% of our motor vehicles and the other vehicles also contribute to the congestion. What steps are being taken to regulate their usage on the road? There is the general feeling that while the increase in car population has to be firmly controlled, the measures to do so should only be taken after improving the existing transport modes. Car owners and potential car owners can be persuaded to give up their cars if they see the taxi and bus services improving. There is already a new transportation mode which is now being built, i.e. the MRT, which will be in operation (at least the first phase) in 1988. Questions have been asked regarding what measures have been taken to upgrade the existing taxi and bus services. For taxis, the usual complaint is that it is difficult to obtain them during the peak hours. At present 38% of taxis are equipped with radio phones. More of our taxis should have radio phones. It will help the taxi service to be run more efficiently and it will cut down aimless plying and bring taxis directly and quickly to the commuters. What the public wants is a taxi service which is reliable, comfortable and available at a reasonable price. At the same time, ta)%i drivers must be given incentives to go on the road. The Ministry of Communications has set up a Taxi Task Force to look into the taxi service. It should work towards upgrading the service to make it more reliable, more comfortable and easily available, especially during peak hours, at a reasonable price. Our bus service, besides being comprehensive in its route coverage, must be able to meet the high expectation of a comfortable ride at reasonable prices. Would the Minister enlighten the House on measures which are in hand to improve the bus service? Is there sufficient competition for the Singapore Bus Service to push it to provide a better service? It may be necessary to give the buses more road space, like the introduction of dual bus lanes, but this will also contribute to the traffic congestion. There must be a judicious balance of road space usage among public transport vehicles, private vehicles and commercial vehicles. Unless the bus service is modernized to provide fast and comfortable service at reasonable prices, it will be difficult to encourage those who are presently using their cars to take buses instead, because of the convenience of driving their cars. In 1988, the MRT will come on stream and it is geared to cater for Singapore's long term transportation needs. What will be the position of private car ownership when the MRT is operational? Will more stringent measures to control private car ownership be introduced then? Will traffic management measures, like the extension of the ALS, be imposed to curb car usage on our roads also? Will the questiOn of ownership of private cars then be left as an individual's choice based on his ability to pay? Could the Minister paint the scenario on the future of private car ownership when the MRT is fully operational? Sir, I would like to urge the Acting Minister for Communications to prepare a comprehensive report on the land transport policy for public debate. Let the report be available for public discussions in the same way as the Medisave Scheme. I feel that in this way we can get the public to examine thoroughly the implication of private car ownership on our limited area of land. The question is whether we should set aside so much of our premium land for roads, car parks and related facilities. We have other critical uses for our limited land - housing, industries, catchment areas, to name a few. As our economy develops and incomes increase, our people will look forward to purchase their own cars. They must clearly understand why the car population must be controlled. Fiscal measures merely frustrate them but the message is not clearly conveyed to them. To conclude, there must be a total and comprehensive solution to curb the car population. Ad hoc measures, fiscal or otherwise, will not be sufficient enough to lead to a slowing down of car population growth.

Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I would like to thank the Member for Geylang Serai for his very thorough analysis of the problems confronted by us in Singapore regarding land transportation. He has raised a total of about 25 points and in the 10 minutes allotted to me I shall attempt to reply to him, not on a point-by-point basis, because I do not think it will be possible. But I hope, in the 10 minutes available, to outline the principles that govern the policies on land transportation and traffic management. Sir, the Member is right in putting his finger on the nub of the problem. The so-called car problem in Singapore is not really a car problem at all. It is really a problem of shortage of land. In Singapore, we all know that we have a very limited amount of land, some 620 sq km. On this limited amount of land we must provide homes for our people, factories and offices to generate jobs, open space and greenery for recreational purposes, army camps, naval and air bases, training areas for security and defence, catchment areas and reservoirs for collection and storage of water and so on. To this very long list of competitive economic uses of land must be added roads and car parks for transportation. In Singapore, we have been very fortunate that over the last two and a half decades of good government, we have rapid increases in disposable incomes for all Singaporeans. Our Government policy is to make easily available subsidized HDB flats to our citizens and this has added and reinforced what we have already noticed, which is, the rising expectations of our people as well as the rapid increase of disposable incomes. As a result of these factors, large numbers of people are now able to afford cars. Just over the last five years alone, there has been an increase of 42%. While the Government can and has undertaken to make easily available homes for everybody, it cannot undertake to make easily available cars for everybody. This is because the car is a very land-intensive mode of transportation. A car requires approximately 150 square metres of roads to service it. That is the amount of land required for a terrace house. Just for comparison, at peak hours, the bus with a capacity of up to 100 passengers, is about 50 to 70 times more efficient in the utilization of roads than the average car with an occupancy of one or two. Imagine instead of having one bus, we have 50 to 70 cars on the road carrying approximately the same number of people, with the same passenger capacity. Sir, Singapore has reached a stage of development where rapid increases in cars are no longer possible. Our roads cannot accommodate the increases. As a result, serious traffic congestion occurs regularly on our roads, especially during the peak hours. Many Singaporeans realize it as they encounter traffic jams every day. What many Singaporeans do not realize is that we have twice as many vehicles per square kilometre of land as Hong Kong and four times as many vehicles per square kilometre as Japan. And both Japan and Hong Kong are considered landscarce countries. Furthermore, we have about one-third more roads per square kilometre of land in Singapore compared to Japan and about four times as many kilometres of roads compared to Hong Kong. Sir, our projections over the next five years indicate that our increase in roads will be approximately 1% per year. So just a matter of simple arithmetic, any increase in the number of vehicles over and above that percentage increase can only add to the already severe congestion we are currently experiencing. Over the past two months, after the announcement of the increases in road tax, I have met hundreds of Singaporeans at every level - from the hawkers all the way to the managing directors - and I have found Singaporeans to be practical and realistic in their understanding and appraisal of the problem. This speaks well for us in Singapore. It speaks well for the intelligence and the sense of reality of the typical Singaporean. Except for a handful of people with a vested interest in the motor-car industry and who are totally unconcerned about the national consequences of severe traffic congestion, Singaporeans, by and large, do not dispute the need to slow down the increase of cars. Anybody on a bus or in a car, caught in a traffic jam which occurs daily, knows that the situation cannot be allowed to deteriorate. Where there has been a difference of opinion, they have centred round how this growth rate can be reduced. My Ministry welcomes suggestions from all quarters. Various suggestions have been made by our Members of Parliament as well as members of the public. Many of the suggestions are useful. They have been considered by our Ministry and will be implemented in due course at the appropriate time. Other suggestions, however, are not practical because they do not take full account of the total problem. Still, other suggestions are biased, extremely so, particularly towards a certain sector of the population, namely, the existing car owners. My Ministry has worked out detailed explanations on the various suggestions made. In the coming weeks, they will be made public to give Singaporeans a better understanding of the pros and cons, the advantages and disadvantages of each of the many suggestions made.

Dr Yeo, you have exactly five minutes to wind up.

Thank you, Sir, My Ministry has always taken a comprehensive approach in working out the problems of land transportation, liaising with the other relevant ministries and taking full account of the implications of policies made. Such comprehensive studies of the problems will continue. However, I must stress that having a comprehensive plan does not mean that all the measures must be implemented together at one and the same time, on a once-and-for-all basis. The recent measures on ARF, PARF, road tax, parking fees, petrol tax as well as the streamlining of the bus routes, the increases in the number of taxis, the widening of our roads and the increased computerization of our traffic junctions, all these plus many others reflect the comprehensive approach that we are taking towards traffic management. Other measures will be implemented at the appropriate time. It should be stressed that land transportation is a constantly evolving problem. It is not a static problem. There are therefore no solutions or combinations of solutions that will give it a permanent effect. Therefore, the management of the problem must be dynamic. It must adapt and respond to the changing circumstances and demands. Sir, I wish to assure the House that my Ministry is carefully studying the problem of land transportation in Singapore not just for the near future but for the longer term future. We will continue to make improvements in public transportation, to make it as cheap, as convenient and as comfortable as possible for users of public transport, be it the bus or the MRT. On the other hand, the cost of ownership and usage of cars must eventually take into account the social and economic costs of such land-intensive mode of transportation, Singaporeans are free to choose and will always be free to choose their preferred mode of transportation. If they prefer to use the bus, they would save themselves a lot of money which they can spend on themselves, on their children, on their home or even on their holidays. If they choose to own a car, then they must be prepared to pay the economic cost of the extra convenience and comfort that comes with owning a car. The Member for Geylang Serai raised the possibility of the use of the Area Licensing Scheme. Sir, this scheme has been found to be effective after implementation, and it is indeed the intention of my Ministry to extend the ALS both in time and boundary as and when the need for such extension arises. The Member asked if tax measures to-date have been effective. Our records over the last decade indicate that together with other measures implemented progressively in a comprehensive manner, the increases in road tax and ARF have indeed been very effective. Following the tax increases in 1975 the number of cars com- ing on to the roads in 1976 and 1977 showed a decrease of 5.6% and 0.4% respectively. The recent increases have also reduced the rate of increase by about 30% and this has been achieved in spite of the strenuous efforts by car dealers to get rid of their old and existing stock during this pre-festive season. The Question having been proposed at thirty-one minutes past Six o'clock pm and the Debate having continued for half an hour, Mr Deputy Speaker adjourned the House without Question put, pursuant to the Standing Order. Adjourned accordingly at One minute past Seven o'clock pm to a date to be fixed.

asked the Prime Minister if he will inform the House of the number of Members of Parliament employed full-time or part-time in statutory boards and companies either wholly or partly owned by the Government giving their names and their places of employment and details of all remuneration of whatsoever kind and howsoever called earned by the said Members.

The following is a list of MPs employed in statutory boards/Government companies: Name and Place of Employed Constituency Employment Designation Since MP Since ----------------------------------------------------------------- S. Chandra Das Intraco Managing 1976 (Joined 13 Dec 80 (Chong Boon) Director as Manager in 1968) Lim Chee Onn Keppel Managing 1 Sep 83 23 Jul 77 (Bukit Merah) Shipyard Director Limited M.K.A. Jabbar Keppel Chargehand 1 Apr 52 23 Dec 80 (Radin Mas) Shipyard Limited Saidi Haji Neptune Training 12 Dec 80 23 Dec 80 Shariff Orient Executive (Kaki Bukit) Lines Ltd Dr Lau Teik National Associate 1972 23 Dec 76 Soon University Professor (Serangoon of of Political Gardens) Singapore Science Dr Koh Lip Lin National Associate Sep 64 to 31 Jan 79 (Nee Soon) University Professor May 80 of of (Nanyang Singapore Chemistry University) and Dean of Since Jun 80 Faculty of (NUS) Science Dr Augustine National Associate May 68 8 Apr 70 H.H. Tan University Professor (Whampoa) of of Singapore Economics Dr Ang Kok National Professor 1951 2 Sep 72 Peng, B.B.M. University of (formerly (Buona Vista) of Chemistry University Singapore of Malaya) (As Professor from 1977) Dr Ow Chin National Senior Feb 1972 Hock University Lecturer (Parliamentary 1976 (Leng Kee) of of Secretary Singapore Economics 1 Oct 77 - 1 May 81) Name and Place of Employed Constituency Employment Designation Since MP Since ----------------------------------------------------------------- Yeo Choo Kok Nanyang Director First 8 Apr 70 (Delta) Techno- (Student appointed logical Affairs/ lecturer, Institute Special Nanyang Duties) University, 1968. Transferred to NTI in Aug 1981 They are all in full-time employment. Their remuneration is a matter between them and their respective employers.

asked the First Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Education (a) if he will release the number of students who obtained passes in the G.C.E. 'O' level examinations conducted for schools in 1980, 1981 and 1982 expressed as a percentage of the total number of students sitting in the following subjects: (i) English; (ii) English and Maths; and (iii) English, Maths and Second Language; and (b) if he will direct his Ministry to release for publication in the press the information requested in (a) for the 1983 G.C.E. 'O' level results when received.

Every year, detailed results of G.C.E. 'O' level examinations are analysed and presented to the Schools Council. The general public have, therefore, been kept informed of the G.C.E. 'O' level results, subject by subject, through the usual mass media. The details of the 1982 G.C.E. 'O' level results (Cols. 267 - 272) are enclosed for the information of the Member for Anson. Results by the groups of subjects requested are not available. The Ministry of Education does not normally carry out such analyses. results - NATIONAL RESULTS FOR ALL SUBJECTS FROM 1980-1982 (ENGLISH STREAM) (Cols. 267 - 272)

asked the Minister for Home Affairs if the Criminal Record s Office makes available to prospective employers in the private sector information on previous convictions of applicants for employment and if it does the circumstances in which this information is made available, e.g. is there a limit in the intervening time beyond which the information would not be made available.

The provisions of the Registration of Criminals Act (Cap 119) empower the Police to maintain the criminal records of persons. Under this Act, there is no limit to the period for which a person's criminal records are kept. The Criminal Records Office of the Police does not disclose criminal records to prospective employers in the private sector, unless the employment has security implications or potential for the commission of crimes. Examples are employment in the petroleum companies whose operations are vital to the economy and therefore require stringent security control, and of certain categories of hotel employees who have easy access to the rooms of hotel guests. In such cases, the prospective employers are cautioned that the information supplied to them are strictly on a confidential basis.

asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Minister for Culture if he will inform the House of the number of Members of Parliament concurrently serving as Singapore's High Commissioners or Ambassadors to foreign Governments, giving their names, the countries to which they are accredited, the dates of their first appointment in the foreign service and details of all remuneration of whatsoever kind and howsoever called earned by the said Members.

The following is a list of Members of Parliament who are concurrently serving as Heads of Mission:- Name and Countries of Date of Appointment Constituency Current Accreditation in the Foreign Service ______________________________________________________________ 1 Dr Chiang Belgium, Luxembourg, High Commissioner to Hai Ding the Netherlands, Malaysia. Jul 71 - Aug (Ulu the Holy See, and the 73 Pandan) European Communities Ambassador to the Federal Republic of Germany, Apr 78 - Apr 82 Present Appointment, May 82 - to-date 2 Mr J.F. Indonesia Ambassador to the Union Conceicao of Soviet Socialist (Katong) Republics, Jul 77 - Apr 81 Present Appointment, Apr 81 - to-date 3 Mr A. Rahim New Zealand Ambassador to Indonesia, Ishak Dec 74 - Jun 77 (Siglap) Present Appointment, Jul 81 - to-date 4 Mr Jek Yeun United Kingdom, High Commissioner to the Thong Denmark and Ireland United Kingdom, (Queenstown) Oct 77 - to-date The terms and conditions of service for Members of Parliament who are Ambassadors are the same as those accorded to Ambassadors who are career or contract officers.

asked the Minister for Finance and Minister for Trade and Industry how much Singapore money has been sunk into the Petrochemical project and in view of the present oversupply of petrochemical capacity, what does he estimate the internal rate of return on the investment to be.

As at 15th December 1983, Singapore's investment in the petrochemical project was S$498 million. This comprised S$233 million in equity and S$265 million in shareholders' loans. The petrochemical complex is a long-gestation project. It will take a number of years for the full complement of downstream projects to come to full production. Losses must be expected in the initial years of operation. However, over the 20-year life-span of the plants, I expect the rate of return to be satisfactory.

asked the Minister for Finance and Minister for Trade and Industry how much revenue he expects to raise from the increases in registration and licence fees for motor vehicles and in the tax on petrol before and after the income substitution effects take place and how the government intends to spend the extra revenue raised.

The additional revenue from the increases in road tax and registration fees is expected to be $26 million for FY 83 and $59 million for FY 84. The additional revenue from the increase in the tax on petrol is expected to be $57 million for FY 83 and $113 million for FY 84. The additional revenue will be paid into the Consolidated Fund and used to finance overall Government expenditure for the provision of services as well as basic infrastructure and development projects.

asked the Minister for Finance and Minister for Trade and Industry whether it is the policy of the government that convicted persons should be kept out of employment in the public sector (Government and statutory boards) regardless of the time that has intervened between the conviction and application for employment and, if there is a time after which they will be considered, what is the time.

It is not the policy of the Government to keep convicted persons out of employment in the public sector. Generally, an enlightened policy is adopted towards convicted persons who apply for jobs. However, each case has to be considered on its individual merits. In considering for employment an applicant who has been convicted of a criminal offence, the Public Service Commission will, in consultation with Permanent Secretaries and Heads of Departments, take into account the seriousness and nature of the offence as well as the likelihood of recidivism. This is necessary because civil servants, especially those in the higher Divisions, have access to sensitive information.

asked the Acting Minister for Communications if he will give the number of foreign-registered motor vehicles allowed for use in Singapore for more than a day and does the government intend to restrict the number of such vehicles and if so how do the recent increases for Singapore-registered vehicles achieve this end for foreign vehicles.

Foreign-registered cars are allowed free entry into Singapore for up to 90 days. Most of them are Malaysian-registered cars. Permits are issued for periods ranging from 1 to 5 days. The daily average number of permits issued for more than a day's stay in 1983 was 1,816. The daily average number of permits for goods vehicles and public service vehicles was 75 and 6 respectively. My Ministry does not intend to restrict the entry of these vehicles into Singapore.

asked the Acting Minister for Labour (a) if he will say what compensation he ordered the employer to pay to the typist who was dismissed, the story of whose dismissal he related at the dinner of the Singapore Manufacturers Association; (b) whether he considers the compensation provided for under the Employment Act is adequate for unfair dismissals; and (c) will he say why he did not order the employer to reinstate the typist in this particular case.

It is undesirable to divulge the quantum of compensation as the person involved may wish to have this information kept confidential. In deciding on the quantum of compensation, the circumstances of each case are considered carefully and the factors taken into account by the Ministry of Labour include the length of employment, the work attitude of the employee, prospects of finding alternate employment with similar salary and service condition, apportionment of blame for the dismissal and gravity of the employee's misconduct, if any. The amount of compensation awarded to the dismissed employee in the case mentioned by the MP for Anson did take into account the abovementioned factors. The quantum of compensation is deemed adequate. The Employment Act does not prescribe the quantum of compensation which the Minister can order. Section 14(4) of the Employment Act allows the Minister either to order compensation for the unfairly dismissed employee or the employer to reinstate him. In this particular case, my Ministry did not consider reinstatement as an appropriate remedy. This is because relationship between the employer and employee had already been soured to such an extent that reinstatement could only lead to suspicion, further friction and potential for yet another dispute. results - NATIONAL RESULTS FOR ALL SUBJECTS FROM 1980-1982 (ENGLISH STREAM) (Cols. 267 - 272)

asked the Minister for Home Affairs if he will give the reasons for launching Operation Senjata and an evaluation of the operation, and whether the publicity which accompanied the operation was necessary.

There was a sudden upsurge in crimes, particularly robberies, housebreakings and thefts of motor-vehicles for the first 10 months of this year as compared to the same period in 1982. In recent months, the situation had been aggravated by the occurrence of several violent crimes in which firearms were used. A feeling of insecurity and unease among the public was developing. Police therefore had to respond, and decided to launch a series of intensive island-wide anti-crime operation code-named 'Operation Senjata'. This was timed for the festive season, when crime could be expected to increase. The overall objective was to keep up pressure on potentially criminal groups, to emphasise our efforts to maintain law and order and to serve as a reminder to criminal elements that tough action will be taken against them. The specific objectives were: (a) to increase police presence on the ground and thereby help strengthen the feeling of public security and order; (b) to intensify discreet checks in locations which have been found to have habitually attracted criminals, and thereby deter crime; (c) to intensify efforts in apprehending specific targets wanted in connection with major offences committed in recent months. The operation was certainly a success in meeting these objectives. First, the operation which deployed uniformed officers drawn from the Divisional Police, Police Task Force, Volunteer Special Constabulary and non-operational Commands, had increased public perception of Police presence and enhanced public confidence. Secondly, a comparison of crime figures for the 3 weeks before and after the launching of Operation Senjata, showed that the operation had deterred criminals from committing various offences. For example, the number of robberies was down by 9%, housebreakings by 29%, thefts of motor-vehicle by 16% and molestation cases by 44%. Thirdly, out of 384 persons who were detained or prosecuted for various criminal offences, several were, in fact, persons wanted by the Police in connection with serious offences including firearm offences, robbery, housebreaking, rape, secret society activities and drug offences. Arrests were also made for offences discovered during the operations. Weapons, including 3 firearms, were also recovered. Publicity through the mass media was essential. First, the Police were seen to be effective through intensive patrols and checks. Secondly, in a major operation like this, it was desirable to inform the public of the operation so that they would fully understand the rationale and would not be alarmed by the increased police presence. Such awareness through publicity helped the Police to gain the unprecedented cooperation and understanding of the public when they were subjected to checks or were delayed at a roadblock.

asked the Minister for Home Affairs if he will give a progress report on the Boys' Clubs which have been established, setting out the reasons for the establishment, the extent of membership and his Ministry's assessment of the usefulness of these Clubs.

Since June 1982, eight Boys' Clubs have been formed in eight constituencies, namely, MacPherson, Bedok, Tanjong Pagar, Kuo Chuan, Kim Seng, Ang Mo Kio, Jurong and Bukit Merah. Each Club has a Management Committee comprising civic group leaders, police representatives, representatives of People's Association and representatives of the boys. The day-to-day activities of each Boys' Club are organised and controlled by 5 Police officers - one Sergeant and 4 others who are either Corporals or Constables. These 5 officers are engaged in these duties on a full-time basis. The main reasons for the establishment of Boys' Clubs by the Singapore Police Force are: (1) to help channel the energy of youths towards healthy sports, recreational and social activities which will inculcate correct values, develop character and leadership qualities, protect them from undesirable peer group influences and thereby pre-empt them from indulging in delinquency; (2) to identify youths with problems that could potentially lead them into delinquency and to ensure that such youths receive help and counselling from police officers and volunteer social workers with the objective of preventing alienation from the mainstream of society. There is a close link between juvenile delinquency and crime. By helping society tackle the problem of juvenile delinquency, the Police will also achieve another primary objective - that of reducing crime. It also serves to forge closer links and rapport between the community and the police. The response to the Boys' Clubs has been overwhelming. To date, 6,575 boys have joined the clubs. This is an increase of 80% from the initial membership of 3,658 when the clubs were formed. 72% of them are between the age group of 12 and 15 years. A number of them are premature school-leavers, an important group of young people who need proper guidance so that they are not led astray in their crucial formative years. The activities organised include regular games such as badminton, soccer, roller skating, table-tennis, carroms, swimming, jogging, hiking, Tae-Kwon-Do and boxing. There are also coordinated joint activities involving all clubs such as a Boys' Club Military Band and a Police Boys' Club Camp. The clubs also organise educational and cultural activities and participate in community and constituency projects, such as visits to the Singapore Science Centre, visits to Homes for the Aged to help in their cleaning and maintenance, and participation in Civil Defence projects and in various activities of Residents' Committees. It is too early to assess the usefulness of the clubs as six of the 8 clubs are less than a year old. The early indications are that the clubs are useful. The police officers in all clubs are respected by the boys and a close relationship and trust between them has developed. A number of cases of indiscipline and potential delinquency involving the members were brought to the attention of the police and remedial action was taken promptly. Many parents have also on their own accord brought their sons to enrol in the clubs which demonstrates their confidence in the clubs.

asked the Minister for Health what are the plans to upgrade the services and facilities of Kandang Kerbau Hospital for the convenience of both the public and the staff and is he aware that the condition of the consultation rooms of the specialists clinics is poor and that the current renovations of the hospital wards are disruptive to the services as well as inconvenient to the public.

Upgrading of hospital services and facilities. Wherever feasible continuous efforts are being made by my Ministry to improve the physical environment of all government hospitals and to upgrade their services and facilities. The Kandang Kerbau Hospital (KKH) is no exception. There are however many physical constraints to the extent these improvements can be successful given the existing conditions in the old buildings. Short of demolishing and rebuilding the whole hospital, we cannot expect to upgrade KKH to a standard of accommodation equivalent for instance to the new Singapore General Hospital (SGH). We may therefore have to live with what by modern yardsticks are considered out-of-date and inconvenient services and facilities. During the last 4 years, we spent a total of $1.1 million improving the facilities in KKH, particularly in the following areas:-

asked the Minister for National Development (a) whether he will request the Housing and Development Board to consider installing additional R.F. amplifiers and antennae in all existing HDB apartment blocks having common antenna systems to cater for the Singapore Broadcasting Corporation's new Channel 12 which is due to operate in February 1984; and (b) whether this facility will be incorporated in the common antenna systems in all HDB apartment blocks that are now under construction.

The HDB will embark on a programme to upgrade the common antenna systems of all existing HDB blocks for the reception of SBC's new Channel 12. A total of 3,500 systems has to be fitted with additional amplifiers, antennae, and related equipment. The programme will be completed by October 1984. (b) All HDB apartment blocks under construction and future blocks will have the additional facility incorporated in the common antenna systems for the reception of the new Channel.

asked the Minister for National Development if he will make a statement on the death of the pig farmer in Ponggol who was driven to take his own life after service of a notice on him for the resettlement of his farm and if he will make public the written note left by the man.

According to the State Coroner, there was a pig farmer in Ponggol who took his own life on 17 June 1983, The Coroner's Court was told that a notice served on the deceased by the Primary Production Department to clear his farm caused the depression that subsequently led to his suicide. If this was so, the unfortunate incident is the only one we know of among nearly 198,000 cases, including 8,292 farmers, that have been cleared by the Resettlement Department over the past two decades. The deceased was eligible for resettlement compensation of $162,180.

91. This sum will be paid to his widow. In addition, she will be eligible for priority allocation of a flat as well as a shop or a workshop to take up an alternative trade. I understand that a note left behind by the deceased was tendered as evidence in the Coroner's Court. The Member for Anson should know that I have no power to make public evidence that has been tendered in a Coroner's Court or any other court. If the Member for Anson is interested in the note, he should apply to the Coroner to see it.

asked the Minister for National Development (a) how many applicants are now on the waiting list for one- and two-room Housing and Development Board rental apartments and for three-, four- and five-room HDB apartments; (b) how many three-, four- and five-room units will be completed in 1984 and 1985; (c) whether all of those who are now on the waiting list will get their apartments by 1984-85; and (d) what is the present estimated waiting time for new applicants for three-, four- and five-room apartments.

As at 30 November 1983, the number of applicants on the HDB's waiting list for 1- and 2-room rental flats and 3-, 4- and 5-room sale flats was 109,506. The breakdown is as follows: 1-room rental flats - 6,502 2-room rental flats - 7,525 3-room sale flats - 32,064 4-room sale flats - 44,005 5-room sale flats - 19,410 (b) In 1984 and 1985, the HDB expects to complete a minimum of 78,000 3-, 4- and 5- room flats. The breakdown is as follows: 1984 - 16,000 3-room flats - 18,000 4-room flats - 5,000 5-room flats 1985 - 12,000 3-room flats - 22,000 4-room flats - 5,000 5-room flats (c) Applicants who registered to purchase flats before March 1982 can expect to get their flats by 1985. The HDB has stopped constructing new rental flats. Therefore, the allocation of these flats depends completely on vacancies arising from tenancy terminations. Based on recent trends in tenancy terminations, the estimated waiting period for rental flats is 2 years for 1-room flats and 4 1/2 years for 2-room flats. This means that existing 1-room applicants will get their flats by 1985 while 2-room applicants will get theirs by 1987 or 1988. The waiting period could be much longer if the rate of terminations decreases. Applicants on the rental waiting list, especially those applying for 2-room units, are urged to switch to the sales register where they can be sure of a flat within a reasonable waiting period. (d) The present estimated waiting period for new applicants of 3-, 4- and 5-room sale flats is 3 years.

asked the Minister for National Development what is the progress of the development of the open space in front of Blocks 551, 552 and 554 of Bedok North Estate into a neighbourhood park; what facilities will be available; when will the project be completed and what will be the cost involved.

The open space in front of Blocks 551, 552 and 554 of Bedok North Estate has been developed into a neighbourhood park for residents of Neighbourhood 5. As with other neighbourhood parks, it has been landscaped with fruit trees, provided with footpaths, seats and a sepak takraw court. The project was completed in December 1982 at a cost of $75,000.

asked the Minister for National Development whether there are plans to provide a market/food and/or shopping centre at Bedok Reservoir Road in Neighbourhood 7 of Bedok North Estate as the residents there do not enjoy such facilities.

A neighbourhood centre is now under construction at Bedok Reservoir Road in Neighbourhood 7 of Bedok North Estate. It will provide 50 shops and other related facilities such as mini-markets and eating houses to serve residents in Neighbourhood 7. It is expected to be completed by the end of 1984.

asked the Minister for National Development whether he will consider the construction of an underpass across Telok Blangah Road at Maritime Square, in view of the heavy volume of movement across the road of picnickers and holiday-makers to Sentosa and visitors to exhibitions at the World Trade Centre.

The PWD will be constructing a pedestrian overhead bridge across Telok Blangah Road at Maritime Square next year to cater for the large number of pedestrians crossing the road at this location. An underpass will not be constructed there as it will be more costly and its construction will also adversely affect the busy traffic along Telok Blangah Road.

asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs and Minister for Culture (a) the number of violations of our air space by the aircraft of the Aeroflot Soviet Airlines over the years from 1980 to the present; (b) what actions have been taken by the Government to ensure that the Aeroflot Soviet Airlines would comply with our laws; and (c) whether in view of the Soviet Union's shooting down of the Korean Air Lines Boeing-747 and the violations of our air space by the aircraft of the Aeroflot Soviet Airlines, the Government would suspend the landing rights of the Aeroflot Soviet Airlines for a period of time.

There were four instances of violations of Tengah air space by Aeroflot aircraft in early 1980 (14 January to 16 April). Since then, there have been no further violations. (b) The Singapore Government took appropriate action against the violations of Singapore's air space by the aircraft of the Aeroflot Soviet Airlines in 1980. On 25 April 1980, the Soviet Charge d'Affaires was summoned to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and told of the violations of Tengah air space by Aeroflot aircraft. He was warned that any such violations in the future would be dealt with in accordance with the laws of Singapore. Since the warning, there have been no further violations. I would like to assure the Honourable Member that the Government takes a very serious view of any violation of Singapore's air space. Under the terms of the Air Services Agreement between Singapore and the Soviet Union, the Singapore Government can take legal action against any infringement of our air space by the aircraft of the Aeroflot Soviet Airlines or any other airline. Paragraph 58 of the Air Navigation Order of 1973 stipulates that any contravention of our air space by any airline shall be liable, on conviction, to a fine not exceeding $2,000 or imprisonment for a term of six months, or to both such fine and imprisonment. Similarly, Article 3(6) of the Air Services Agreement between Singapore and the USSR gives Singapore the right to suspend Aeroflot flights in Singapore if the Aeroflot Airlines failed to comply with the conditions prescribed in the Agreement. (c) The Singapore Government has no plans to suspend the landing rights of the Aeroflot Airlines.

asked the Minister for Finance and Minister for Trade and Industry if he will consider reduced tariffs for public utilities for Residents' Committee Centres which are assessed at non-domestic rates at present, in view of the fact that Residents' Committees are voluntary organisations dedicated to community service.

There are many voluntary organisations like the Residents' Committees which are dedicated to community service. It would be invidious to reduce public utilities' tariffs for one organisation and not extend the same concession to the others. The domestic tariff rates are applicable only to domestic premises which are used exclusively as the consumer's place of residence. I regret that the tariffs for public utilities for Residents' Committee Centres cannot be reduced.

asked the Acting Minister for Social Affairs what measures are being undertaken and planned to improve programmes for Senior Citizens and for the parents who will benefit from more and better creches or child-care systems in factories and housing estates.

It is not the intention of the Government to encourage the attitude that senior citizens are a class apart for whom special policies and programmes should be drawn up. Able-bodied senior citizens who, for one reason or another, are not in gainful employment face the problem of boredom and social isolation during the day when their children are at work and their grandchildren at school. To alleviate this problem, the People's Association and Residents' Committees have set up 60 recreational centres in community centres and HDB void decks. It is intended to open more such centres and to involve the inactive senior citizens themselves in the management of the centres. In 1982, my Ministry introduced a "Befrienders' Service" in the Tiong Bahru constituency as a pilot project to cater to the needs of senior citizens who are single and living alone or are home-bound and unable to cope with the demands of living in the community. Under the project, a pool of concerned citizens befriend, advise and assist them and act as points of contact in times of need. The project will be extended to another two constituencies soon. With regard to child-care systems, my Ministry runs a Family Day Care Scheme under which children of working mothers are matched with housewives selected as care-givers and a Workplace Childcare Centre Scheme under which factories are encouraged through a system of subsidies to set up child care centres. In addition, my Ministry provides training for childcare centre staff. The Family Day Care Scheme was launched in October 1980. Since then, out of 7,292 requests for assistance, 1,943 have been successfully matched. Publicity for the Family Day Care Scheme includes pamphlets and a booklet entitled "Choosing Good Day Care for Children", advertisements on bus panels, car stickers, announcements over the radio, filmlets screened over TV and classified advertisements placed in newspapers. Since July 1983, my Ministry has been promoting the concept of workplace childcare centres to both the private and public sectors. My Ministry has approached the National Productivity Council as well as several employers with a large female workforce to familiarise them with the concept of workplace childcare centres and to explain the types of assistance the government will give to encourage them to set up workplace childcare centres. One workplace childcare centre has already been set up at Chartered Industries of Singapore. Another four workplace childcare centres will be set up soon. My Ministry now provides 4 basic courses in early childhood education and 2 specialised courses. The training is intended to upgrade the quality of childcare services offered in the childcare centres. To date, 115 persons have benefited from the training.

asked the Acting Minister for Communications what additional steps will be taken to improve the public transport system especially buses in view of the Government policy to curb motor-car ownership.

My Ministry is presently studying various proposals to improve our public transportation. Firstly, the number of buses during the short "peak within the peak" period in the mornings and evenings can be increased slightly. This can be done either by SBS putting more buses on the road or introducing more Scheme B services to help take some of the load off SBS during these peak hours. Secondly, we will also consider the use of more bus lanes to help speed up travel by bus and improve its regularity. Thirdly, for those who would like a higher level of comfort and convenience and are prepared to pay more, we are examining the possibility of encouraging taxi pools, to carry commuters to work and back on a fixed monthly contract basis. Our preliminary assessment indicates that both car owners and taxi-drivers might find this to be of mutual advantage. Such a service would be very much like that provided by the school mini-buses which provide door-to-door service for school children for a fixed monthly sum. The difference will be that the taxi provides an air-conditioned ride, with a shorter waiting period because it carries 4 passengers only. For the taxi driver there is the assurance of a basic monthly revenue from this fixed morning and evening service leaving him free to earn more during the rest of the day. The ROV can provide a central processing facility to match operators and commuters who are interested in joining the scheme. Details are now being worked out. This scheme can also be extended to air-conditioned mini-buses. Fourthly, the number of taxis will be increased gradually to match increasing demand. A Taxi Task Force has also been set up by my Ministry to carry out a thorough review to improve the taxi service. The recommendations can be expected early next year.

asked the Acting Minister for Communications (a) whether, as a result of the recent increases in road taxes, ARF and PARF as well as petrol pump prices, car growth will become more manageable; (b) what other measures his Ministry intends to take to ensure that there will be manageable growth in the car population, bearing in mind that the private car today is more of a basic necessity than a luxury; (c) will he also not consider removing the ARF altogether and retaining only the PARF, i.e., a new car may only be registered in exchange for an old one; and (d) will he also consider allowing new increases in the number of cars to be balloted for and made non-transferable.

The measures taken have begun to produce results. For the first 6 weeks since the increases on 17 October 1983, the average weekly increase was 340 cars compared to 494 for the first 10 months of this year - a reduction of 3O%. My Ministry will continue to monitor the situation and study other possible measures to ensure smooth traffic flow. But we must be careful about solutions which will severely distort the economy and result in the inefficient use of our limited land. The long term answer for us must lie in the more efficient means of transportation like buses and the MRT. The suggestion to remove ARF altogether and make car buyers scrap an old car whenever they buy a new car is a very attractive idea superficially. It is very effective and will put an immediate lid on the car population. However, there are severe consequences. The immediate outcome would be that second-hand car prices will increase dramatically overnight. When this happens, the cost will be beyond those who may need to own a car in future. Such an approach gives a windfall gain to existing car owners at the expense of the rest of the population and penalises our younger workers and professionals. These are some of the considerations we have to bear in mind before we introduce new measures. The suggestion that we allow some increase in the car population through a ballot is not satisfactory. The ballot, which is really a lucky draw in disguise, will result in a windfall benefit for the lucky applicants and we will be swamped with tens of thousands of applicants. The allocation of cars in this manner would be unrelated to the optimum economic use of our roads.

asked the Acting Minister for Communications why bus fares cannot be lowered even though (i) the price of diesel has dropped; (ii) manpower costs have also gone down because of the use of the more efficient OMO system; and (iii) the prices of vehicles and their accessories are lower owing to the strength of the Singapore dollar.

There has been no increase in bus fares for the past 2 1/2 years. However, over the same period the average wage in SBS has increased by about 32%. As wages account for half of SBS operating costs, the effect of higher wages is acutely felt in SBS. In 1982, even though there was a nett decrease of 806 in manpower, the wage cost went up by $13.4 m. Fortunately, the price of diesel remained relatively stable for more than 2 years and has fallen slightly since the middle of this year. The strengthening of the Singapore dollar has also kept the price of spare-parts from rising with overseas inflation. At the same time, determined efforts by SBS to cut costs and improve productivity has led to more cost savings primarily through more extensive use of OMO services. 45% of SBS buses are now rostered on OMO services, up from 35% at the beginning of this year. Savings have also been achieved through computerisation and mechanisation. These efforts have enabled the SBS to hold its fares for the past 2 1/2 years in spite of increased labour cost. By increasing its productivity further, SBS hopes that future fare increases can be kept to the minimum.

asked the Acting Minister for Communications if he will provide details of plans or measures that have been or will be carried out to further improve the taxi service.

The Taxi Task Force which was set up in my Ministry is now in the middle of a thorough and comprehensive review of the taxi service and will make its recommendations early next year. It has undertaken several surveys to find out in detail the demand and supply characteristics of travel by taxis, the driving pattern of taxi drivers and the opinion of the general public on the taxi service. This information will enable it to draw up a long term plan to improve the service. In the meantime we have taken steps to increase the supply of taxis next year. Two new taxi companies - SBS Taxi Pte Ltd and Singapore Commuter (Pte) Ltd - have been formed and will, between them, add about 500 new taxis on the roads. In addition the Singapore Airport Bus Service (Pte) Ltd (SABS) has plans to increase its fleet from 300 to 500 taxis. All these "company" taxis will operate in 2 shifts. Taxi drivers will be better trained. The ROV has recently revised and improved its training course and extended it from 2 weeks to 2 months. It is also planning to introduce refresher training courses for existing taxi drivers. I would like to assure Members that we view the taxi service as an important and integral part of public transportation and will continually strive to improve its quality.

asked the Acting Minister for Communications what is the progress of the study made earlier this year into the possibility of introducing a direct bus service between the Bukit Merah Interchange and the Ang Mo Kio Interchange for the convenience of residents of Telok Blangah and the surrounding estates and when this service can be expected.

I am glad to inform the Honourable Member for Telok Blangah that residents in Telok Blangah and the surrounding estates will get a direct bus service to Ang Mo Kio next month. SBS Service 132 which runs from Ang Mo Kio and loops at the Orchard Road area will be extended to the Bukit Merah Interchange.

asked the Acting Minister for Communications if he will report on the progress of implementation of the Mass Rapid Transit project and state the problems, if any, that are encountered in respect of participation of local contractors, selection of the locomotive system most suited for Singapore, availability of local expertise, soil conditions of sites earmarked for the routes and stations, resettlement and land acquisition, and any other engineering, organisational and financial problems.

The MRT project has been progressing very satisfactorily. The MRT Corporation was officially inaugurated on 22 October 1983 to take over the functions of constructing and operating the MRT from the Provisional MRT Authority. All 7 tunnelling contracts for the Phase I system have been awarded at highly competitive prices. The remaining civil contracts for the 5 civil defence stations, the Bishan Depot and the elevated section will be awarded sometime next year. Our local contractors have been active in the MRT project. Four of the 7 civil contracts awarded were given to joint ventures between local contractors and their foreign partners. All the E & M contracts are scheduled to be awarded during the first half of next year. Tenders for the rolling stock contract to supply our MRT trains are scheduled to be closed on January 9 and awarded by mid-April next year. One main problem faced by the MRT Corporation is the lack of local expertise in tunnelling work and railway engineering. The Corporation is therefore recruiting the necessary experienced engineers and workers from Hong Kong and other countries. To increase the pool of local expertise, the Corporation requires all contractors to make a firm commitment in training of local personnel and transfer of technology. All contractors will be required to submit monthly statements listing their local staff and full details of the training received by them. Soil investigations have revealed that difficult soil conditions will be encountered. The MRTC has therefore chosen contractors with direct relevant tunnelling experience. Resettlement and land acquisition have been progressing smoothly. No serious problems are expected. There are also no serious engineering, organisational or financial problems. However, it is anticipated that construction will create disturbances and disruptions to the public as traffic will have to be diverted and the noise level may increase. To alleviate such problems, contractors are required to plan their work carefully. There will be close liaison with interested organisations and open communications with members of the public. REVISION OF HOSPITAL, OUTPATIENT AND DENTAL CHARGES, MAXIMUM FEES PAYABLE BY CLASS B2 AND C PATIENTS PER ADMISSION OR SPECIALIST OUTPATIENT ATTENDANCE (Cols. 295 - 304)