Hansard, 1989-05-29

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 Lim Boon Heng (Kebun Baru), Deputy Speaker - from 11th to 14th April and from 26th May to 6th June, 1989. Dr Wong Kwei Cheong (Cairnhill) - from 12th to 14th April and from 22nd April to 2nd May, 1989. Dr Koh Lam Son (Telok Blangah) - from 13th to 16th April, 1989. Mr Goh Chok Tong (Marine Parade GRC), First Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Defence - from 17th to 22nd April, from 2nd to 4th June and from 12th to 18th June, 1989. Mr Mah Bow Tan (Tampines GRC), Minister of State, Ministry of Communications and Information and Ministry of Trade and Industry - from 17th to 22nd April, on 26th and 27th May and from 29th May to 3rd June, 1989. Mr Peter Sung (Buona Vista), Minister of State, Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Ministry of National Development - from 17th to 22nd April, 1989. Mr Ng Pock Too (Nee Soon Central) - from 17th to 22nd April, 1989. Mr S. Chandra Das (Cheng San GRC) - from 17th to 22nd April, from 18th to 21st May, from 26th to 27th May and from 1st to 4th June, 1989. Dr Yeo Ning Hong (Kim Seng), Minister for Communications and Information and Second Minister for Defence (Policy) - from 20th to 25th April and from 23rd to 26th May, 1989. Dr Ahmad Mattar (Brickworks GRC), Minister for the Environment - on 24th April, 1989. Dr Seet Ai Mee (Bukit Gombak), Minister of State, Ministry of Community Development and Ministry of Education - from 30th April to 1st May and from 13th to 31st May, 1989. Dr Richard Hu Tsu Tau (Kreta Ayer), Minister for Finance - from 2nd to 8th May, 1989. Encik Yatiman Yusof (Tampines GRC), Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Foreign Affairs - from 5th to 16th May, 1989. Mr Tan Soo Khoon (Brickworks GRC), Speaker - from 5th to 11th May, from 2nd to 5th June and from 8th to 17th June, 1989. Dr Arthur Beng Kian Lam (Fengshan) - from 6th to 8th May, 1989. Mr Yeo Cheow Tong (Hong Kah GRC), Acting Minister for Health - from 6th to 25th May, 1989. Mr Lim Chee Onn (Bukit Merah) - from 6th to 26th May, 1989. Mr S. Dhanabalan (Kallang), Minister for National Development - from 6th to 28th May, 1989. Mr Choo Wee Khiang (Marine Parade GRC) - from 8th to 10th May, 1989. Dr Wan Soon Bee (Pasir Panjang GRC) - on 11th May, 1989. Mr Wong Kan Seng (Toa Payoh GRC), Minister for Foreign Affairs and Minister for Community Development and Leader of the House - from 12th to 21st May, 1989. BG Lee Hsien Loong (Teck Ghee), Minister for Trade and Industry and Second Minister for Defence (Services) - from 12th to 25th May, 1989. Dr Dixie Tan (Ulu Pandan) - from 12th to 30th May, 1989. Mr Sia Khoon Seong (Moulmein) - from 15th May to 16th June, 1989. Dr Hong Hai (Bedok GRC) - from 17th to 20th May, 1989. Dr Low Seow Chay (Chua Chu Kang) - from 18th May to 10th June, 1989. Mr Lau Ping Sum (Yio Chu Kang) - from 19th May to 10th June, 1989. Dr Aline K. Wong (Tampines GRC) - from 22nd May to 24th June, 1989. Mr Chiam See Tong (Potong Pasir) - from 22nd May to 24th June, 1989. Mr Heng Chiang Meng (Cheng San GRC) - from 24th May to 8th June, 1989. Dr Ow Chin Hock (Leng Kee) - from 24th May to 23rd June, 1989. Mr Chew Heng Ching (Eunos GRC) - from 26th May to 20th June, 1989. Dr Koh Lip Lin (Nee Soon South) - from 31st May to 10th June, 1989. Mr Lee Yock Suan (Cheng San GRC), Minister for Labour - from 31st May to 18th June, 1989. Dr Augustine H.H. Tan (Whampoa) - from 5th to 24th June, from 10th to 17th July and from 24th to 28th July, 1989. Mr Eugene Yap Giau Cheng (Mountbatten), Senior Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Trade and Industry and Minister for the Environment - from 5th to 9th June, 1989. Encik Othman bin Haron Eusofe (Marine Parade GRC) - from 5th to 19th June, 1989. Mr Goh Chee Wee (Boon Lay) - from 6th to 18th June, 1989. Mr Ong Teng Cheong (Kim Keat), Second Deputy Prime Minister - from 6th to 18th June, 1989. Mr Ng Kah Ting (Punggol) - from 9th to 23rd June and from 18th August to 20th September, 1989. Encik Abbas Abu Amin (Pasir Panjang GRC) - from 9th to 13th June, 1989. TAN SOO KHOON Speaker Parliament of Singapore

The following Bills were assented to by the President of the Republic of Singapore on the date stated: 13th April, 1989 (i) Judicial Committee (Amendment) Bill; (ii) Road Traffic (Amendment) Bill; (iii) Economic Expansion Incentives (Relief from Income Tax) (Amendment) Bill; (iv) Customs (Amendment) Bill; (v) Statutory Corporations (Contributions to Consolidated Fund) Bill; and (vi) Central Provident Fund (Amendment) Bill. TAN SOO KHOON Speaker Parliament of Singapore

asked the Minister for National Development what enforcement policy is in place to ensure that the air ventilation systems of underground car parks are functioning properly.

Mr Speaker, Sir, building regulations require all basement car parks to have mechanical ventilation systems providing at least six air changes per hour. This is comparable to standards adopted by other countries. Owners and management corporations of buildings are required to maintain and keep their car park mechanical ventilation systems in good working condition.

Can I ask the Minister which department in his Ministry is in charge of enforcing such regulations to maintain the air quality designed into the air ventilation systems?

Mr Speaker, Sir, the Building Control Division of my Ministry is in charge of enforcing the regulations governing any violation of these rules.

The following Question stood in the name of Mr Chew Heng Ching --- 2. To ask the Minister for National Development if the standard of cleanliness in Housing and Development Board estates has suffered as a result of cleaning contractors facing manpower shortage; and, if so, what measures the HDB will take to overcome the problem.

Question No. 2, Sir.

Mr Speaker, Sir, there are presently 32 conservancy con- tractors holding contracts for the cleaning of HDB housing estates. 18 of these contractors commenced their contract on 1 April 1989. In the first two weeks of April some contractors were short of manpower and equipment. This resulted in a temporary drop in standard of cleanliness in some HDB housing estates. To correct the situation, HDB mobilized its own workers and other conservancy contractors to spruce up the affected estates. HDB also increased daily site supervision to identify problem areas and to take immediate corrective action. As a result, Sir, the standard of cleanliness in HDB estates is now back to normal. HDB, however, will continue to monitor the performance of the contractors closely and will not hesitate to impose penalties against those who do not carry out their contracts properly. Besides these measures, I would also like to call on residents in the public housing estates to cooperate with HDB's efforts to maintain a clean environment. Residents should not litter the common areas. Bulky refuse should not be abandoned along common corridors or at lift landings. If necessary, residents should seek HDB's assistance in disposing of such bulky refuse. With more residents' cooperation, the task of keeping the housing estates clean would be achievable at a lower cost to everybody.

asked the Minister for Education if he will give the building schedule of the sixteen new secondary schools which was announced by the Government in August 1988.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I am answering on behalf of my Minister. Four schools are scheduled to be completed in 1992. The remaining 12 schools will be completed between 1993 and early 1995.

Sir, will the Parliamentary Secretary identify these four secondary schools?

The four schools which will be completed in 1992 are located in Ang Mo Kio, Bishan, Serangoon and Jurong West.

asked the Minister for the Environment whether his Ministry has established the cause of the outbreak of food poisoning at the Sree Narayana Mission Home for the Aged Sick; and what steps his Ministry has taken to prevent the recurrence of such incidents.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I am answering on behalf of my Minister. The recent outbreak of diarrhoea at the Sree Narayana Home was caused by the dysentery bacteria, Shigella. A total of 68 inmates and two ward attendants came down with diarrhoea between 28th April and 15th May 1989. A 78-year old inmate died on 4th May 1989. Sir, the outbreak is likely to have been caused by food prepared by the Home. The food could have been contaminated by one of the inmates who had helped in the kitchen. The inmate could have earlier been infected with dysentery bacteria after eating food brought in from outside and became a transient carrier. The Sree Narayana Home was well maintained and the general sanitation, including toilets, was satisfactory. The kitchen in the Home was clean. Food samples taken from meals prepared by the Home, during investigations, were found to be free from dysentery germs. The Home's cooks and their assistants were medically screened and they were also found to be free from dysentery infection. Sir, the two key factors in the prevention of outbreaks of food borne diseases in Homes for the aged and the destitutes are a high standard of environmental sanitation and good personal hygiene. Managements should avoid enlisting the help of inmates in food preparation and in the kitchen. They should also be on the look-out for diarrhoeal cases and isolate them from the rest of the inmates and then treat them. As a routine, officers from my Ministry carry out checks to ensure that the environmental sanitation in Homes for the aged and the destitutes are satisfactorily maintained.

asked the Minister for the Environment if he will explain the significant increase in the number of food poisoning cases reported to his Ministry in 1988 compared with those in previous years; and what measures are being taken to contain the problem.

Sir, 191 cases of food poisoning were reported in 1988 as compared with 135 in 1987 and 91 in 1986. The majority of these food poisoning reports were made by members of the public to my Ministry. Inspections of eating establishments carried out by my Ministry throughout the year, however, showed that there has not been a deterioration in food hygiene standards amongst food handlers in 1988. The number of contraventions on food and personal hygiene by food vendors was less in 1988, 6.7% of premises inspected compared to 9.1% of premises inspected in 1987. My Ministry, however, will continue to step up checks against all food vendors in food establishments. Sir, every licensed food establishment is placed on a schedule of inspection. On an average, eating establishments and food stalls are checked once a month. Those with poorer records are inspected more than once a month. My Ministry takes a very serious view against improper practices of food and personal hygiene amongst food vendors. Every restaurant manager, every eating house proprietor, every hawker, food caterer and anyone involved in the sale of food must be fully responsible and accountable for the standard of hygiene of food sold by him and the cleanliness of the premises where food is prepared. Sir, since September 1987 licensees of eating establishments, including hawkers, are given demerit points whenever they are convicted of any food hygiene offences. Those who have accumulated 12 points within 12 months will have their licences suspended for two weeks. And if they continue to commit further offences, their licences may be revoked. My Ministry is in the process of amending the Environmental Public Health (Food Handlers) Regulations and the Environmental Public Health (Food Establishments) Regulations to introduce tighter control measures, including heavier penalties against recalcitrant hawkers and restaurant operators. The amended Regulations will be ready in three to four months' time. Sir, we will study the systems of countries with high hygiene standards, such as Japan, to learn how to upgrade the education of food handlers and our supervision of food handling. Food vendors in Singapore must learn about food and personal hygiene and they must adopt a sense of responsibility to consumers by dropping their old and dirty habits and picking up clean ones. My Ministry is very pleased to note that there is today a greater awareness amongst members of the public on food hygiene and food poisoning, brought about by wider publicity given on these topics by the press media last year. Members of the public are now more inclined to report to the Ministry whenever they come down with diarrhoea or other symptoms of food poisoning when they consume food bought from eating establishments. Health inspectors from my Ministry will carry out full investigations into every complaint and report of food poisoning made by members of the public to my Ministry.

asked the Minister for Communications and Information whether the recent repatriation of a substantial number of illegal Thai workers has affected the construction works of Changi Airport's Passenger Terminal II and, if so, whether there will be a delay in its operation date scheduled for mid-1990.

Mr Speaker, Sir, Changi Airport's Second Passenger Terminal Building is scheduled for completion by the second half of 1990. The Public Works Department (PWD) is managing the construction project on behalf of the Civil Aviation Authority of Singapore (CAAS). They have informed CAAS that the construction works at Terminal II are presently still within schedule. It is true that a certain amount of time has been lost but this is still within the time allowed for in a construction project of this size, time allowed for exigencies such as labour and materials shortage, poor weather, and other factors. This period is slowly being used up but as of the latest report from PWD, we will still be able to complete Passenger Terminal Building II by the second half of next year.

asked the Minister for Communications and Information whether the Singapore Broadcasting Corporation will produce special TV programmes for the main festivals of the other communities similar to the special TV programme on Lunar New Year's Eve to highlight the celebration of Lunar New Year.

Sir, presently SBC is already telecasting special TV variety programmes as part of the celebrations of the main festivals that are observed by Singaporeans. SBC will continue to do so. Telecasting from a location outside of the TV studio adds interest to a variety show and it is something that we intend to do more. For example, the recent Lunar New Year Show with the 'live' inserts from outside were very well received by members of the public. SBC will continue to have these shows. Whether we will be doing the shows completely outdoors or whether we will just be taking inserts from outdoor locations and phasing them in with a programme that is produced indoors will depend on a number of factors, including the feasibility of location, and also the level of public interest on that particular occasion and festival.

asked the Minister for Law what interest has the Government in Civil Suit KOD No. S6-25-235-87 between Mr Lee Kuan Yew and Mr Chin Vui Khen and another heard in the High Court of Malaya at Kuala Lumpur on the 27th, 28th and 29th of March, 1989.

Sir, this is a civil suit against Star Publications and its editor in respect of two libellous articles which appeared in the Sunday Star of 1st February 1987 and 22nd February 1987. These articles contained highly defamatory and scurrilous attacks on the whole Government, the Prime Minister, the Cabinet and senior civil servants. The Government as a whole has an interest in the legal redress sought on these defamatory articles published in a friendly neighbouring country. The Attorney-General advised that the action be instituted in the first instance by the Prime Minister claiming damages for libel and an injunction to restrain the defendants from publishing further similar libellous articles. The claims of other Cabinet Ministers and the senior civil servants are held in abeyance and can be pursued after the case brought by the Prime Minister has been concluded. The Prime Minister agreed. The Attorney-General, as instructing solicitor in these proceedings, briefed a lawyer in Kuala Lumpur to institute libel proceedings, and is holding a watching brief during the trial for the Government as a whole both the Cabinet Ministers and the senior civil servants whose honesty and integrity have been impugned.

Sir, the legal officers were taking part in a civil suit by the Prime Minister. Why were they there?

Sir, let me explain. The Attorney-General has advised that when defamation is committed against the Government as a whole or against any Minister in his capacity as a Minister of the Government or against the Prime Minister in his capacity as Prime Minister or as head of the Government, it is perfectly legal and in order for the Attorney-General to act on their behalf.

The Minister mentioned about the Prime Minister agreeing. How is it that the Government has not also taken action at the same time?

Mr Speaker, Sir, it is obvious that the Member has not listened to my answer.

asked the Minister for Home Affairs whether there was an increase in the number of secret society and criminal activities involving students in the years 1986, 1987 and 1988.

Mr Speaker, Sir, student involvement in crimes showed a decline from 266 arrests in 1986 to 217 in 1987 and 203 in 1988. A total of 21 secret society incidents were reported from 1986 to 1988. However, only 2 students were involved.

asked the Minister for Home Affairs what are the reasons for Teo Soh Lung's continued detention when the others have been released.

Mr Speaker, Sir, as the Government has explained on many occasions, a decision on whether a detainee should be released earlier than the expiry of the detention order or be in continued detention depends on the assessment of the Internal Security Department on whether the detainee has responded positively to rehabilitation and whether he is likely to reinvolve himself in subversive activities and pose a security threat upon release. ISD's current assessment is that Teo Soh Lung is not suitable for early release. In considering whether to release a detainee, the Government also takes into consideration reports of the Advisory Board constituted under the Internal Security Act. Teo, together with three other detainees, namely, Chng Suan Tze, Kevin De Souza and Wong Souk Yee, had made representations to the Advisory Board on 20th January 1989. While the Board recommended that consideration can be given for the early release of Chng Suan Tze, Kevin De Souza and Wong Souk Yee, it made no recommendation for Teo's early release. Chng Suan Tze, Kevin De Souza and Wong Souk Yee were thus released on 11th March 1989.

Does the Minister agree that in the first statement the ISD issued when Teo Soh Lung was released, it was said that she would no longer pose a threat to the security of Singapore?

Mr Speaker, Sir, I do not have the statement with me but she was arrested in May 1987 and released on certain conditions and a press statement was issued. Her present detention order is the result of her rearrest in 1988.

Was it not said that she was rearrested because of her public statement?

Mr Speaker, Sir, I would urge the Member to carefully read the statements which have been issued by the Government. When she was rearrested together with the others, it was pointed out that the contents of her press statement gave rise to the conclusion that she and the others were likely to resume their subversive activities.

Is it not true, Sir, that when the other three were released they had forgone the application for the habeas corpus and that Teo Soh Lung had not?

Sir, the Member is repeating claims of others that Teo Soh Lung is in continued detention because she pressed on with her habeas corpus case whilst the other three, Wong Souk Yee, Kevin De Souza and Chng Suan Tze, were released because they dropped their habaes corpus cases. This is totally untrue. In the first case, the three of them withdrew their cases on 3rd March. But the Advisory Board had submitted its report recommending their early release before they withdrew their cases. In other words, the Government's decision was based on the Advisory Board's recommendation which had recommended theirearly release before they withdrew their cases. Secondly, let me also point out the fallacy of that view because Vincent Cheng who never brought any habeas corpus proceedings is still in detention. Thirdly, Patrick Seong was released in May 1988 even though his case was still before the courts.

How does the Minister distinghish Teo Soh Lung's case from the case of the other three who were released?

Sir, it must be obvious from my answer that it depended on the security assessment by the Internal Security Department.

The following question stood in the name of Mr Chiam See Tong --- 11. To ask the Minister for Foreign Affairs whether the relationship between Singapore and India has deteriorated as a result of the recent arrest, conviction and sentence of certain Indian foreign workers and, if so, whether the situation will escalate for the worse.

Question No. 11, Sir.

Mr Speaker, Sir, bilateral relations between Singapore and India are good. In the past few years, our bilateral relations have been strengthened based on mutual respect for each other's sovereignty and non-interference in each other's internal affairs. Singapore has long had a problem with illegal immigrants. Given Singapore's size and scarce resources, we have no choice but to take tough measures to curb the number of illegal immigrants in Singapore. As there was no effective means to deter the increase in the number of illegal immigrants and overstayers, the Immigration Act was amended this year to provide for stronger punishment against them. The new amendment to the Immigration Act was debated in Parliament on 26th January this year. The Immigration (Amendment) Act came into effect on 31st March 1989. The law applies to all foreigners irrespective of nationality and the new penalties apply to those who enter Singapore illegally or overstay for more than 90 days. The amended Immigration law provides for caning of illegal immigrants and overstayers. Caning is a deterrent punishment provided for in several of Singapore's laws. For example, the Misuse of Drugs Act, the Penal Code and the Vandalism Act provide caning for offences like trafficking in controlled drugs, robbery and vandalism. I have asked the Clerk to distribute a table (Cols. 227 - 230) showing the details of some of the offences which attract caning. table - EXAMPLES OF MANDATORY MINIMUM CANING PROVISIONS FOUND IN OUR STATUTES (Cols. 227 - 230) Sentencing comes under the domain of our courts and will have to be carried out by due process of law. For example, in 1987, 602 prisoners were caned, of whom 487 were Singapore nationals and 115 were non-nationals, among whom were 1 Indian, 1 Chinese and 11 Thai nationals. In 1988, 616 prisoners were caned, of whom 497 were Singapore nationals and 119 were not. 2 Taiwanese, 4 Pakistanis and 12 Thai nationals were among them. The caning of foreign nationals who violated our laws is not new. The recent arrests, convictions and sentencing of Indian overstayers were made under the Immigration (Amendment) Act, 1989. The Singapore and the Indian authorities have worked together to resolve the issue amicably. At the request of the Indian authorities, Singapore granted the Indian High Commission in Singapore a two-week period ending 19th May to repatriate its overstayers. Even though these Indian overstayers were the responsibility of the Indian High Commission, the Singapore authorities made every effort to assist it in the repatriation exercise. All the overstayers who reported to the Indian High Commission were provided free accommodation at Jalan Bahar Camp. The Singapore Government provided electricity and water supplies to the camp. Indian officials have expressed appreciation for the cooperation of the Singapore authorities. Singapore made a major concession by agreeing not to prosecute all those Indian overstayers who surrendered themselves during this exercise. However, for those who have already been charged, or already convicted, and are appealing, the law has to take its course. The Government cannot intervene in cases which are before the courts. We are aware that some Indian officials have described caning as a "barbaric" punishment. Unfortunately, even though these "barbaric" laws have been on our books for decades, Singapore continues to be a magnet for nationals of other countries who are prepared to take great risks to get into Singapore in order to work illegally. We hope that with the recent publicity over these illegal workers, widespread knowledge of this "barbaric" punishment will deter foreign nationals from coming to Singapore to work illegally. Some Indian officials have also expressed concern that caning would have an adverse effect on bilateral relations because in India caning is no longer meted out in their courts. We hope that it will not. It is an established principle in international relations that friendly relations between nations must be based on mutual respect of each other's laws and legal systems and non-interference in each other's internal affairs. We respect and understand that other countries have different laws, punishments and legal procedures. We expect our nationals, when abroad, to observe and respect their laws. Likewise, foreigners who come to Singapore must observe our laws, even if these are different from the laws of their home country. Caning has been a part of Singapore's criminal law since British days. Singapore citizens and other nationals, including Indian nationals, have been caned when they have breached the law. Both Singapore and India share many common interests. It will not do any good to anyone to make the system of punishment for crimes in Singapore into an issue.

asked the Minister for Community Development what is the Government's response to the Report of the Committee on Destitute Families.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the Report of the Committee on Destitute Families has been considered by the Advisory Council on Family and Community Life. The Advisory Council accepted many of the recommendations of the Committee. The Council has completed its Report entitled "Towards Better Family and Community Life". My Ministry is now obtaining the views of the respective Ministries and organizations on the recommendations. The Report with their comments will then be submitted to the Government for approval. My Ministry will announce the Government's decision later. In deciding on how destitute families can be helped, we have to ensure that there is no departure from the Government's policy on welfare assistance. Some countries which have gone the way of the welfare state are now trying to get out of it. We must not follow their example. Self-help and help from the community must form two basic pillars of our welfare policies. Any help for the destitute should enable them to upgrade themselves so that they can be self-sufficient in the long term. Financial help, if any, should be temporary and should not lead to dependency. It should be part of a social assistance package that should involve referral to social agencies for counselling in areas like family planning, home and child management and upgrading of skills.

asked the Minister for Trade and Industry whether our manpower planning met actual needs in 1988 and will meet those in the coming years.

Mr Speaker, Sir, last year, I explained to the House how the Ministry of Trade and Industry does manpower planning in Singapore. We try to predict the state of the economy 5 to 10 years ahead, anticipate what jobs will be in demand, and guess the number of places needed in each discipline. In 1988, about 19,500 students graduated from NUS/NTI, the polytechnics and the VITB. Nearly 20,000. NUS and NTI together produced 4,750 graduates, 2.3% more than in 1987. One-fifth were graduates in engineering. There were 5,750 polytechnic graduates, 9% higher than in 1987. 80% of them were trained in the various engineering disciplines. 9,000 skilled workers graduated from the VITB, 2% more than in 1987. With the strong economy, these skilled persons were readily absorbed by the labour market. Many received multiple job offers. The economy could have done with more graduates in the right disciplines, but we could not produce more for lack of qualified trainees. We will endeavour to increase the output of skilled manpower year by year. University, polytechnic and VITB intakes are increasing. We should be able to meet our manpower needs in the coming years, although we will always be ready to absorb skilled persons from abroad.

asked the Minister for Trade and Industry (a) what is the number of meter-readers employed by the Public Utilities Board and the number of utility consumers who currently read their own meters as at the latest convenient date and (b) whether the Board will consider offering some form of incentives to encourage more consumers to read their own meters.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I am answering on behalf of my Minister. At present, the Public Utilities Board employs 175 meter readers. As at March 1989, PUB had 836,308 customers. 15,078 (or 1.8%) read their own meters. Currently, PUB's meter readers read customers' meters once every two months. In the alternate months, PUB offers customers the option of reading their own meters. They can be billed on actual readings instead of estimated consumption. Customers also read their own meters if their premises are not accessible when the PUB meter readers call, although the readers will call again at scheduled times to check the readings. Under these arrangements, the option for customers to read their own meters is only a service to help them monitor their utility consumption more accurately. It does not replace the work of the PUB meter readers or save costs for the PUB. PUB's experience with this scheme has been positive. I have asked PUB to consider encouraging more customers to read their own meters, and reducing the frequency of PUB's own meter readings from bi-monthly to quarterly. This should save manpower costs, which can be passed back to customers. The disadvantage is that in households which do not read their own meters, the estimated billings will be less accurate, and the customers may have to pay higher back-charges when the meters are eventually read. PUB has agreed to study this further.

asked the Acting Minister for Health whether he is satisfied with the outcome of the recent Singapore Medical Council Inquiry in which a neurosurgeon in private practice was suspended from practice for 12 months for gross negligence in the management of a patient resulting in the patient's death; and what action he will take to ensure that similar cases are more severely dealt with in future.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the doctor in question is a non-Singaporean doctor in private practice. He was trained as a Neurosurgeon in Europe. He was charged by the Singapore Medical Council with misleading a patient to believe that she required urgent brain surgery and with managing the patient in a grossly negligent manner. The patient died from complications following surgery some three months later. The case was heard by the Singapore Medical Council which is an independent statutory body established under the Medical Registration Act. It comprises 13 senior members of the medical profession. The Council heard the case over a period of 19 days and found the doctor guilty as charged. The Council decided to impose a suspension of 12 months, which is the maximum period of suspension permitted under the Act. Whilst there may have been some mitigating factors, I believe, however, that a doctor who is found guilty of gross negligence in the management of a patient is guilty of gross professional misconduct, and therefore, deserves a more severe penalty than a suspension period of only 12 months. Unfortunately, a longer suspension period is not available under the existing legislation. The Ministry of Home Affairs did not renew the doctor's employment pass when it expired in September 1988 and will not do so in future. His name may accordingly be removed from the Register of Medical Practitioners by the Singapore Medical Council as he is not practising and will no longer be able to practise in Singapore. My Ministry has since December 1987 undertaken a review of the Medical Registration Act with the objective of updating its provisions, raising standards of professional conduct and practice, and enabling the Singapore Medical Council to carry out its functions more effectively by prescribing an appropriate range of penalties relative to the severity of the charges. My Ministry plans to take to Parliament the proposed amendments to the Act within the next few months. These amendments, when approved, will enable such cases of gross professional misconduct to be dealt with more severely in the future.

asked the Acting Minister for Health (a) what is the number of patients given remission of medical treatment fees since the corporatization of Singapore General Hospital in April 1989; and (b) what arrangements are being made to assist patients having difficulties in paying for their medical treatment.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the Singapore General Hospital was administered as a restructured hospital as from 1st April 1989. For the month of April 1989, 15 inpatients representing 0.2% of all B2 class inpatients and 103 outpatients representing 0.6% of the B2 outpatients were granted remission of medical treatment fees. In addition, about 90 inpatients and 255 outpatients had their fees automatically waived as they were on the Public Assistance Scheme or had been issued with the Medical Fee Exemption Cards. The hospital assists patients who have difficulty in paying for their medical treatment by allowing: (a) patients to pay by instalments; (b) the use of Medisave by the patient's immediate family members (ie, spouse, parents, children, or grandchildren); (c) the use of future Medisave contributions provided the patient is admitted to a B2 class ward; (d) the use of siblings' Medisave provided the patient is admitted to a B2 class ward and is solely dependent on his/her siblings. If the patient is still unable to pay for his medical treatment with the above assistance, he or she is referred to the hospital's Medical Social Work Department for a review of the socio-economic and financial circumstances of the patient and his/her family. If the patient satisfies the hospital's criteria for remission of fees, the Medical Social Worker wil recommend his/her application to the hospital management for approval. In addition to the above, patients on the Public Assistance Scheme and residents of the Ministry of Community Development welfare homes and approved voluntary welfare organizations issued with Medical Fee Exemption Cards will have their medical fees automatically waived. Fees are also automatically waived for patients who are financial hardship cases and who have been issued with the Medical Fee Exemption Card by the Medical Social Work Departments of Government hospitals.

asked the Minister for National Development whether there are plans to build a footbridge over the Rochore Canal linking the Lavender Mass Rapid Transit station to the Crawford Housing Estate.

Mr Speaker, Sir, a pedestrian footbridge over the Rochore Canal linking the Lavender MRT Station to the Crawford Housing Estate will be built by PWD. It will be completed early next year.

asked the Minister for National Development (a) why the resettlement compensation for some farmers are held up for such a long time; (b) whether there are any changes in the compensation rate and the guidelines on awarding farmer's rate compensation to unlicenses farmers; and (c) what is the number of resettlement cases in Chua Chu Kang Constituency as at the latest convenient date and when the full resettlement compensation will be released to them.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the delay in paying resettlement compensation has been caused by investigations into fraudulent claims. My Minister will be making a Ministerial Statement on this at the end of Question Time. Sir, my Ministry has tightened up the guidelines for processing compensation claims. New guidelines for classifying squatters as unlicensed farmers and compensating fruit trees, wells and farm structures were introduced in April 1988. A squatter must now satisfy the following conditions in order to qualify for compensation under the unlicensed farmer scheme: (1) He must be actively engaged in farming. The level of his farming activities must meet the criteria set by the Primary Production Department; and (2) He must possess an old farm licence which expired before 22nd March 1979, the effective date for the unlicensed farmer compensation policy. In the absence of an old farm licence, the claimant must have at least two adult members of his family who are engaged full-time in farming at the time of clearance and they have been staying at the clearance site since 22nd March 1979. Sir, there is no change in the compensation rate for unlicensed farmers. There are 1,343 resettlement cases under clearance in Chua Chu Kang constituency as at 1st May 1989. Payment to these cases will be made once Resettlement Department has checked and verified the claims using the revised procedures and guidelines. Most squatters will receive their compensation payment between now and June 1990.

asked the Minister for Communications and Information whether, in the light of the budgetary constraint which caused the late news bulletin on channels 8 and 12 to be discontinued in January 1989, the Singapore Broadcasting Corporation would videotape an amplified version of the summary of news headlines at the end of the main TV news programme for broadcast later in the evening for the benefit of Singaporeans who miss the main TV news programme.

Sir, SBC reviewed the need for the late night TV news last year. The reason for discontinuing the late night news was because of the very low viewership. Apart from TV News, SBC keeps the public informed on the key issues of the day by many other means. For example, most of SBC's radio channels have news bulletins once every hour on the hour up to midnight and on certain channels beyond. SBCText also features the latest news up to midnight. Hence, SBC feels that it is not necessary to produce an amplified version of the news summary for telecast later in the evening when there is no viewership.

asked the Minister for Communications and Information whether he is aware that many people, especially the aged, would like a resumption of Cantonese serials telecast by the Singapore Broadcasting Corporation, and whether he plans to respond positively to such popular demands.

( In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, SBC's practice of not telecasting Cantonese serials is in support of Government's policy to promote the use of Mandarin rather than dialect. When it did so, SBC realized that some older members of the family would be inconvenienced. It was a sacrifice on their part. But, by and large, most have accepted that their sacrifice has not been in vain. They realize and accept that this is for the good of their children and grandchildren, as the children in the family would not then have to cope with both Mandarin and dialect in addition to the other subjects in the school time-table. SBC will therefore not re-introduce Cantonese serials. In the meantime, SBC took steps to develop local Mandarin programmes which have become as popular, if not more, than Cantonese programmes made in Hong Kong. Surveys done by Survey Research Singapore (SRS) since July 1988 show that the average Chinese viewership for the nightly SBC Mandarin serials telecast at 9.30 pm during weekdays was 47%. Among the older Chinese, that is those above the age of 50, 52% of them watched these serials. These figures compare well with the viewership for popular Cantonese serials in Hong Kong itself. For example, the two most popular Cantonese serials telecast in Hong Kong in the corresponding period each had a viewership of 46%.

( In Mandarin): Sir, when was this Government survey carried out?

( In Mandarin): These surveys are continually carried out every three monthly.

( In Mandarin): Are these surveys published then?

( In Mandarin): Sir, these figures are not something new. It is not necessary for us to publish them after every survey. But if the Member would like to have these figures I would be prepared to supply them to him.

( In Mandarin): Are these surveys accurate and reliable?

( In Mandarin): As far as I know, the company that carries out the survey is very reliable and the figureshave a high degree of accuracy.

( In Mandarin): Does the Government know that every night many Chinese Singaporeans watch the Malaysian TV3 and RTM3 programmes? Does he know that?

( In Mandarin): We do. Because of this, just as Dr Lee has said our Singapore viewers are also able to watch some dialect serials through these channels. This gives SBC the more reason to discontinue the telecast of Cantonese serials.

( In Mandarin): On the contrary, what I have heard is that they want to watch Cantonese serials from on local TV station.

( In Mandarin): Yes, most of Singaporean viewers, including the older generation, would like to watch Mandarian serials made in Singapore, just as Dr Lee has mentioned a moment ago by a slip of his tongue. In this way the older generation can watch together with their grandchildren and at the same time enjoy family togetherness.

( In Mandarin): Enjoying family togetherness, yes. Then why not allow the older generation to enjoy Cantonese serials together with their children who can also understand Cantonese? Why can they not enjoy the Cantonese serials together then?

( In Mandarin): Dr Lee perhaps knows that nowadays, generally the older generation Chinese also understand Mandarin. Although they may not be too fluent in the spoken Mandarin they can still understand it.

asked the Minister for Home Affairs whether drug abuse is on the increase again; and, if so, what further steps are being taken to curb this problem.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the Member will recall that in January this year, in answer to his question, I informed the House of the local and regional drug scene and the measures which we would take to contain the problem. In March, during the debate in the Committee of Supply, I had occasion to give further details. Since then, the drug situation in this region has continued to deteriorate. The Director of the Central Narcotics Bureau has informed me that more opium is expected to be produced this year in the Golden Triangle area. Therefore, more heroin is likely to be available in this region. The drug abuse problem in Singapore has risen, from 4,730 arrested drug offenders in 1987 to 6,062 in 1988. However, in the first quarter of 1989, the numbers have come down slightly to 1,274. Heroin abuse continues to be the serious and main drug of abuse. The trend of new Malay heroin addicts detected also continues to be high. In the first quarter of this year, 310 new heroin addicts were detected, of which 62% were Malays. Apart from the measures which I had previously mentioned in this House, new measures that are being taken to curb the problem of drug abuse include the following: 1) We will install additional instant urine testing (IUT) machines at every police headquarters station to identify and ferret out drug addicts; 2) My Ministry, Central Narcotics Bureau, SANA will cooperate with the Malay Task Force to finalize strategies to tackle the problem of Malay drug addicts; 3) We will assist SANA this year to launch their anti-drug abuse campaign in September/November which is important in constantly reminding the public, espe- cially parents, of the dangers of drug abuse. Finally, the Government will also introduce amendments to the Misuse of Drugs Act to ensure that the law continues to be effective to combat the problem. The amendments will include extending the death penalty for trafficking offences involving opium, cannabis and cocaine.

Sir, when are the amendments to the law likely to be implemented?

Sir, the law officers are now drafting the legislation and I expect to introduce the Bill during the course of this year, hopefully within the next few months.

asked the Minister for Trade and Industry whether the current consumer price index accurately reflects the cost of living of the working class.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the consumer price index is a generally accepted measure of changes in the cost of living. It is based on a representative basket of goods and services reflecting the expenditure pattern of typical Singaporean households. The Department of Statistics constantly monitors prices of the items in the basket through various means, including regular field visits to markets and popular retail outlets, and the price changes are reported monthly in the CPI. The CPI basket is determined by a household expenditure survey of about 4,600 households, and this is conducted every five years. These households spend between $100 and $3,000 per month. Most of them, in fact, 58% of them, earn less than $1,500 a month. 61% of them live in 1-, 2- or 3-room HDB flats and 65% of the main income earners of the households are production and related workers, clerical workers or sales workers. They are therefore representative of average Singaporean households. In other words, we try to determine what the average family in Singapore buys and then we price that basket of goods every month; what does it cost; and the changes are the CPI. Nevertheless, some people believe that the CPI underestimates the rise in the cost of living for lower income groups. This is not so. To monitor the impact of inflation on lower income groups, MTI calculates a separate price index which covers households spending less than $1,000 a month. This is the lower income group. The results show that for this group inflation is even lower than the CPI figure. Between 1983 and the first quarter of 1989, the CPI rose by 4(r)%, but for this lower income group, the cumulative rise in prices was only 2.3%.

Sir, when will the household survey, which was last done in 1982, be updated?

We did an update survey in 1987, and once we have all the figures digested we will update the CPI.

Sir, does the Minister have a separate CPI for the higher income group?

We have not computed it but it can be done.

asked the Minister for National Development whether there is any plan to enliven the Serangoon Town Centre; and, if no, whether he will consider providing a cooked food centre next to the Serangoon Bus Interchange and other facilities so as to attract more people to the Centre.

Mr Speaker, Sir, adjacent to the existing bus interchange in the Serangoon Town Centre are 72 shops, 14 market-produce shops, a mini-market, one eating house and two family restaurants. In addition to these existing facilities, an area office, a fast food restaurant, 11 shops and 24 offices are under construction and due for completion by 1990. These additional facilities, when operational, will help to liven up the Town Centre. All the above facilities are located within easy reach of the residents and will be sufficient to cater to their needs. HDB therefore has no plans to build a cooked food centre next to the bus interchange.

asked the Minister for Communications and Information whether he is aware that, with the advent of the facsimile machine, it is possible for distributors to proliferate undesirable publications, thus circumventing censorship; and, if so, what steps are being taken to curb this loophole.

Sir, existing laws are adequate to deal with any person who uses a facsimile machine to transmit or to receive undesirable publications. Offenders can be prosecuted for the possession or distribution of these materials. For example, seditious and obscene contents are covered under the Sedition Act and the Penal Code respectively. Reproductions from publications prohibited under the Undesirable Publications Act will be dealt with under that Act. Those caught infringing the law will face penalties under the law with fines up to $10,000 and imprisonment of up to five years. Recipients of unsolicited undesirable material transmitted by fax should destroy such material upon receipt. If they retain such material, they are liable to prosecution for possession. This is exactly the same as with recipients of undesirable material obtained unsolicited by mail or other means.

The following Question stood in the name of Mr Chiam See Tong --- 25. To ask the Minister for Trade and Industry if he will give the total number of Public Utilities Board water meters which have been installed in residential properties as at the latest convenient date.

Question No. 25, Sir.

Mr Speaker, Sir, as of March 1989, there were 674,710 water meters installed in domestic premises.

1.29 pm

Mr Speaker, Sir, between February and September 1987, I received a number of anonymous complaints alleging that squatters affected by public clearance schemes had cheated the HDB's Resettlement Department in their claims for resettlement compensation. I referred these complaints to the Corrupt Practices Investigation Bureau (CPIB) for investigation. The Bureau reported that it too was receiving complaints of the same nature. CPIB investigations confirmed these allegations and revealed that cheating on resettlement compensation was widespread. So far, more than 600 squatters have admitted to over-claiming resettlement compensation. In many cases, the amounts over-claimed exceeded $10,000 each. 199 squatters have agreed to make full restitution amounting to more than $1 million. The most common abuse is the planting of fruit trees after the cut-off date, solely in order to claim extra compensation. Often the fruit tree seedlings were planted so closely together that they could have served no other purpose than to cheat the Resettlement Department. Other squatters fraudulently claimed to be farmers to qualify for farmer resettlement benefits. Squatters succeeded in this fraud because Resettlement Department was less than vigilant in detecting abuses and because some resettlement officers were corrupt. The Department continued to use outdated procedures and guidelines, and to rely on controls which were no longer effective. The CPIB has also found evidence of collusion between squatters and some resettlement officers to cheat the Department. One officer has been charged in court. Several others are still under investigation. The CPIB and the Auditor-General's Office have recommended changes to rectify the weaknesses in the resettlement compensation system. My Ministry has accepted these recommendations, and is implementing them immediately. They include the following measures: Firstly, new guidelines for classifying squatters as farmers and assessing the amount of compensation for fruit trees; and Secondly, revised procedures for census-taking, compensation assessment and computation. For example, census officers will now photograph every item of improvement at the time of census taking, and will verify all claims against records held by other Government departments, such as the Land Office, Building Control Division, and Primary Production Department, before making payments. MND has set up a task force together with CPIB to review every resettlement case since 1979. Where there is evidence of cheating or wrongdoing, prosecution will follow. So far, 43 squatters have been prosecuted. In 21 cases, charges were withdrawn after they had made full restitution. One case pleaded guilty and was sentenced to eight months' imprisonment. Government policies on resettlement and compensation have been generous and fair. The Government pays adequate and equitable compensation to ease the disruption of those affected by resettlement. The amount depends on the type and value of property owned, and whether the squatters' livelihood is affected by clearance action. Compensation rates have beenreviewed every few years. During the last review in 1985, compensation rates were increased by 30% across the board. Over the last five years, resettlement compensation payments have cost taxpayers more than $1.4 billion ($1,400 million). 64% of this vast sum of money was paid to resettled farmers. On average, each farmer received $122,000. The payment of such large compensation was necessary to clear land for development expeditiously. However, no one should abuse the resettlement compensation system, or collude with public officers to cheat the taxpayers. There must be absolute honesty on the part of both Government officers and the public. What is at stake is not just the money defrauded, but also the integrity of the system of government. The public must impose the same high standard of integrity on itself as it would on the Government. It cannot expect to cheat the State and get away with it. The Government will relentlessly pursue those who have been dishonest and bring the full rigour of the law to bear on them to recover the misappropriated public funds and bring the culprits to justice.

"to amend the Housing and Development Act (Chapter 129 of the 1985 Revised Edition)", presented by the Senior Minister of State for National Development (Dr Lee Boon Yang); read the First time; to be read a Second time on the next available sitting of Parliament, and to be printed.

"to amend the Prevention of Corruption Act (Chapter 241 of the 1985 Revised Edition)", presented by the Minister for Law (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 amend the Judges' Remuneration Act (Chapter 147 of the 1985 Revised Edition)", presented by the Minister of State for Finance (BG George Yong-Boon Yeo); read the First time; to be read a Second time on the next available sitting of Parliament, and to be printed.

"to amend the Central Provident Fund Act (Chapter 36 of the 1988 Revised Edition)", presented by the Minister for Labour (Mr Lee Yock Suan); read the First time; to be read a Second time on the next available sitting of Parliament, and to be printed.

1.38 pm Order for Second Reading read.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." During the 1988 Budget session, I informed Members that Mindef was planning changes to the law to do three things: (a) to cut down the response time for mobilizing reservists; (b) to make better use of telecommunications to mobilize them; and (c) to requisition civil resources in the same way that we mobilize reservists. The amendments to the Enlistment Act and the Requisition of Resources Act, which I shall move later, give effect to these changes. The Enlistment Act was promulgated almost 19 years ago. It provides for only a limited number of ways in which reservists can be mobilized. Mindef must either serve the order to report to the reservists individually in person, or it has to announce the order over the radio or television. The Act makes no provision for telephones or pagers to be used, or for codewords to be broadcast in place of the entire mobilization order. The mobilization system can be improved to upgrade the operational readiness of the Armed Forces. In recent open mobilization exercises, over 98% of the reservists have reported to camp within six hours of the first announcement over television. But under the Act, the reservist is conclusively deemed to have knowledge of the order only 12 hours after its announcement over the air. The law should be tightened to reflect what is achievable on the ground. The amendments thus reduce the current statutory presumption of knowledge for open mobilization from 12 to six hours. It is absurd not to use the excellent tele-communications network in Singapore to mobilize the SAF. Nearly every household in Singapore has a telephone. Last year the SAF conducted a pilot mobilization exercise using telephones. It was a success: 92% of the reservists responded when contacted. Often when the reservist himself was not at home, the call was taken by members of his family or household, who then relayed the orders to him. Family members know it is vital for reservists to report for service as soon as possible. This is as it should be. We want to institutionalize this system. The proposed sections 29(2)(a) and (g) allow the SAF to mobilize reservists via the telephone. The reservist will have knowledge of the order immediately he receives it by telephone. This is like the existing position when the notice is served by hand to the reservist personally. The reservist is also deemed to have knowledge of the order when it is received by a member of his family or household who is at least 16 years old. The same presumption already applies when the notice is served to a family or household member by hand. Besides the telephone, reservists can be contacted by other telecommunications means such as the pager, telex, facsimile, or Teleview. The proposed sections 29(2)(j) and (k) cover the use of these means. Because telex and fax machines are mostly in the place of business or employment of the reservists, there may be times, for example, at night or on weekends, when the reservist will not be immediately aware of an order which has been transmitted to him through telex or fax. The proposed section 29(3)(f) therefore provides that the presumption of the reservist's knowledge of the order is rebuttable within the first six hours, when the order is transmitted by pager, telex, fax or other telecommunication device. In other words, although the reservist is presumed to have received the order immediately it is sent, within the first six hours this presumption can be rebutted, for example, if the reservist can prove that the office containing the fax machine was closed and unmanned. Only after six hours have passed will he be deemed conclusively to have received the order. The proposed section 29(2)(i) provides that the order can also be served on the reservist by telephone at his workplace. Where it is received by a fellow employee who is above the age of 16 years, the same six hour limit will apply. This will enable Mindef to contact reservists during working hours, and not just in the evenings or on weekends. Presently, families of reservists already relay mobilization orders to them. A natural network has evolved over the years, which has worked well. We want to encourage reservists to extend this network to their workplaces as well. A reservist's colleagues must realize that he defends not only their families but also their jobs. Often these colleagues are themselves reservists, or they are the wives or girlfriends of reservists. They understand this. The amendments also look ahead. The Government intends to install an island-wide public warning or siren system within three years. Although this system will primarily be for civil defence purposes, warning the population of impending air raids, it will be an additional means of open mobilization. Section 29(2)(d) provides that audible signals will be given in the prescribed manner for open mobilization. Reservists will be told how to identify these signals. Sir, I beg to move. Question proposed.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise to support the Enlistment (Amendment) Bill and also the subsequent Bill which the Minister will be moving the Requisition of Resources (Amendment) Bill. Sir, the Armed Forces are extremely vital to us and we have, I am told, about 55,000 active personnel, of which 35,000 are national servicemen. On the other hand, we also have a reserve strength of well over 200,000. Therefore, for every active serviceman, we have more than 3(r) reser- vists. Thus, the reservists form the backbone of our Armed Forces. In an emergency, they will form the bulk of our front-line troops. Sir, 22 years since the enactment of the Enlistment Act, national service has trained many of our citizens to be good soldiers as well as good citizens. Many reservists have found that the skills they have acquired in their national service days to be useful in their civilian careers. Over the years, national service has already been accepted as a duty to the country. The acceptance is in no small measure due to Mindef's promotional efforts. We must also give credit to Mindef for the improvements made over the years to improve the effectiveness in mobilizing our reservists and civilian resources. The Second Minister for Defence, on a visit to the Singapore Artillery Battalion, said that in the open mobilization on 15th April a record of 98.6% was achieved. This excellent performance can be attributed to the civic consciousness of the reservists. It can also be attributed to the success of Mindef's efforts to inculcate a sense of urgency and understanding that the defence of Singapore is important amongst our reservists. Mobilization of civilian resources to support the mission of the Singapore Armed Forces is another logical step taken to maximize the use of our limited resources. During emergencies, about 3,500 vehicles will be rounded up for the use of the various Government agencies. Sir, having achieved good results, credit must be given to Mindef for not resting on its laurels. The proposed Enlistment (Amendment) Bill and the Requisition of Resources (Amendment) Bill aim at cutting down response time for open mobilization from 12 hours to 6 hours. The method of notification has also been refined. Mindef must now set new challenging standards in order to continue making improvements. Therefore, I would consider this introduction as a very timely initiative by the Minister. Quicker mobilization is a logical improvement over the current system. I envisage the new system will take a few years to take root. It will require patient and sustained education of family members, employers and employees alike. Meanwhile, potential areas of difficulty in implementation must be recognized. The proposed provision under clause 29 (2) allows for the Minister to issue an order by transmitting it to a member of a household, employer and employee who apparently is above the age of 16. I believe this could give rise to a number of practical difficulties. First, there could be genuine mistakes in judging the age of a young recipient if the order. The amendment Bill does not stipulate the consequences if the recipient fails to convey the message to the reservist. Secondly, it is questionable whether an employer or employee will accept responsibility to convey the order to the reservists. Sir, the Bill again does not stipulate the consequences if an employer or an employee wilfully or otherwise fails to pass the message to the reservists. There may be difficulties especially with reservists who are sole proprietors, particularly if the order is transmitted during office hours. These reservists typically spend most of their time away from their offices. The use of pagers may help but this is an area that requires closer examination. The objectives of the two amendment Bills are sound. However, I would urge the Minister to closely examine the practical problems that I have outlined in the implementation of the new system.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise to support this Bill. We have come a long way since the introduction of national service in 1967. Over the years, national service and reservist training have become part and parcel of life in Singapore. Reservists do take their obligations seriously. Without their cooperation, it will not be possible to think about reducing the response time for open mobilization from 12 to 6 hours. We must also commend the SAF for constantly improving its logistical and organizational structure for making it possible to mobilize, equip and put into the field a large number of reservists in such a short period of time. The efficient mobilization and operational readiness of the SAF will send to one and all the appropriate signal telling all not to disturb or "kacau" us, to leave us alone to pursue peace and prosperity. Reservists, I believe, are prepared to play their part. They are mature, married with families and know what the score is. My point is that the system of mobilization must be fair and seen to be fair. For example, on the new provision for the use of telephones. How could we tell over the telephone whether the person is apparently 16 years and above? What happens if a foreign maid picks up the telephone? Are we to trust the foreign maid in the household to pass the message even though she might be above 16 years of age? The use of pagers is a very good innovation. But those of us who carry pagers often know that we are always paged wrongly. Whenever we check, it is a wrong message. Somebody at the end of the line pressed the wrong button. So many of the messages could be sent to the wrong person and the appropriate person might not receive such messages. But the burden of proof in the provisions of this Bill lies with the reservists. Again, the introduction of the fax machine is a very good innovation and I think we have to advance with technology. But the Ministry should be aware that very often fax messages are misplaced. They might not be sent to the person quickly enough. There are so many fax messages passing through a fax machine, that the person at the end of the line manning the machine might not know which is of priority. So I think the Ministry of Defence must teach the reservists or the reservist's employers or office holders to sort out these messages. We must bear in mind that in the Pearl Harbour episode, intelligence messages were sent on time but they were misplaced. The clerk or the messenger thought that it was not important and they were not delivered. Sir, my question is: is the system fair to the reservists who are willing to do their part? The burden of proof in this Bill lies almost completely on the reservists, Will the benefit of doubt be given to the reservists in some of the circumstances I men- tioned? Will there be adequate opportunities for review and appeal if the reservist felt that he has been mistreated in one way or another or when there is perceived misjudgment? Sir, I support the Bill. 1.55 pm

( In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, some people would like to listen to me speaking in Mandarin in Parliament. Today when the government and all strata of the people are emphasising the importance of the use of the mother tongue, it is only appropriate that I speak in the mother tongue here too. Mr Speaker, Sir it is generally agreed that increasing control and regimentation of the people is one of the characteristic features of PAP rule in Singapore. Our young men are required, by 18 years of age to register and enlist for National Service, and after completing their term of service, again be subjected to recall for reservist service annually. Just now the Minister has explained why they should respond the call-up quickly. Of course the Minister has got his own reasons. But what I would like to ask is: why should the reservist be required to answer the call-up so quickly and in double quick time, in 6 hours now instead of 12 hours as in the past. Why the speed-up? Has the response from the reservist not been prompt in the past, despite what he has said about the 98% response? If that be the case, then it merely confirms one well-known fact, namely, that such emergency call-up exercises have been most unpopular, and that many of the reservists answer them most reluctantly. The reservist is also deemed to have knowledge of the call-up order that is conveyed to him at his work-place through any means under various circumstances. And the Bill makes it plain that ignorance of the order will not be accepted as an excuse for failing to comply with the order. Presently if the reservist fails to answer a call-up order, the authorities have to prove that the reservist has known of the call-up order before he can be punished according to law. Now the situation is changed. If he hopes to escape punishment, the reservist will have to prove that he does not know of the call-up order. Have the authorities found it difficult in the past to "conclusively presume" that a reservist is guilty of an offence if he reports late, or does not answer the call-up order? Is that why the burden of proof is now shifted on to the reservist? It is no secret that most reservists are not happy with the mobilization exercises. They find them most inconvenient and do not see the need and purpose for such exercises. That the reservists as well as the employers are also unhappy with their in-camp reservist service is also no secret. Some reservists who work in Government departments or in the private sector and who receive fixed monthly salaries, may find such training a welcome change to their daily routines. They receive make-up pay, suffer no loss in income, and could take the exercises even as holidays. Not so the employer who may find that he is short-handed, and has to engage another person to do the work left undone as a result of the call-up of the reservist. How does he feel? Have the authorities ever given that a thought? He is inconvenienced and out of pocket. How will he make good his losses? The situation is worse for the reservist who is self-employed. Some mention has been made on this earlier. If he is a self-employed professional, his work schedule will be disrupted. He loses some business opportunities. Make-up pay may not be able to compensate him for his loss in income during the call-up period. The same situation applies to the small contractor. If he is a solo-proprietor in a small business, or is a daily-rated employee in a small business, he will suffer losses in income which he can ill-afford to suffer if the reservist in camp exercises should last more than 10 days. Make-up pay consists of only rank-pay which comes to a mere fraction of his normal income. Here, I would like also to comment on some of the unreasonable provisions in the original Act, and which are now re-enacted in the present amendment Bill. For instance: the order or notice left with a person "who is apparently above the age of 16 years" is considered valid. What if the 16-year-old does not appreciate the importance or urgency of the order or notice? Or forgets to inform the reservist? Would it then be fair and reasonable to blame and punish the reservist for not knowing about the order? The Bill re-enacts Section 14 of the Enlistment Act. That is, a person who has completed his term of national service is still liable for reservist service of up to 40 days a year, and even for a longer period should the authorities so decide. The young man's studies have already been disrupted for 2(r) years. He is now 2(r) years behind his contemporary who does not do national service, and is consequently 2(r) years behind in prospects of promotion or advancement in his chosen field of endeavour.

Sir, on a point of Order. The Member has turned a debate on a correction to the Enlistment Act on a technical item into a general attack on the system of national service in Singapore. That is not the purpose of the Bill, and I submit it is out of order.

Yes I will have to direct the Member to confine his discussions to the Bill.

What I have said refers to what is exactly in this Bill. So I cannot be said to have gone out of the Bill. The Minister has emphasized certain aspects of it. I exphasize other aspects of it. That is all.

Can you confine yourself to the matter under the Bill?

Yes, I am following exactly what the Bill says. I go according to what the Bill says.

All right, you continue and I will see whether you are discussing within the context of the Bill.

( In Mandarin): Just now I was talking about the NS disruption of 2(r) years which has also affected many female graduates causing them to miss the opportunities to team up with contemporary life partners, and as a result being unable or even becoming unwilling to get married until too late in years. Has the Government studied seriously and fully this aspect of the problem related to national service?

Order. It appears to me that you are deliberately straying.

Very slight digression.

I think there is a difference in what you consider as digression and what I consider as straying.

It is related to the Bill because they have been asked to go for 40 days of reservist service. And I am trying to tell the Minister that this period is just a bit too long. It says here, new section 14 (b): '(ii) for periods not exceeding in the aggregate 40 days annually.' I have not gone out of the Bill. Let me just resume, Sir. (In Mandarin) This question is related to national service and is one of the causes for our women graduates not marrying early, thus resulting in the lopsided procreation pattern that our Prime Minister has always complained about. NS is a big contributory factor and this has been left ignored and uninvestigated by the Government.

Order. Dr Lee, I really must stress that you have to confine yourself to the matter under debate. I do not see how marriage and birth rates have got to do with the Bill.

This is by way of only -

I suggest that we have a lot of Members who wish to discuss this matter today and you should therefore confine yourself to the Bill.

I will try as far as possible.

You have to. I insist you have to, otherwise I will have to ask you to resume your seat.

I understand that. (In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I want to mention one important point. The times for NS and for annual reservist service must be reduced by half. This will not affect national defence. Today the whole world is moving towards detente, not confrontation. The Soviet Union, China, and Vietnam which in the past had been pictured as potential threats to Singapore by the PAP government, all have enough internal difficulties of their own. We have friends in ASEAN. Our relations with our immediate neighbours, Malaysia and Indonesia, have never been better. We even carry out joint military exercises with them. In other words, at present there are no indications that we would go to war in the near and foreseeable future. Why then do we need to emphasize so much on military discipline, training and preparedness? Must the PAP government continue to be befogged with the siege or garrison mentality? Must government continue to wear blinkers? And tilt at windmills like Don Quixote? The freguent jingoistic boasts about preparing for war in order to have peace, the repeated emphasis on total defence, are totally unrealistic in the context of peace and stability in Singapore and S E Asia today. Similarly mobilization exercises on food and water rationing on such a large scale involving a million people, can only inconvenience the people. Is all that really necessary? Perhaps it is now time for Singapore to review its defence thinking. The Western powers are now being guided by a new concept of "reasonable sufficiency" and general disarmament. We should do the same. Singapore is a small country of only 2.7 million people. Our best defence lies not in the heavy expenditure on armaments, most of which will soon be obsolete anyhow. Our best defence lies in friendly diplomacy with all countries and especially with our neighbours and ASEAN, together with an economic policy that promotes co-operation and mutual benefits, and avoids friction with our friends and neighbours. Our defence posture should be one of low profile, as heavy expenditure and frequent emphasis on training for prepardness -

Order. Dr Lee, it appears to me that you are turning this debate into a debate on the need for national service.

No, Sir. I am talking about the training.

If you intend to continue in this vein, I will have to direct that you resume your seat. Do you intend to speak on this Bill or do you want to continue talking on the needs of national service?

I am just mentioning the difficulty of ---

It appears to me that you are trying to circumvent procedures. If you intend to continue this way, then I direct that you resume your seat.

I will just cut it short then. Sir, there is something which I would like to say but since you have said that I can't say it, then I will -

Is it pertaining to the Bill?

I just want to say these words, Sir.

All right.

( In Mandarin): Sir, finally I must inform the Minister that I have also discussed the matter with a number of reservists. What I have said represents their views, views which they have no opportunity or are unwilling to publicly express. I hope therefore that government will not dismiss what I have said as mere Opposition propaganda. Of course our Singapore young men today do not have the same strong urge for democracy and freedom as the Peking youths. But who can be certain that they will forever not follow the footsteps of the Peking youths!

( In Mandarin): Sir, I support the Bill. I was surprised to hear Dr Lee the NCMP's speech in Parliament. We are no longer a colony and we are not a part of Malaysia. Singapore is an independent country. Therefore, we must be prepared to defend our country and stand on our own two feet. For the recall of reservists we are to reduce the time from 12 to 6 hours. In this hi tech age what we talk about is speed. If we can raise the alertness of the reservists by having them to answer to the call of duty within a shorter span of 6 hours, these reservists will demonstrate their efficiency and alertness. Subsequently the mobilization exercise will be effective. In times of emergency, we require alertness and quick response on the part of the reservists. If we were to follow what Dr Lee has suggested just now that six hours is difficult to achieve and 12 hours is a waste of time, then when a national emergency befalls us when the whole country is razed to the ground we may still be looking for the reservists. He further mentioned about the self-employed professionals being inconvenienced in their business or in making money. But, as a Singaporean, I feel every Singaporean has the duty to defend the nation and we cannot put the duty simply on part of the armed forces to protect a small sector of the population who claim to be self-employed professionals. I think their thought is very selfish. As to whether we should have compulsory national service with brief call-ups to defend our country, this is like the question of whether we to keep our money in our home or in the bank. We should definitely deposit it in the bank and for the sake of security. It is worth the while. Therefore, for the security of our money we have to spend the time, the inconvenience and the effort to go and queue up at the bank. Similarly, in the case of defence, if one should begrudge the small inconvenience of NS for 2(r) years and shorter reservist service thereafter with 6 hours call-ups and regard them as unnecessary, then it will be a sad state of affairs for the future of Singapore in the long run. Therefore, I do not agree with Dr Lee's view on this subject, but support the Bill.

( In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I remember I was born in 1949. In 1967, when the National Service Act was first introduced I was among the third batch of young people being enlisted. Although I did not have the opportunity to receive full-time national service as I was assigned to a Special troupe, I realized the importance of national service as a citizen of Singapore. Ours is a small country. If we do not have national service, then we will have to maintain a large number of regular armed forces. On the other hand, our nationals will then not be able to understand that the defence of a country is the duty of everyone. After the implementation of national service, then as citizens we would not only be able to spend about 2(r) years to carry out our duty to make some contribution to the defence of our country but also in the long run be a great help in lightening the heavy expenditure on our defence budget. Although I have been a part-time NS reservist having spent some 12 years in NS from when I was 18 to 30 years old. I have no regret at all and I feel that this is a duty that I should take up. Dr Lee Siew-Choh rose --

Do you have a clarification?

Yes. I want to clarify because they have been barking at the wrong tree.

On what point?

They are saying that I do not want to protect my country and that I do not want to defend my country. Sir, can I speak in Mandarin?

All right.

( In Mandarin): I agree that the defence of a country is everybody's duty but we should not spend all the time and all our money on only one aspect of it. We must be able to distrubute and share them well with all the people, not just with only a few people. We do not have to spend all our money and time or everybody's effort on only one thing. I hope the Government should be able to understand this, and strive more to give serious attention to this aspect. It will then receive the support of more people. Nobody is saying that we should not defend our country. We are not against defence. The question is not whether we should defend our country. Of course we should. We are just asking how much time do we want to spend on it, I say that we can reduce and shorten the time we spend on it?

Mr Speaker, Sir, I shall first respond to the queries from Mr Das and Dr Ong briefly in English and then take the other points in Mandarin. Mr Das asked several questions. First, how will we know the age of the person who answers the telephone? Dr Ong also asked this question. The answer is very simple. We will just ask him his age, his IC No. and his name, and if he cannot give us a reply, we presume that he will be less than 16 years old. It is a practical solution. It is the same arrangement we now use when we call on the household and the reservist is not at home. We give the notice to a member of his household, who signs for it and puts down his name and IC No. It has worked well. I see no reason why doing this by telephone should complicate matters. Secondly, as to whether employers or employees will accept responsibility and whether they will be liable if they fail to pass on the message to the reservist, what we are looking is a solution where the reservist himself takes responsibility and makes arrangements with his employers or his colleagues at work, the same as they have done at home with their families, to pass messages on to him when they are received from Mindef. You can be sure that when the mobilization order arrives from Mindef through the fax, it is not going to come in the form of junk mail. We have deliberately not prescribed any penalties on the family members or on the employers for failing to pass the message on to the reservist. We consider it the reservist's personal responsibility to make these arrangements. It has worked quite well. With open mobilization, for example, we issued each reservist with a sticker giving the codeword of his unit, in English as well as in Mandarin. We asked him to paste it on to his television set at home, so that his family see the codeword when he is not at home, they can recognize whether it is for their son's unit and, if need be, get going to contact their sons. I think the same arrangement can work with civil resources, and also in offices. As for the use of fax and pagers, and whether the message will be acknowledged, this was foreseen. In the proposed section 29(2)(k) of the Bill there is a provision for acknowledgment of a message "by electronic or any other means to the effect that the order or notice has been received at that place." Dr Ong asked about maids-what if the maid may receive a message and does not know what it is about. I have been informed that, technically speaking, maids are not members of the household. So the question does not arise. The message has to be left with a member of the household. Is the system fair? It is as fair as the existing system, which nobody has complained is unworkable or unreasonable. The question is the onus of proof. Who is answerable? Who has to prove that he was reasonably unreachable when he did not respond to a mobilization notice? If we place the onus of proof on the SAF or Mindef, I suppose, in a way that is being more generous to the reservist. In practice it will be almost impossible for the SAF to track down each case and establish that the soldier did not come back when he could have done so, because the number of possible excuses is innumerable. By placing the burden of proof on the reservist, and requiring him to establish that he was not reachable, because he was on an offshore island, or was overseas, or his whole family was away for some family emergency and nobody was at home for two days, we have resolved the difficulty without in practice causing any injustice to any reservist. I think it is a workable arrangement. In extending the mobilization system to telecommunication means and in cutting back the duration of the notice from 12 to six hours, I do not think we should tamper with a principle which works. Now let me continue, Mr Speaker, in Mandarin. (In Mandarin) Mr Speaker, Sir, having heard Dr Lee's speech I was rather surprised because I remember that just a few months ago when we were in this House talking about national service, total defence and the defence of our country and various other topics, Dr Lee expressed his support for national service and took a stand different from that of previous years. Today it seems that he has changed his stand again. I believe, of course, it is not his personal stand but the stand of Barisan Sosialis in the past and now that of the Workers Party. We must be clear that we are talking about the defence of the country, and the duty of every citizen to the country, not just 2(r) years full tiem NS but also for about 13 more years as a reservist thereafter. This is the duty of every male citizen. To say that we do not want national service, amounts to saying we do not want to defend our country.

( In Mandarin): Sir, a point of clarification. Again the Minister says the same thing as the other two speakers. Just now the Minister has said that we are against national service. In the whole speech that I made, can he pick out any passage which says that I am against national service? What I am against is the exercise of stricter and tighter control over our national servicemen and reservist. What I suggest is that the Government should relax a bit, and what I stress is in connection with this aspect only. This is entirely different from what he is saying now.

( In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, Dr Lee's talk was equivocal and sophistic. On the one hand, he supports national service, on the other hand he is against mobilization exercises, against yearly recall of reservists for exercise, and against training the units to upgrade their defence capability and standard. Therefore, we can understand his true intention from his own words. Although he pays lip service to NS, in truth we can only conclude that he has no good intentions about our national service. The Bill is introduced today mainly for two purposes. One is to reduce the time necessary for the recall of reservists. The Act at present provides for 12 hours but our past few years' experience have proved that since Singapore is a compact small country, and distances are short, it is possible to use pubblic communication media to recall one whole unit of reservists back to camp in six hours. Therefore, we should adjust the provisions of the Act to match the actual standard that we are able to achieve, that is to recall back to camp within 6 hours. Our Armed Forces are very strict, and ought to be. Otherwise if they are lax in discipline, and cannot make it in a short time, then they will certainly lose on the battle field. In fact, we not only require every soldier to return to camp within six hours, but also, require them to start off immediately to camp as soon as he has received the order. Even if he returns to camp in 6 hours, but we know that after he had received the notice, perhaps in the first hour, he did not respond immediately by proceeding to camp, we can still charge him. Therefore the 6 hours is only the limit, not a proper time of response. The second purpose is to mobilize the reservists by means of modern telephone, fax and sophisticated electronic communication means. In the past, the means of communication was rather crude and simple. The first method was by broadcasting the whole order over radio and television, together with the names of the units. You could not use secret codes to identify the unit which is called in. Now we want to change the method by using just one secret code so that that only particular unit which is recalled will know. The second means of communication is by telefaxing. In the past, we could not do that. We sent soldiers to every household to look for the reservist. That was very time-consuming. To get the whole unit to be back would take 10 to 12 hours or even more. Now by means of telephone communication we can reduce the time to six hours. This time is not fixed by the Government, but is in keeping with the requirement of the situation. It depends how quickly the enemy will come. If in an emergency, the reservist were to take the attitude that the enemy will only come in six hours or more, then decide to enjoy the company with their girlfriends in the meantime, I think he need not go home anymore, because there will be no more home for him. Therefore, in an emergency, the speedier the better. We have tried it out and found it feasible. We have come to know that six hours is an achievable feat to mobilize a unit. There is no problem. Therefore, now we are introducing this Bill to amend the existing Act. If in future after trying out for some time we find that we can reduce the time and raise the standard further, we will come back again to this House to discuss on it further. Thank you, Mr Speaker.

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.-[BG Lee Hsien Loong]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed.

Order for Second Reading read.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." Civil resources are as important a component of the SAF's operational preparedness as reservists. We must be able to requisition resources as quickly as we can mobilize reservists. The systems for mobilizing both of them must fit together. The amendments to the Requisition of Resources Act do this. They provide for the same means of requisition and the same presumptions of knowledge as in the Enlistment Act. This will also help us react more quickly to civil disasters, such as the Hotel New World incident. However, two differences arise because civil resource owners are not only individual persons but also companies, corporations or firms. Firstly, the persons responsible for these entities are the partners of the firm or the directors, managers or secretaries of the companies or corporations, or their authorized agents. Already under the Companies Act, such persons have locus standi to act in all matters relating to the affairs of these entities. Section 41(2)(a) therefore specifies that these persons can receive requisition orders over the telephone. Knowledge of the requisition order by these persons is knowledge by their respective entities. Sections 41(3)(c), (d) and (f) provide for requisition orders also to be served by telephone, facsimile, telex and other means of telecommunication at the last known place of business or registered office of the entity. Secondly, most civil resource owners do not conduct their businesses from home. Therefore, section 41(4)(d) specifies that when a requisition order is received at home by a member of the civil resource owner's family, there is only a rebuttable presumption of knowledge of the order. The civil resource owner is only deemed to have knowledge of the order six hours afterwards. This is unlike the position under the amended Enlistment Act, where the reservist is immediately deemed to have been informed of a mobilization order which was communicated to a family member. The Bill requires the text of the announcement over the radio or television for mobilization and requisition to be prescribed in regulations. These regulations will be duly promulgated when these amendments become law. They will provide only for a symbol or codeword to be flashed over television or announced over the radio, rather than the full text of the order for mobilization or requisition. Mindef will carry out exercises to familiarize civil resource owners with this new system of requisition and to break in the system. Civil resource owners have responded well in previous exercises. Mindef is confident that they will continue to be responsive in future. Sir, I beg to move. Question proposed.

Sir, I rise to support this Bill. Sir, it is heartening to note that many of our corporations and companies give full cooperation and support to this mobilization of civil resources. In fact, I know that many of them have declined payment or compensation for the work they have done for the nation. We can conclude from this that many of our businessmen have taken to heart Machiaevelli's statement that there will be no prosperity without adequate defence. I think they are fully aware of the fate of city states of Florence and Milan during Machiaevelli's time which fell under foreign domination because of their neglect of defence while pursuing prosperity. This, I know, will not be the fate of our nation with the support of these businessmen. It seems, therefore, that the message of total defence where you could not divide civil and military resources has permeated throughout society. The question here I would like to raise is whether these cooperative and supportive companies and corporations are given their due recognition by the Ministry of Defence and by society in general. I am aware that there is a parallel scheme of recognition to reservist employers for their full cooperation in the call-up of reservists. I wonder whether the Ministry of Defence will consider such similar scheme or recognition, though it may be a token recognition, to endorse and to encourage all these civilian businessmen and companies who give full support to this mobilization of resources. I support the Bill.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I will ask Mindef to look into the matter. We are grateful for the support we have received from civil resource owners and from reservists and from employers. Contrary to what some people believe, we have a very strong national consensus on total defence. And the SAF's efforts have received considerable understanding from members of the public who from time to time, we acknowledge, have been inconvenienced, although we try to keep the inconvenience to the barest minimum. I will ask Mindef to look into a scheme to recognize formally civil resource owners who have been exceptionally cooperative with Mindef in the same way as we do with employers of reservists.

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.-[BG Lee Hsien Loong]. Bill considered in Committee.

Clauses 1 and 2 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 3 ---

Mr Chairman, Sir, I seek your consent and the general assent of Members to move an amendment.

I give my consent. Does the Minister have the general assent of Members to move the amendment? Hon. Members indicated assent.

BG Lee, please move your amendment.

Mr Chairman, Sir, I beg to move the following amendment to the Bill: In page 5, line 22, after "section", to insert "16 or". This is a typographical omission. It is not a substantive amendment. The proposed section 41(3) of the Bill refers to notice of requisition issued pursuant to section 12 or an order or direction issued pursuant to section 16 or 17. The proposed section 41(4) follows from section 41(3) of the Bill but has inadvertently omitted any reference to section 16. Amendment agreed to. Clause 3, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Bill reported with an amendment, read a Third time and passed.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move the Motion* standing in my name as it appears on the Order Paper. *The Motion reads as follows: That this Parliament, in accordance with section 4 of the Foreshores Act (Chapter 113), approves the reclamation of the foreshore and seabed at Pulau Brani containing an area of approximately 34 hectares as shown coloured yellow and pink on the plan marked "Land Office Reclamation Plan No. 1/89" which is deposited at the Land Office, Singapore. Sir, at its sitting on 21 March 1972 this House approved the reclamation of approximately 46.94 hectares of the foreshore and seabed at Pulau Brani and Brani Shoal by the Port of Singapore Authority, as agent of the Government, for several redevelopment purposes. However, only 34.8 hectares at Pulau Brani were reclaimed. PSA did not proceed with the reclamation of the remaining 12.14 hectares as it was subsequently found not economical to reclaim the narrow strip at Brani Shoal. Sir, since 1980 PSA has achieved a 17% compound annual growth in container traffic. This growth is expected to continue, although at a slower average annual rate of 9% to 11% into the next decade. Singapore would require five main and five feeder container berths to handle the expected throughput of 9.26 million Twenty-foot Equivalent Units (TEUs) by the year 1999. To achieve this, PSA proposes to construct a new container terminal at Pulau Brani. Construction of this new terminal requires the reclamation of approximately 34 hectares of foreshore and seabed at Pulau Brani as shown coloured yellow and pink on the Land Office Reclamation Plan No. 1/89, a copy of which is displayed in the Library of this House for the information of Members. The proposed reclamation will be carried out in two phases. Phase I, involving approximately 25.6 hectares of the foreshore and seabed as shown coloured yellow on the plan, is estimated to cost $103 million. Two smaller areas (coloured yellow), although adjoining the Phase II area, are also included in Phase I to facilitate the construction of the proposed road. The reclamation is scheduled to commence in 1989 and will take about four years to complete. Phase II reclamation of approximately 8.4 hectares of foreshore and seabed as shown coloured pink on the Land Office Reclamation Plan No. 1/89 will be undertaken by the year 1991 and will take about two years to complete. Sir, I beg to move.

Question put, and agreed to. Resolved, That this Parliament, in accordance with section 4 of the Foreshores Act (Chapter 113), approves the reclamation of the foreshore and seabed at Pulau Brani containing an area of approximately 34 hectares as shown coloured yellow and pink on the plan marked "Land Office Reclamation Plan No 1/89" which is deposited at the Land Office, Singapore. 2.45 pm

Sir, I beg to move the Motion* standing in my name on the Order Paper. *The motion reads as follows: That this Parliament, in accordance with section 4 of the Foreshores Act (Chapter 113), approves the reclamation by Government of the foreshore and seabed off Woodlands Checkpoint containing an area of about 8.3 hectares as shown coloured yellow on the plan marked "Land Office Reclamation Plan No. 2/89" which is deposited at the Land Office, Singapore. On 27th March 1989, I informed this House that Woodlands Checkpoint is being redeveloped to cater to the long-term traffic growth. A total land area of 18 hectares is required for the proposed redevelopment. Of the 18 hectares, 3 hec- tares is State land, about 6.7 hectares island acquired from the Malayan Railway Administration and the balance 8.3 hectares is foreshore and seabed which will have to be reclaimed. This area to be reclaimed is shown coloured yellow on the "LAND OFFICE RECLAMATION PLAN NO. 2/89", a copy of which is displayed in the Library of this House for the information of Members. These reclamation works will be undertaken by the Housing and Development Board, as agent of the Government, at a total estimated cost of $34 million and are expected to be completed by mid-1991. Sir, I beg to move.

Question put, and agreed to. Resolved, That this Parliament, in accordance with section 4 of the Foreshores Act (Chapter 113), approves the reclamation by Government of the foreshore and seabed off Woodlands Checkpoint containing an area of about 8.3 hectares as shown coloured yellow on the plan marked "Land Office Reclamation Plan No. 2/89" which is deposited in the Land Office, Singapore.

Order. I suspend this sitting and will take the Chair again at 3.10 pm. Sitting accordingly suspended at 2.48 pm until 3.10 pm.

Sitting resumed at 3.10 pm

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, *That this House supports the principles underlying the latest measures introduced by the Ministry of Communications and Information to curb road usage. *The motion also stood in the name of Dr Wang Kai Yuen (Member for Bukit Timah). Sir, the purposes of introducing this motion are, first, to provide a forum for discussing, supporting or opposing the measures without disagreeing with the principles underlying their introduction. Second, to provide an oppportunity for Members of this House to propose suitable amendments to these measures for the consideration of the Minister for Communications and Information. Sir, the motion has been proposed by my GPC after careful consideration of the recent measures to curb car usage. The House would have noted that we have merely supported the principles underlying these measures. It does not necessarily follow that we endorse all or any of the specific measures. It is also possible and consistent for any Member of this House to support our motion and yet oppose most of the measures that have been introduced. The package of measures have been introduced ostensibly to curb road usage as distinct from car ownership. But this package carries with it a strange appendage that does not belong. I refer to the 100% increase in car parking charges in HDB estates. As far as I can see, this does not contribute to curbing road usage. By coupling it with road usage measures, we have opened the floodgates to confusion on the ground. As this involves thepolicy of the Ministry of National Development, I will not pre-empt what the GPC on National Development must want to comment upon. Suffice it to say that whatever the rationale for increasing car park charges, a sudden 100% increase appears somewhat excessive. Sir, if I may now return to the principles underlying the measures. The principles are clear. We have limited space in Singapore for roads, and to avoid traffic congestion it is necessary to provide disincentives against road usage in congestion-prone areas. Hence the need for the ALS and higher parking charges in the city area. Many of the new measures are defensible on these principles. However, my GPC has some reservations about some of these measures. I would like to highlight two of them here. First, it is not clear why Scheme B buses are not exempted from ALS charges like other regular buses. Scheme B buses are efficient in road usage, like regular buses. The only difference is that they carry school children, tourists, and the like. Sir, I am sure the Minister for Communications has nothing against school children and tourists. I urge him therefore to consider exempting these buses from the new ALS ruling. The other measure over which I have some doubt is the evening ALS scheme. If evening traffic congestion was indeed much more serious in the restricted zones than on the ring roads, there is perhaps some justification for introducing the evening ALS. However, I have yet to see clear evidence that this is indeed the case. Many commuters have reported to me that they do not experience any worse congestion getting out of the restricted zones than they do on the ring roads or on other main highways when they travel home from work in the evenings. Sir, if this is the case, then evening ALS may provide only very marginal gains in traffic flow. For only that little gain, it imposes inconvenience and irksome costs for those who live in the restricted zones, or for those who pick up their family from these zones after work. I suggest that the Minister reconsiders this, and possibly defers it until a more thorough study has established beyond doubt the effectiveness of evening ALS. In this regard, I note that the Ministry has commissioned a research project to study traffic flows. Would it not make more sense to complete these and other studies first, before making the evening ALS decision? Sir, my GPC members and other Members of the House will comment on these and other measures in detail. I would now like to turn to a more basic question. This concerns the circumstance under which these measures are being introduced. Regrettably, these measures are being introduced at a time when the public transportation system does not yet provide acceptable alternatives to car owners to commute to work. This point was brought out forcibly by a writer to the Forum page of the Straits Times last week. Mr Melvin Cheah wrote on the 25th May issue of the Straits Times, one of the more sensible letters I have seen on the subject, and I quote: 'Car users would switch to public transport ... only if these systems are able to provide a relatively efficient and comfortable service as a substitute. As it now stands, the MRT provides excellent but restricted service ... The majority (of people) still rely on buses and these have (many) drawbacks. I suggest that officials take a ride on our buses officials take a ride on our buses to fully appreciate the trauma of a bus ride. Maybe then they will understand why people cling on people cling on to their cars despite the increasing costs. You must give people a good substitute if you want them to give up their cars, not squeeze their purses till they are empty.' Sir, the good substitute was to have been the MRT. We invested $5 billion into the system, but the results today are somewhat less than satisfactory. Technically, the system works beautifully; the trains are clean, fast and comfortable. But there are not enough passengers using the system to commute to work. Most of those who do switched over from buses. The MRT has failed to attract large numbers of car drivers, and therefore has failed to make sizeable contributions to reducing road congestion. The basic problem is one of access to the MRT stations. There is yet no viable feeder system from private housing estates where large concentrations of car owners reside. Why has such a feeder system not been introduced? I am told by Ministry officials that it may not be profitable. The SMRT is unwilling to run these feeder services even though these services will bring more passengers to the MRT and therefore contribute additional revenue to the SMRT. I believe we must not lose our sense of proportion here. We spent $5 billion in capital subsidies for the MRT system. To appreciate what this amount means, consider the fact that this capital amount, if invested at a modest 8% return, would yield $400 million a year. This exceeds the entire market capitalization of SBS and TIBS put together. Put in another way, just one year's interest cost of financing the MRT could buy up the two major bus companies in Singapore, with money left over to set up several feeder services for major private housing estates. Sir, with such an enormous capital outlay, it is a serious matter that the system is not fully utilized. By this I do not mean that the trains are not full at peak hours. I mean that the tracks and tunnels can take many times the frequency of trains that we are seeing now. I recall a Ministry official telling me that it could be as much as 10 times. This could mean that the capacity of utilization is only about 10% by that measure. Sir, if as a matter of economic ideology the Ministry is averse to operating subsidies, then perhaps we could promote feeder services through capital grants for vehicles, for vans, for minibuses, that could ply the routes from the estates to the stations with high frequency, so that one can walk out of one's home, pick up an air-conditioned shuttle, and get to the station in comfort. Sir, I do not know what the capital cost would be for these feeder services, but I would be surprised if it amounted to more than a few months' financing cost for the MRT system. We have already lost years in making the MRT system work to reduce road congestion, and the opportunity cost runs into many hundreds of millions of dollars. It can only make sense now to invest a little more to finally make it work. Sir, a similar situation exists with regard to the feeder system for the HDB estates. The Ministry has for some time talked about "through-ticketing", integrating bus and MRT services. We started building MRT lines in the early 1980's. I understand that through-ticketing will not be working until early 1991. I am not sure why it has taken so many years and I hope that the Minister could expedite it. In the meantime, motorists bear increasing pain each year, having to dig deeper into their pocket. But the harsher are the measures needed against motorists, the clearer is the indication that viable alternatives in transportation are lacking. It would appear that for too long the Government has chosen the easier option of punishing the motorists to keep the traffic smooth. The harder option is to improve the public transportation system swiftly and effectively. I would like to suggest in all seriousness to the Ministry that henceforth it sets itself a house rule that it would not introduce further strong measures against car ownership or road usage unless each measure is accompanied by a matching improvement in the public transportation amenities. Only in this way can we really and truly be, as the Government would have put it, "on the right track". In conclusion, while we support the principles behind curbing road usage, we also urge the Ministry to take a wider view of the matter and review some of these measures. Question proposed.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the road transportation measures which are the subject of this motion aim to encourage people to use their motor vehicles less. The assumption is that if the motor vehicle usage can be reduced by, say, 10%, then vehicle population can be increased by correspondingly 10%, without causing additional congestion on our roads. The Minister for Finance has been quoted as saying that the Government would be happy if people buy cars and keep them at home, driving them mainly in Malaysia. So a perception has emerged among Singaporeans that Government henceforth will not discourage car ownership explicitly. Instead it will control primarily car usage. My question is this: is that really the case? I do not think so, and I think it would be useful for the Government to clarify its position. To begin with, the measures already implemented to control the number of cars remain. In my opinion, these measures will remain an important policy instrument in future, despite the shift in emphasis. We must recognize that fiscal measures to control car population have been successful, even though pursuing it single-mindedly has led to some serious distortions in the economics of owning and operating a car. The distortion arises from the fact that the operational cost, including road tax, parking and petrol, are comparatively low in comparison with the capital cost of buying a car. Like any piece of expensive equipment, the tendency in such cases would be to maximize the use of that piece of equipment. So the person who is going to put up $40,000 or more for a vehicle would tend to use it as much as his budget for operating the car will bear. This tendency has been confirmed in a study done by the Automobile Association of Singapore which showed that the average mileage of a car in Singapore is about 18,000 km per year while those in the OECD countries is about 16,000 km per year. Furthermore, this distortion caused by the high import levy is accentuated by the rapid appreciation of the Japanese yen from 1985 till 1988. The result was that the value of used cars has appreciated significantly over the same period. I knew many individuals who bought used cars during that period and sold them after several years of use and, instead of losing money, have made money out of it. So in effect, they has gained free use of their cars over this period. Indeed, pursuing our past policy in controlling car population has produced this very severe distortion. So any increase in ARF would have similar implication as the yen appreciation. In fact, this was confirmed by the reported losses suffered by used car dealers when the Government unexpectedly left the ARF untouched in spite of the rapid increases in the number of cars on our roads. Mr Speaker, Sir, to remove this distortion and to make car ownership policy really work, the depreciation of the motor vehicle over its operating life must be real and substantial. One way to do this is to remove the PARF and concurrently make driving an old car on our roads expensive. But any move in this direction would be drastic and extremely unpopular. Therefore, the shift in emphasis to curb car usage through increasing the cost of operating a car is to be welcomed. I support this principle behind the measures introduced by our Government to curb car usage. However, I believe the Government may have oversold this concept of controlling car usage vis-a-vis controlling car ownership. Thus, it is, in fact, very difficult to justify the 100% increase of HDB season parking fee. As has already been explained by Dr Hong Hai, no matter how one looks at it, this 100% increase cannot be justified on the principle of reducing car usage. It indeed confuses the issue. On top of that, the burden does not fall evenly on all car owners since only those living in HDB estates will be affected by it. As a result, Government has been perceived as being unfair. If the Government's position in this measure is to recover the cost of operating the car perhaps it would actually be easier for our people to understand and to accept if the Ministry of National Development were to announce this policy separately. Now let me address the philosophy behind car usage. To curb car usage, the car owner must be deterred from using his car whenever he wants to go out for an errand. He will also decide on a per trip basis. The Government has taken measures to increase the per trip costs, such as the fuel cost and the parking charges at the end of a trip as well as the restricted zone entry fee for those going into the restricted zone. The fuel cost is increased by raising the petrol tax and the parking charges incurred by raising the parking fees and parking surcharges. These are logical derivations of the car usage reduction principle and I support them. On the other hand, when measures are introduced to change human behavioural patterns, I believe they would have some shock values. I reckon, by and large, that 10% increase in petrol and the small increase in parking fees are unlikely to achieve any reduction of car usage on our roads. Indeed, today there is no indication that sales in petrol kiosks have been affected by the petrol tax increase. What these measures, will achieve indeed would be to fatten Government coffers. Indeed, if Government really wants to reduce car usage through these measures, I would foresee more substantial increases in the pipeline. If that is the case, perhaps the Minister should say so now. In the context of increasing the per trip cost to reduce car usage I would say that the reduction of ALS entry fees for private cars is illogical. Under the new measure, for a single trip, a driver will save $2 a day. Parking fee will go up 40 cents per hour in the city. So if a person drives to the city and parks for one hour, he will save $1.60 for that particular trip, petrol cost increase being relatively insignificant. And for a businessman who buys a monthly ALS disc, he would save up to $40 a month after taking into consideration parking fee increases. In fact, these savings will encourage more car owners to drive into the restricted zone. I say so because the Government has indeed confirmed this by saying that if the fees were not reduced that would lead to an under-utilization of our roads. Indeed the Government recognizes that and reduces the fees to encourage more people to drive into the restricted zone. But we must remember that people are creatures of habit. Once the habit to drive to work is developed and inculcated, to curb such habits in future more and more stringent measures would then be required to change it. Mr Speaker, Sir, I can only say that while this reduction in entry fee will please the motorists in the short-term, it might be a short-sighted measure in the long term. It is the evening ALS that I find quite difficult to rationalize. Granted that Government has ample evidence to show that there is congestion inside part of the restricted zone during the evening rush hours. But I do not think the civil servants formulating this evening ALS policy know exactly where those vehicles come from. From 4.30 pm to onwards to 5.00 pm, who are the drivers on the road? Are they businessmen returning to their parks in HDB estates, their counterparts? If these meetings are held inside the restricted zone, I would say that the evening ALS does not help matters. From 5.00 pm onwards, are the drivers driving cars that have been parked within the restricted zone suddenly leaving the restricted zonetaking them home after work? If that is so, then the evening ALS would not deter them from doing so. The outbound traffic will continue as before. What the evening ALS would restrict are indeed cross-town traffic. These are drivers going through the restricted zone to save time and fuel on their way home after work and these vehicles do indeed contribute to congestion. But drivers of this nature would only reach the restricted zone at about 5.15 pm to 5.45 pm if they finish work by 5.00 pm. Since these are the only people whom the evening ALS aims to deter, perhaps the time of the evening ALS should be shortened to this period and should last no more than one hour. This way, there will be no major impact on drivers residing within the restricted zone. As it is now, the burden of reducing the traffic congestion falls on them instead of on the real culprits. The second ramification of the evening ALS would then be the lack of taxis inside the restricted zone during those hours. Already a $1 incentive is needed to attract taxis into the restricted zone during the evening rush hours. Under the new measures, except for those taxis that have already acquired an ALS disc by carrying passengers into the restricted zone in the morning, most taxis would avoid it from 4.30 pm onwards. The available taxis are therefore only those already inside the restricted zone by 4.30 pm and those already possessing an ALS disc. It is quite clear to me that it would then in future become very difficult to find taxis once the evening ALS is in force. Queues would lengthen in the taxi stands, tempers would flare and Government would be blamed. I believe the Minister should consider a feasible solution right now and keep it up his sleeves. An obvious one would be to waive the ALS charges for taxis during the evening ALS. My next disappointment with the package is the classification of motor-cycles as vehicles subject to entry fee into the restricted zone. Mr Speaker, Sir, the $1 levy is substantial and is a burden to motor-cyclists who are primarily from the lower income group. What is even more significant is that motor-cyclists henceforth are subjected to all the fee control schemes that motor vehicles are subjected to. With the electronic road pricing which will be pilot tested within two years, it seems to me that in future the Government would require all motor-cyclists to have a transponder installed in them. How much would the transponder cost? Would this cost increase the cost of owning a motor-cycle substantially? Would motor- cyclists be billed like motorists in the full implementation of the ERP? Mr Speaker, Sir, I would prefer to see motor-cyclists excluded from this fee control scheme. Anyway, in the past, the Government has never highlighted the population of motor-cycles on our roads to be a problem and I do not see the necessity of levying usage fees on motor-cycles under our current circumstances. Of course, I might be wrong but I believe the Minister needs to explain his rationale in this matter. In conclusion, I would say that the principle to reduce car usage is a good one and it will be useful to try out the effectiveness of the new policy in controlling congestion on our roads. In this respect, I support the measures in increasing petrol duty and hourly parking fees although I think they will not be very effective. However, I find the measures in increasing HDB season parking fees difficult to justify and explain. Furthermore, while the evening ALS may be a viable solution, I would like to see a shorter period of evening ALS. Finally, I would urge the Government to reconsider the decision to impose ALS charges on motor-cycles. Mr Speaker, Sir, I second the motion. 3.40 pm

Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise to support the motion. The recent restraint measures for land transport announced by the Ministry of Communications and Information aim to control congestion by curbing road usage. The principles behind these measures to discourage excessive usage of roads are good and ought to be supported. The measures introduced, such as the petrol duty increase, the modified ALS scheme and the car park surcharge will all contribute to the objective. However, the various measures introduced together with the simultaneous increase of HDB car park charges have instead caused considerable unhappiness among Singaporean vehicle-owners. They are unhappy because they feel that the package as a whole is too big a dosage. Sir, if we were to individually look at the measures introduced you can see that they are mainly unhappy over two of them. Firstly, the HDB season parking rates and, secondly, the evening ALS. The Minister for Communications and Information has given me the impression that, when dishing out measures to control traffic congestion on our roads, he prefers to administer them a small dose at a time and on a regular basis, be they the control of road usage or car ownership or both, for he believes that this approach is more palatable and will also produce the same result as that of big dosages administered once in a while. I agree with him for two reasons. Firstly, as we move towards controlling congestion by restraining road usage, a small dose at a time will result in better utilization of roads. This is because the traffic volume can then be constantly monitored and maintained at a satisfactory level. Secondly, unlike the ARF which controls car ownership, control of road usage is more painful to existing owners and therefore small dosages will allow them time to adjust, either y giving up their car or switch to public transport some of the time. However, Sir, in the recent measures taken there seems to be so many small doses given at the same time giving a cumulative effect of a big dosage. Although HDB car park charges have got nothing to do with MCI, the increase in season parking rates of 100% basically has the effect of car ownership restraint whatever good reasons HDB may have. Therefore, the increase cannot be viewed as a separate issue and must be viewed in the context of our land transport policy. Sir, there must be therefore better coordination between MCI and MND regarding the timing and size of theincrease in parking rates so that the measures as a whole will not be viewed as excessive. It would have been better if the revision of HDB season parking rates is done over, say, two increases with prior warning given to the vehicle owners living in HDB estates. Let me now come to the evening ALS. What do we gain from introducing the evening ALS? Obviously the traffic flow in CBD will be smoother as a result. But what is the fall-out? Sir, as we know from the information given by MCI, at the moment traffic condition in CBD in the evening is, in fact, less heavy than along the ring roads. The average speed of vehicles in the CBD during the evening period is about 26 km per hour. But along the ring roads it is much less, and sometimes during a localized traffic congestion it can go as slow as 11 km per hour. Therefore, by introducing evening ALS, more vehicles will be diverted to the ring roads, and I foresee that we are going to aggravate even more the traffic situation on the ring roads. Another problem is that the evening ALS is going to affect retail businesses in the CBD. More motorists will head for the ring roads to do their shopping and so on, and that will further aggravate the traffic conditions there. Thirdly, as my GPC Chairman has mentioned, the evening ALS will also inconvenience the residents in the CBD. I suggest that, since we have introduced this car park surcharge, as a result of which the car park fee is going to increase, maybe we can delay the evening ALS and allow the hike in car park charges to work and see if it will achieve the desired results. Finally, I would like to come to my last point. I would like to echo Dr Hong's point about the public transport system. As we move towards road usage restraint, we are asking car-owners to switch to public transport. Sir, generally these people are in the better income group, and getting them to switch to a cheaper means of transport means that the form of transport must be compatible to that of private cars. And if they cannot get a good standard ofservice in terms of comfort, time and convenience, it is not going to be attractive. I therefore support my GPC Chairman's proposal that the Government should look into ways and means as to how we can improve on the comfort, the convenience and the time in taking public transport so that Singaporeans can be encouraged to make a switch. Otherwise it is unlikely for them to give up their present mode of transport. Sir, we have subsidized the MRT system so much that I think we ought to consider subsidizing public transport on an operating basis, so that we can have not just cheap public transport but at the same time quality public transport. Sir, on that note, I urge the Ministry to review some of these measures that we have commented on. And I want to stress again that I support the principles behind these measures but I do not agree with some of the measures taken.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the package of measures introduced by the Government to ease traffic congestion, I believe, is a step in the right direction in our aim to tackle the problem of traffic congestion in Singapore. There is a distinct shift from measures restricting car ownership to measures curbing car usage. I dwelt on this subject at some length during the debate on the President's Address earlier this year. As Singapore progresses and as our society becomes more affluent, our people more educated, car ownership becomes more of a need than a luxury. People who are successful in their careers would naturally aspire to own a car. Hence, Sir, it would not be desirable, in the long term, for the Government to continue imposing measures restraining car ownership to frustrate the people's aspiration to own a car. Besides, recent events have shown that car ownership measures tend to benefit existing car owners and encourage those thinking of getting a car to buy one before it is too late, speculating on Government's possible increase in taxes. In fact, car ownership has become an investment in Singapore. I know of no other country in the world where ordinary car owners, other than car dealers, can profit from owning a car. Sir, Singaporeans fully agree that there is a need to prevent traffic congestion from reaching crisis proportions. Many of us who have travelled to places like Bangkok, Tokyo, Taipei, Hong Kong and other major cities will understand and appreciate the Government's concern about traffic congestion. However, there are certain aspects of the measures introduced that have caused unhappiness amongst the people. Allow me to elaborate. Firstly, as some Members have already spoken, the extension of the ALS to evening hours from 4.30 pm to 7.00 pm is a good idea. Many people support it, except those resident in the CBD but working outside the CBD. These car owners find it absurd having to pay to return home during CBD hours or to stay in their office until after 7.00 pm. Many will probably choose the latter option and this might affect the pattern of their family life. Sir, another change in the ALS which puzzles people is the reduction in the ALS fees from $5 to $3, and the inclusion of car pooling in the scheme. This new measure allows those who can afford the ALS fees and who have been paying so far to pay less, while those who cannot afford and have to car-pool to enter CBD now have to pay to enter the CBD. Sir, there is merit in considering exemption for car pools when Government has been encouraging people to form car pools. People have responded and this has become a way of life, a pattern for them. And now car pools have to pay. There is some inconsistency. Maybe the Minister can reconsider this. Sir, it is also strongly felt that motorcyclists should not be included in the ALS scheme. It is debatable as to what extent motorcycles contribute to traffic congestion. The Government to-date has not made a strong case to convince most of us. Again, like the car pools, I would urge the Government to reconsider the inclusion of motorcycles in the ALS. Sir, the 100% increase in the HDB residential season parking fees from $25 to $50 has, in fact, angered many HDB car owners. Although the Ministry of National Development has explained that the revision is to move towards full recovery of the economic cost associated with providing parking facilities, many residents view this measure as contradictory to the Government's objective of reducing traffic congestion through curbing car usage. For example, an HDB car owner wishing to switch to MRT and to use his car only during the weekends, finds that he still has to bear a high cost of leaving his car at home. The increase is also seen as being too drastic and too sudden. Not enough time is given for people to adjust to the increase. This applies also to all the other increases. Many people feel that sufficient notice should have been given to enable them to make adjustments to their budget to meet these increases. Maybe the Ministry of Communications can take a leaf from the Ministry of Labour when it announced its CPF limits. People know what the CPF limits are 20% employer, 20% employee. This is the target, and everybody can make the necessary adjustments. A similar scheme can be announced for HDB car parks with periodic adjustments. Mr Speaker, Sir, I dare say that if such an approach is taken by the Ministry of National Development, these increases can be made more palatable to the people. All in all, the package of measures appears to favour generally the higher income group who can afford these increases. It is still not equitable as it should be. In the long term, the electronic road pricing system would be the solution. Maybe the Minister can brief this House on what further progress has been made to set up this system as quickly as possible. Sir, I would like to add that while the Government has introduced this series of measures and is contemplating other measures to further restrict car ownership, it should also provide the people with a practical and suitable alternative to car usage. This has been touched on at some length by the Chairman of GPC, Dr Hong Hai. This is especially so when the car is at present the best form of transport. I am referring to our public transport system. Although our MRT system is one of the best and most comfortable in the world, it only serves those living along or in the vicinity of the MRT routes. The Ministry does not consider taxis as part of the public transport system. If we want to encourage the people to give up their cars and make use of public transport, our public transport system must be further improved and made as efficient as possible so that car users will be attracted to switch from cars to public transport. Besides improving the public transport system, I would also urge the Government to examine other measures such as building two-tier carriageways in congested areas, reviewing traffic flow in our roads to reduce bottlenecks, and also building more car parks near MRT stations, which the Minister will disagree, or at least provide bicycle parking lots near the MRT stations. Sir, car ownership is a very personal and emotional issue. We must broach this subject rationally and objectively to come up with measures which, even though not totally acceptable to all people, would at least be understood by the people.

( In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, the recent announcement of certain measures by the Ministry of Communications and Information was aimed at curbing the use of roads. I support the principles underlying these measures. There are two principles involved. One is to ensure that there is free flow of traffic on the roads. The second principle is that those who cause traffic congestion on the roads should pay a price for it. Our land transport conditions are unique. Space is so limited. A survey points out that at the moment, we have 250,000 cars. If the number increases to 350,000 cars, then not only will the central business district will be affected but also those fringe areas and the new towns. Calculated on the assumption of an increase in our car population of 10,000 per year, in the very short time of 10 years there will be a situation where cars may not be able to move freely on the roads. Therefore, the problem of traffic congestion should be regarded as a problem that every citizen should face up to. At present, the recent measures have caused certain dissatisfaction. This is due to the following reasons. One is over the increase in parking fees particularly for season parking in HDB car parks. This measure appears to be contrary to the idea of curbing the use of cars on the roads and has caused certain misunderstanding and dissatisfaction. The second reason is that motorcyclists will also have to pay $1 to enter the CBD. This has caused unhappiness to the motorcyclists who are mainly of the lower income group. The third reason is that CBD businessmen and residents feel that if the evening area licensing scheme were to be implemented, it would adversely affect their business and livelihood. From these murmurings of dissatisfaction, we can see that the problem of traffic congestion in the CBD cannot be resolved by any measure in isolation. Consideration must also be given to the livelihood of the people. At present, the authorities are making a survey of the number of vehicles entering the CBD to assess the effects of the new measures. I would urge the authorities concerned to assess the effects not just in terms of traffic conditions but also in terms of the business and the livelihood of the businessmen and residents before modifying the measures. In taking a holistic approach, we should have such a comprehensive plan, and it should not be the sole responsibility of the Ministry of Communications and Information but should also be the responsibility of other relevant Government Ministries such as MTI and so on. If there is a co-ordinated and comprehensive plan, then there would not be such dissatisfactions as are now taking place. When talking about measures to tackle traffic problems, at the moment there are two approaches. One is about the curbing of the use of roads and the other the restriction on the ownership of vehicles. I have just been saying that if the total number of cars had been more than 350,000 then the congestion on the roads would be very severe. I would like to ask the Ministry of Communications and Information what the long term policy on the restriction of car ownership is. I feel that measures of important thing is that we should provide a comprehensive and effective package of public transport systems for the people. Earlier the Chairman of the GPC on Communications and Information suggested improvement of the services of the MRT. I wholly support such a suggestion. If the eastern line of the MRT is operational, then the transport problem of the people living in the eastern part of Singapore would be alleviated. Similarly, if some basic facilities of the MRT could be improved, more people could be encouraged to use its services. We should also not forget another component of the public transport system-the buses. The bus service should complement the MRT system in providing our residents with an effective system of public transport. Thank you.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move an amendment to the Motion moved by Dr Hong Hai, At the end, to add --- 'but regrets that some of the measures are too hastily introduced and too harsh; and that this House urges the Ministry to review them.' Sir, I would like to thank you for allowing me to move this amendment. My colleague, Dr Tan Cheng Bock, and myself have given serious thought to the main motion, and we both feel strongly that for meaningful debate, this amendment is necessary. I would like to explain to the House why we feel that this amendment is necessary. Having persuaded hon. Members, we ask for their support. All of us in the House must remind ourselves that in our parliamentary democracy, Parliament reigns supreme. All important policies of State should first be presented to the House, debated and a decision subsequently taken after hearing Members' views. The Ministry of Communications and Information has again made this serious omission in its announcement of its package of measure to curb car usage. It is indeed unfortunate that its press release "INTERIM RESTRAINT MEASURES FOR LAND TRANSPORT" was not first tabled for debate in Parliament. Yes, we may again be told that tax and revenue announcements must be kept secret. However, I believe that a blue paper could and should have been presented for a full debate without mention of pricing figures and dates of implementation. The Ministry could then take Members' views into consideration and act accordingly. This is parliamentary democracy. This is the expected norm in parliamentary practice. This is more important when this House has only one elected Opposition Member and one NCMP. The people of Singapore have given us, the PAP, their mandate, and we must represent their views in Parliament. Another very important aspect of Parliamentary debate is that this will allow for all Singaporeans to follow the arguments for and against, ie, it will help us to secure the understanding and acceptance by Singaporeans of new policies. If we debate the motion in its original form, it would be a meaningless debate. It would merely mean talk and more talk. The difference in the amendment is that it calls upon the Ministry to review the policies after hearing Members' views. If this motion receives the support of this House, then the Ministry cannot ignore the views of hon. Members. To do so would be to do it in defiance of a motion carried in this House. Are we asking for the unrealistic or impossible? Are we trying to place obstacles in the path of the Ministry? Are we trying to upset the system? Are we being unreasonable? No. What the House will be doing is to remind the Ministry that it has an obligation to listen, think over again, then act in good faith. Out of the inputs of 81 elected Members must come some good suggestions. The carrying of this motion will also signal to all Singaporeans that we, as their elected Members, are not impotent in presenting their views. The original motion provides the forum for debate, but the amended motion calls for action after the debate. As the saying goes, "Action speaks louder than words". Herein lies the very important difference between the amended motion and the original motion, and I call upon all Members to lend us their support. Sir, I do not intend to discuss every single measure recommended by the Ministry, but merely to make out a case that there is a need for a review of the proposed measures. I consider that the measures have been introduced too hastily. Why do I say this? Firstly, the MRT is only partially completed. Secondly, there is a lack of MRT/bus integration. Thirdly, access to the MRT stations, ie, having a convenient means to reach the stations is still a problem. Fourthly, there is still room for improvement in the bus service to make it more attractive to the motorist. In summary, while deterrent measures are being implemented, are alternatives being offered to the motorists? Sir, in the planning of an efficient public transport system, the feelings of the people must be considered. A realistic balance must be struck between consumer expectation vis-a-vis statistical criteria of traffic congestion. In our consideration of land transportation, we should not be obsessed by motor vehicle population only. We should not be obsessed by vehicular speed only. After all, what is the definition of a "traffic jam" or "congested roads"? What is "acceptable restraining measures"? What is reasonable? What is unreasonable? These are all very subjective. Let me illustrate with two examples. One, after the opening of a transport conference two years ago, an official from a foreign country came to congratulate me, ie, Singapore, for our wonderful traffic management. He was complimenting us on our ALS, PARF and our car ownership disincentives. I asked him if he was going to recommend this to his own government. He looked at me aghast and answered, "Of course not". I was astounded. I asked him, "Why?" His answer, "Firstly, it will be politically unacceptable and, secondly, I [ie, he himself] will not be able to afford a car." At a diplomatic function one night, I met an expatriate. He had just come back from Hong Kong. Again, he was singing praises for how good our roads were, and how pleasant it was to work in the CBD in Singapore with the ALS. Again I asked him if he would recommend our system to his home government. He answer was "No". So I asked him why he was recommending it for Singaporeans. He was very honest in his answer. Being an expatriate in Singapore, his company paid for all his transport bills. If he was back home, he would have to pay from his own pocket - like us Singaporeans. Sir, measures proposed for implementation must be very carefully thought through. The advantages to the Singaporean motorist must be convincing. There must be acceptable alternative travel modes. Disincentives, by its nature, will be painful, but still in the final analysis, affordable. The measures proposed by the Ministry have deep social and economic implications, as may have been mentioned by many of my colleagues. Some of the questions I would like to raise are: (1) What are the implications for residents living in the restricted zone? (2) What will be its effect on retailers in the restricted zone, with the implementation of the evening ALS? (3) What about those studying in the restricted zone? (4) What about family arrangements with the evening ALS? What is the social implication of this? (5) What will be the inflationary effect of all these measures? (6) Will the restricted zone be under populated when Singaporeans decide no longer to live in it? How does this fit into the Master Plan regarding maximum utilization of land? (7) The Ministry in its haste to implement these measures have forgotten that the whole eastern sector of Singapore has no MRT service today; likewise, other parts of Singapore. Do these people have any alternative? Is this fair to them? Sir, I will now deal with the harshness of these measures. The measures are harsh in two ways: First, the net effect of all these is to increase the cost of motoring very substantially; and Secondly, it is very much more harsh on those who can least afford it, and may even affect those who do not own a vehicle, through inflation. Sir, the policy to shift the restraining measures from vehicle ownership to vehicle utilization is welcomed. Indeed, this was what I was advocating. But what is done now is to add tax upon tax. The cost of car ownership remains status quo, but disincentives for utilization are added. This is difficult to accept. As I have said before, this can even be counter-productive when a person asks himself, "Why am I paying so much to leave my car at home?" In particular, I wish to point out that the petrol tax is not a utilization tax. It is as good as an ownership tax for can anyone of us run our vehicle on anything else but petrol? It is a frustration tax. It merely irritates and frustrates the car owner as it is non-discriminating. It is a "blind tax" that cannot differentiate whether the petrol is being burnt up in Orchard Road or in Changi. Whether it is being burnt up on Sunday or a Public Holiday or during peak hours on a working day. It will hit hardest those who need to travel to make a living. Salesmen who call on clients and people providing home services. For those requiring home services, for example, TV repairs, electrical/plumbing repairs, the cost will go up. The inflationary aspect cannot be denied. Likewise, the 100% increase in parking fees in public housing estates. This is not utilization tax. This is as good as ownership tax. What is the alternative to the present HDB car owner? This also applies to the increase in parking charges in the restricted zone. As has been mentioned by one of my colleagues earlier, it is totally illogical that you encourage more people to enter the CBD by lowering the toll then frustrate them by increasing the parking charges. Sir, have the measures been equitably applied? A Business Times report on 17th May 1989 states. I quote: "latest anti-congestion measures affect junior executives most". Junior executive (definition: salary $2,500) will spend 2.1% of salary more per month on transportation. Middle executive (salary $4,000) will spend 0.5% more. Senior executive (salary $8,000) will spend 0.1% more. What is not mentioned is the poor motor cyclist. Motorcycle growth reported a minus growth of 3.2% in 1987 over 1986, and 0.9% growth for the period 1988 over 1987; less than 1% growth. Is this so alarming that we must now let the sledge hammer fall on motorcyclists? Based merely on the question of growth in numbers, there is no need to punish the motorcyclists entering the restricted zone. Sir, 70% of cars are in the 1001 to 1600 cc range. A 1600 cc car owner will pay a road tax of $1,440 per annum. 70% of motor cycles are in the 101 cc to 200 cc range. A 200 cc motorcycle owner will pay road tax of $30 per annum. However, his cost of entering the restricted zone will be $240 per annum. That of the car owner is $720 per annum. For the motorcyclist the cost of entering the restricted zone is eight times his road tax. For the motor car owner the cost of entering the restricted zone is half of his annual road tax. Is this equitable? Sir, I feel that we have let down the Scheme B buses. In the 1970s when the bus service was undergoing reorganization, they played a vital role. Now we seem to have forgotten their contribution. Once they were a vital part of our public transport system. Now the SBS and TIBS have improved their services, they are no longer treated as public service vehicles. Is this consistent policy, as asked by one of my colleagues earlier? First, taxis were penalized. Now Scheme B buses. SBS and TIBS had better be on the alert now. One day the MRT may be regarded as the only public transport system. Sir, I wish to reiterate that the proposed measure will have tremendous social and economic repercussions. They need further evaluation before implementation. I agree that electronic road pricing will be one of the most important measures for controlling road utilization in the future. It is my earnest hope that it will not take up to seven years to put the ERP in place. I believe that if we have the political will, this gap can be closed. The target should be 3-5 years. Last but not least, we must continually upgrade the public transport system that we now have. One of the most pressing questions as has been mentioned earlier is how do we make MRT travel more convenient? Better feeder services? Park-and-ride? The bus services must also be improved and we must press on with Bus/MRT integration. We must also keep our minds open to other forms of mass people-mover system. Will a light-rail-transport system be necessary in the future to complement the MRT? In conclusion, I urge all members to lend us their support. This amended motion will place the onus on the Ministry merely to have a re-look on its policy after listening to Members of this House. We are not asking for anything more. If the Minister after his re-look believes that all his policies are correct, so be it.

The Member for Fengshan has proposed, as an amendment, at end to add, ' ... but regrets that some of the measures are too hastily introduced and too harsh; and that this House urges the Ministry to review them.' The Question is, "That the words proposed to be added, be there added."

Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise to support the amendment standing in the name of the Member for Fengshan because the amendment calls for a review of some of the measures taken recently to curb car growth. I would not have supported him if he had amended the motion to the effect that the recent measures were all unreasonable. In fact, I would probably oppose such an amendment. But the Member is a reasonable person and therefore I agreed to support him. And as a request for a review is fair, I think Members of this House should consider his amendment carefully and give their full support. To the ordinary man in the street, the motion moved by Dr Hong Hai is not action-orientated. What Dr Arthur Beng's amendment seeks to achieve is to get things done, not just words, to express the people's unhappiness. It also reflects the general feelings of many Singaporeans, especially those from the HDB estates. They do understand the need to have less traffic congestion and are prepared to accept certain measures to achieve this end. But they feel that, contrary to what the Ministry feels, some of the measures taken are not relatively mild, but harsh. If you think that a 100% rise in season parking is mild, I wonder what is harsh. After the 1988 General Elections, the Singaporean has to pay more for his maid, more for his taxi fares, more for his children's tertiary education, more for his health bills, more for his road and diesel taxes, and now more for his petrol, his season parking, his hourly parking, and for some, a $3 surcharge if he wants to get to his home in the CBD between 4.30 pm and 7.00 pm, or to bring his child home in the evening from a school in the CBD area. Soon, he will have to pay more for his coffee, more for his hawker's food and drink, because the hawkers complained that they have to pay 100% more for their parking fees, both at home and at their place of work. Transport costs and services will naturally go up because your petrol prices have gone up, leading eventually to inflation and also more Singaporeans going across the Causeway and its consequent loss of revenue. In the coffee shop, the talk is that most of us in this House, Ministers, Members of Parliament and the richer Singaporeans who live in private homes, do not have to pay for the season parking fees because we have our own private lots and therefore we do not feel the pinch so much, and we do not care so much. This perception that the measures hit out at them must be dispelled. We have to explain more and, in this context, I agree with the Member for Fengshan that we should have more discussions with the ground. For example, we talk now that the car parks in the HDB were heavily subsidized and must be recovered. It is a little too late now because when we now tell them that the car parking lots are subsidized, they turn around and say, "Look, this is a building requirement and therefore when we pay for our flats, you have probably taken into account all this cost." This is something which they think and it is important that I think the Minister for National Development has to explain more. It is not pleasant but I think it is necessary that you all should know. HDB dwellers may not be aware that the private home owners pay for their parking space when they pay for their property. It is an upfront payment. It is part of the deal. It is not free. But the point is that they feel that we are just searching for answers to justify what we want to do. Then I heard the Member for Bukit Timah asking for the scrapping of the PARF and I got a cutting from the Business Times quoting the Minister for Trade and Industry in his speech sometime back when he was in Washington: "higher petrol tax and removal of PARF system could be the next step". Dr Wang Kai Yuen rose --

Dr Tan, will you allow Dr Wang to make a clarification? Dr Tan Cheng Bock resumed his seat.

Clarification, Mr Speaker, Sir.

All right.

In my speech I did not ask for the scrapping of the PARF. What I said was that to make the car ownership policy effective, one way to do it is to make the depreciation real and substantial. And I say the scrapping of PARF is very unpopular and will be very drastic. I did not ask for the scrapping of the PARF.

Well, it amounts somewhat to that. But I think we must be very careful. In fact, BG Lee Hsien Loong's statement has actually destabilized the motor car industry. It is serious. It has created uncertainty and worry among car owners, car dealers and even financial houses. Why is this so? Because removal of the PARF would immediately reduce the value of your car to zero. Here, I must declare that all my cars have got no PARF value. Can't afford to buy new cars with all the measures introduced by the Ministry of Communications. On a more serious note, if out of your 250,000 cars, about 150,000 are private cars with PARF value of, say, about average $10,000. There will be written off $1.5 billion worth of assets. I was told that the financial institutions after hearing BG Lee's speech in the US, have also started to recall some of the loans from some of these car dealers. So you must be careful. Your words are very powerful. I think the PARF is a good system. You scrap one car to buy a new car. You can fine-tune it, but don't scrap it. I remember our Prime Minister once lamented at the lack of activity and life in the city. How are we going to bring back life to the city when the Ministry of Communications and Information is unhappy that Singaporeans are getting into the city between 4.00 and 7.00 pm to shop, to eat, to relax? You must understand our climate. Singapore's climate is very, very hot, and the best period is around after 5.00 to 7.00 pm. I think you should not take this period away from us with your evening ALS. You spend millions of dollars to upgrade your shopping centres, your recreational facilities, to have a nice Marina Bay, and yet you impose this ALS system. Now, I wonder if you want to take a walk along Marina Bay you have to pay $3, no one is going to do that. I think you please review that too. Don't take life away from the city with your evening ALS. Mr Speaker, I urge the Members of this House to support the amended motion because it is, as I said, not unreasonable. Most of the speakers, I am sure, will agree with what I have said and will also probably be emphasizing and talking in more detail the points I have just put across. With their support, I am sure that the Minister for Communications and Information I should think he is a more reasonable person now will come to accept that some of the measures introduced should indeed be reviewed.

It is 4.30 pm. Debate to be resumed what day, Dr Hong Hai?

Tomorrow, Sir.

Mr Speaker, Sir, before I move the adjournment, may I remind Members that when they address Members of the Frontbench, referring to the Ministers, will they please follow the Standing Orders and refer to them by their appointment and their designation; and that when they use the pronoun "you" in their speech, they are actually referring to the Speaker, to the Chair, and not to the Minister concerned.

Resolved, "That Parliament do now adjourn." [Mr Wong Kan Seng]. Adjourned accordingly at Half-past Four o'clock pm.

asked the Minister for Law what expenditure has been incurred by the government in the engagement of Queen's Counsels for the government in appeals to the Privy Council over the years 1984 to 1988 showing separately, in each instance, the nature of the appeal and the amount paid.

QC'S ENGAGED IN APPEALS TO PRIVY COUNCIL 1984 - 1988 Costs S/ File Date of Amount Awarded Nature of No No Subject Payment Paid to AG Offence -- ---- ------- ------- ------ ------- ------- 1 2/82 Lim Kok Yew 31.1.84 $1,304.35 - Accomplice v PP of person using arm 2 6/82 Tjoea Chwee 25.7.84 $1,428.83 - Murder Tee v PP 3 3/83 Leo Hai Hock 25.7.84 $1,193.44 - Trafficking v PP of drug 4 1/83 Donald Chan 5.1.85 $1,182.42 - Murder Hock Chye v PP 5 5/82 Mariappan ) Murder A/L ) Kandasamy ) ) 3/82 Bong Kim ) 11.1.85 $3,951.88 Trafficking Loy and Anor) in drug ) 1/82 Murugaya ) Trafficking Rajendran ) in drug ) 3/80 Kalidass s/o) Murder S Narayana- ) samy v PP ) 6 1/84 Tan Ah Leng 12.6.85 $1,727.89 Trafficking v PP in drug 7 1/85 Ramu 19.2.86 $1,940.35 Murder Annadavascan & Anor v PP 8 5/85 Wong Hong Toy 6.6.86 $7,473.46 $4,784.9 Fraudulent & J B delivery Jeyaretnam of property v PP in cheques to prevent distribution and false declaration 9 3/85 Wong Foot 7.7.86 $1,998.53 Murder Ling v PP Costs S/ File Date of Amount Awarded Nature of No No Subject Payment Paid to AG Offence -- ---- ------- ------- ------ ------- ------- 10 2/85 Tay Cheng 5.11.86 $1,970.87 Murder Hoe v PP 11 3/87 J B Jeyaret- 19.1.88 $9,431.30 $4,216.00 Same as nam v PP No 8 12 3/86 Sim Min Teck 19.1.88 $2,633.40 Murder v PP 13 1/86 Ong Her Hock 22.1.88 $2,666.84 Murder v PP 14 2/86 Seet Thiam 16.3.88 $2,551.64 Murder Heng v PP 15 4/86 Tan Mui Choo 29.4.88 $5,580.13 Murder & Anor v PP 16 4/85 Sng Kian 29.4.88 $2,628.87 Murder Huat v PP 17 1/87 Sek Kim Wah 14.7.88 $2,868.96 Murder v PP

asked the Minister for Finance how much was received by the government for the transfer of its shareholding in the petrochemical plant to Shell.

The total sum received by the Government from Shell was S$569.5 million, representing proceeds from the sale of its shares in three companies within the petrochemical complex, namely, the Petrochemical Corporation of Singapore (Pte) Ltd, The Polyolefin Company (Singapore) Pte Ltd and Ethylene Glycols (Singapore) Pte Ltd. Government will continue to hold a 20% shareholding in the Petrochemical Corporation of Singapore. It should be noted that the money received from Shell is a provisional payment and the shares are still held in trust by Government, pending final completion of technical details in the transaction.

asked the Acting Minister for Health whether he is aware that the present accouchement charges for the third, fourth, fifth and subsequent child in government hospitals are in conflict with the present policy of government to promote more childbirths in Singapore and whether he will reduce such hospital charges.

The Government's population policy encourages parents to have three children, and for those who can afford it, to have more. This is because having children and bringing them up is very expensive. The accouchement fees for the first, second and third child are heavily subsidised. However, the accouchement fees for the fourth and higher order births are not subsidised, and are therefore higher. This is consistent with the Government's current population policy. My Ministry therefore does not intend to reduce such accouchement fees in the future. table - EXAMPLES OF MANDATORY MINIMUM CANING PROVISIONS FOUND IN OUR STATUTES (Cols. 227 - 230)