Hansard, 2003-06-30

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: FromTo Name(2003)(2003) Prof S Jayakumar29 Apr30 Apr 3 May12 May 15 Jun24 Jun Mr Charles Chong1 May4 May 23 Jun25 Jun Mr Cedric Foo1 May5 May 14 Jun29 Jun Mr Chan Soo Sen4 May7 May 11 Jun18 Jun Mr David T E Lim6 May8 May Dr Lee Boon Yang7 May8 May Assoc Prof Ho Peng Kee14 May19 May Dr Balaji Sadasivan18 May31 May 9 Jun12 Jun 27 Jun29 Jun BG George Yong-Boon Yeo19 May22 May 31 May4 Jun 10 Jun14 Jun 18 Jun29 Jun Mr Mah Bow Tan22 May26 May 12 Jun17 Jun Dr Ong Seh Hong26 May2 Jun Mr Yatiman Yusof27 May29 May 14 Jun15 Jun Mdm Halimah Yacob30 May22 Jun Mr Chew Heng Ching31 May4 Jun 12 Jun16 Jun Dr Tony Tan Keng Yam1 Jun14 Jun Mr Lee Kuan Yew2 Jun6 Jun Mr Ahmad Md Magad2 Jun6 Jun 19 Jun27 Jun Miss Penny Low6 Jun14 Jun Mr Matthias Yao7 Jun15 Jun Mr Tharman Shanmugaratnam7 Jun12 Jun Assoc Prof Koo Tsai Kee8 Jun13 Jun 19 Jun- Mr Abdullah Tarmugi8 Jun10 Jun Dr Ng Eng Hen9 Jun14 Jun 16 Jun21 Jun Mr Heng Chee How9 Jun11 Jun 13 Jun- Mr Lee Hsien Loong9 Jun14 Jun 2 Jul4 Jul Mr Lim Swee Say9 Jun15 Jun FromTo Name(2003)(2003) Mr R Ravindran9 Jun17 Jun Ms Braema Mathiaparanam9 Jun20 Jun Dr Yaacob Ibrahim10 Jun28 Jun Mr S Iswaran10 Jun22 Jun Mr Hawazi Daipi11 Jun18 Jun Mr Chay Wai Chuen11 Jun25 Jun 30 Jun1 Jul Mr Ong Kian Min11 Jun17 Jun 24 Jun27 Jun Dr Warren Lee12 Jun17 Jun 11 Jul13 Jul Mr K Shanmugam12 Jun28 Jun 30 Jun4 Jul Mdm Ho Geok Choo12 Jun13 Jun Mr Sin Boon Ann13 Jun20 Jun Mr Mohamad Maidin B P M13 Jun26 Jun Mr Leong Horn Kee13 Jun18 Jun Mr Lee Yock Suan14 Jun27 Jun Assoc Prof Low Seow Chay14 Jun17 Jun Mr Raymond Lim15 Jun20 Jun 23 Jun28 Jun 2 Jul3 Jul Mr Gan Kim Yong15 Jun21 Jun 4 Jul11 Jul Dr Ong Chit Chung16 Jun20 Jun 24 Jun26 Jun Dr Wang Kai Yuen16 Jun17 Jun Ms Olivia Lum Ooi Lin16 Jun- Dr Mohd Maliki Osman17 Jun23 Jun Dr Vivian Balakrishnan18 Jun23 Jun Mr Zainul Abidin Rasheed18 Jun- 28 Jun11 Jul Mrs Cynthia Phua21 Jun28 Jun Assoc Prof Ngiam Tee Liang23 Jun10 Jul Mr Ahmad Khalis bin A Ghani23 Jun26 Jun Mr Arthur Fong24 Jun28 Jun 30 Jun- Mrs Lim Hwee Hua25 Jun5 Jul Mrs Yu-Foo Yee Shoon25 Jun5 Jul Dr Teo Ho Pin25 Jun27 Jun Dr Lily Neo27 Jun29 Jun Mr Ng Ser Miang28 Jun15 Jul Ms Indranee Rajah30 Jun- Mr Davinder Singh30 Jun- FromTo Name(2003)(2003) Mr Yeo Guat Kwang30 Jun3 Jul Mr Loh Meng See30 Jun- Mr Wee Siew Kim30 Jun- Dr Tan Cheng Bock4 Jul15 Jul Mr Wong Kan Seng5 Jul17 Jul ABDULLAH TARMUGI Speaker Parliament of Singapore

The following Bills were assented to by the President of the Republic of Singapore on the dates stated: 26 April 2003 (i) The Infectious Diseases (Amendment No. 2) Bill 5 May 2003 (i) The Companies (Amendment) Bill (ii) The Statutes (Miscellaneous Amendments) Bill (iii) The Land Titles (Amendment) Bill ABDULLAH TARMUGI Speaker Parliament of Singapore

asked the Acting Minister for Manpower, with the unemployment rate forecast to creep up and perhaps even surpass the levels experienced in the 1998 downturn, will his Ministry consider further interim measures to help the unemployed, at least for a period, subject to suitable means testing, until they are able to become financially independent again.

asked the Acting Minister for Manpower in view of the current unemployment situation and projected pessimistic employment forecast, whether he will introduce additional financial assistance schemes to help those who are unemployed and who face financial difficulties.

asked the Acting Minister for Manpower (a) whether he is aware that, despite the Utilities Save scheme introduced in the Budget, there is a substantial number of households who are unable to pay utility bills and have had their supplies disconnected; and (b) whether he will introduce measures or provide specific assistance schemes to help these households.

Mr Speaker, Sir, with your permission, I would like to take Question Nos. 1 to 3 together.

Yes.

Because the Questions have been asked from various agencies, this reply is with the inputs from the Ministry of Finance, Ministry of Community Development and Sports, Ministry of the Environment and Ministry of Trade and Industry. As the Member rightly pointed out, since 1998, as economic conditions worsened, the Government appreciated that more would face hardship. In response, several measures have been introduced to help lower income groups and unemployed workers cope with the difficult times. These measures involved not just temporary financial assistance, but also job matching and placement services, and specific schemes and programmes to facilitate re-entry into the workforce. On financial assistance, the Government works closely with Community Development Councils (CDCs) and voluntary welfare organisations (VWOs) to tailor the assistance to households in need. For instance, the unemployed who have a low household income can apply for interim financial assistance at their Community Development Councils. Short-term financial aid will be granted for six months, subject to a review every three months. In FY2002, 6,700 unemployed Singaporeans were helped by this scheme. 88% of them managed to get a job within three months and become financially independent. In addition, families who live in 1-, 2- or 3-room rental and purchased flats who have difficulty paying their rental, utilities or conservancy charges can obtain short-term relief to tide over temporary crises. They may apply for monthly subsidies for rent, utilities and service and conservancy charges, up to a maximum monthly cap of $90 for utilities and $35 for service and conservancy charges. For those lower income families that are unable to pay their utility bills - this is in reply to Mr Low Thia Khiang - PUB has already adopted the practice of thimbling their water supply instead of cutting it off completely since late 2002. This has enabled them to continue to have access to a minimum supply of water for basic needs. PUB will extend this practice until the economic situation improves. As for facilitating job placement, between December 2001 and last month, 152,000 visits for job assistance under MOM's Career Link and its Distributed Career Link Network were recorded; of these, 19,600 people were placed into jobs. Recently, we have seen an increase in take-up rate and this is encouraging. MOM also introduced a number of industry-targeted programmes to place and train or convert job seekers for jobs in growth or strategic sectors. More than 1,200 Singaporeans have benefited from such programmes so far. Further, training programmes are in place to ensure that workers' skill sets develop in tandem with the economy. About 80,000 workers have benefited from the Skills Redevelopment Programme. I share Members' concern on the impact of a further rise in overall unemployment rate, as pointed out by Dr Amy Khor. Hence, MOM is working towards introducing more place and train programmes in other sub-sectors which offer employment opportunities. We will support retooling and upskilling workers and later I will be introducing a Bill which will enable us to start the CET statutory board. These developments will enable MOM and its partners to be more effective in helping the unemployed find jobs. The various financial, training and employment assistance measures which I have just described provide a sound and holistic framework for helping unemployed and low-income Singaporeans in this downturn. We will have to calibrate the extent of assistance depending on economic circumstances, and feedback from MPs, VWOs, and officers on the ground. Unfortunately, our experience shows that despite the difficult conditions, there are jobs which companies still cannot find Singaporeans to fill. Hence, the Government will need to tighten the connection between financial assistance and efforts on the part of individuals to look for jobs, take up jobs that are available and undergo training. We will monitor closely how well the existing schemes are working and, wherever necessary, to streamline and improve the assistance framework to make it more effective. Ultimately, jobs and self-reliance are the best guarantee of financial independence, self-confidence and personal dignity. I urge Singaporeans who are out of work to be flexible and realistic in their search for jobs. They should not turn down job opportunities which may not be ideal, but which can financially tide them over this downturn.

Sir, I would like to ask the Minister specifically about the white collar workers. It has been reported that about half of the currently unemployed are white collar workers. Are there any specific measures in place or being planned to help this specific group of workers, especially they are reporting that they are encountering resistance from prospective employers due to cynicism about their over-qualification and possible change of job when the economy turns around?

Sir, saying that half of the workers unemployed are white collar workers does not quite lend equanimity to the situation. Let me give a clearer picture. Of all the unemployed residents - if we take the overall global number of those who are unemployed - the unemployment rate for degree holders is 3.8%, in other words, 96% of those with degrees are employed. For diploma holders, it is 3.5%; upper secondary, 3.4%. Nonetheless, we do agree with Dr Amy Khor that more needs to be done to help every sector of the unemployed and our programmes are crafted not so much at either blue or white collar workers but industry-specific, to look at areas where there is growth and to enable workers who have been unemployed or retrenched from one sector to convert to another sector.

Sir, I would like to ask the Minister how he would facilitate the employment of young graduates who are today finding themselves very disillusioned when they graduate from the university, especially when they are losing out to the diploma holders as well as the ITE graduates.

Sir, I think the Member has touched on the issue of job vacancies. Let me give some numbers again. As of March 2003, there were still about 12,000 job vacancies in the private sector. There are still about 31% or 4,000 jobs for professionals, managers, executives and technical vocations. Also, in the public sector, there are about 1,800 jobs available for professionals and associate professionals. It is not only a question of the grade of jobs but also the industry. Yes, there is disruptive unemployment, in other words, particular sectors have shrunk so that those who work in one sector cannot go back to that sector and they have to convert to another sector. We have created specific schemes targeted at this group. One particular scheme is called the Strategic Manpower Conversion Programme and it is aimed especially at professionals to help them change. For example, an executive who is retrenched from the electronics sector can switch to the healthcare sector. There are these schemes available. We also work with professional organisations, such as SHRI and SPEC, to help them help professionals to make this conversion.

I would like to ask the Minister whether he deems the current assistance schemes for the unemployed sufficient and able to help them.

Sir, the Member fully appreciates that the word "sufficient" is subjective. Let me give some objectivity to his question in terms of those who are in utility account arrears, which he has mentioned. Yes, for everyone who suffers hardship, we empathise, but we need to be mindful of the numbers. The percentage of households who have arrears on utilities is 1% of all accounts. Even in the 1-room and 2-room HDB flats, it is around 5%. The Energy Market Authority has set for itself particular targets to try to bring down the number of accounts in arrears to reduce the figure to pre-1999 level, which is 0.2% eventually. So that is the working target internally. As I have also mentioned, PUB, instead of disconnecting supply, has agreed that they will use thimbling so that their essential water requirements are still met. We will work hard and, as I said, we will calibrate the financial assistance schemes with our CDCs and VWOs to respond to those in need. But the number suggests that there is a declining trend of those who are in arrears.

Sir, while we are asking the workers to change their mindset to accept other jobs, has the Ministry any plan to also work at changing the mindset of some employers who are against employing older workers who would otherwise be more than qualified for the job?

Sir, we actively do this, but to really get the effect, my Ministry has decided that a holistic approach is better, which means that not only we work on the mindset of all those parties involved but we also introduce enabling schemes. One particular enabling scheme, as I have mentioned previously in this House, is the People-for-Jobs Traineeship Programme where Government will fund half of the worker's salary for about six months or $2,000, whichever is less. This will facilitate, if you like, the employer to accept the employee and for Government to show its support and for that six months for the employee to be tested in the new job. I am sure that those who have signed up for this scheme will prove their own worth in due time.

Sir, I would like to ask the Minister how successful has this People-for-Jobs Traineeship Programme been.

Sir, I do not have the exact number but, from my recall, about 4,000-odd people have been placed on this scheme since it was introduced. But I would have to check the number.

Sir, the Minister said that the Ministry would calibrate the assistance schemes. I would like to ask him whether or not the Government has calibrated the latest employment situation and the financial assistance schemes and whether he is satisfied that the current financial assistance schemes - despite the number that he has mentioned about the arrears position in utilities - such as the Rents and Utilities Assistance Scheme as well as other interim financial assistance schemes, are actually helpful and sufficient to take care of the unemployed.

Before I answer Mr Low Thia Khiang, my other more learned colleague has told me that actually 10,000 people took up the People-for-Jobs Traineeship Programme, of which 4,000 stayed on. I will again have to check on the numbers. Is it sufficient? It is a relative word. I would rather give the Member numbers so that we know where we are now and in the future. As I said, the number of accounts in utility arrears is 1%. The average amount of arrears for each account is about $1,000 and the trend is down. Are we satisfied? Can anyone be satisfied? We will work with our CDCs and VWOs and we will monitor the situation and calibrate the assistance in tandem with the hardship felt on the ground and in tandem with the economic conditions.

asked the Acting Minister for Manpower in view of National Wage Council's recommendation for wage restructuring and the global competition that our companies are faced with, (a) will his Ministry facilitate the review of wages in both the local and global industries and provide a database of such reviews for companies to make informed decisions timely; and (b) how can his Ministry be better poised to partner industry players to carry out job profiling exercises which are essential in supporting wage restructuring and minimising tensions between employers and unions during restructuring exercises.

Mr Speaker, Sir, as the Member rightly pointed out, in the face of stiff global competition, the NWC has, in its wage guidelines for July 2003 and June 2004, urged companies and unions to speed up wage restructuring to enhance wage flexibility and competitiveness. It has also recommended that a Tripartite Taskforce be set up to drive this process of wage restructuring. The Government has accepted these recommendations and a Tripartite Taskforce has been set up to help companies in their wage reform. This Taskforce is chaired by my Permanent Secretary and will also include representatives from the unions and employers. I thank the Member for her inputs and agree that more information regarding wage reviews should be provided periodically to industries. We have recognised that this is a deficiency and we will work towards that. In other words, we will provide market information more readily to companies to see what the hiring salaries are. We will take her inputs into account. The Taskforce will provide companies with relevant information and analysis on wage cost, formulate flexible and competitive wage models, and highlight the experiences of companies in their wage reform. The Taskforce will also recommend measures and options that companies and unions can adopt in restructuring their wage system. Together with the tripartite partners, my Ministry will work closely with industries, companies, unions and professional societies to implement changes to their wage systems and look into skills upgrading and industry transformation that would complement wage reform. The successful implementation of wage reform and the upgrading of our workers' capabilities will help enhance the competitiveness and employability of our workforce. The Taskforce is expected to release its final report within six months.

asked the Acting Minister for Manpower what steps his Ministry has in place to (i) ensure that employers use retrenchments as a last resort to save costs and (ii) encourage employers to use other strategies such as job-sharing, part-time work or cutting back on frills such as company cars as cost-saving measures.

Sir, MOM has been providing retrenchment advisory services to help companies explore feasible alternatives to retrenchment, as Ms Braema Mathi has suggested. We have asked them to carry out retrenchment only as a last resort. Following the recommendations of the Tripartite Panel on Retrenchments in June 1998, a special Retrenchment Advisory Unit under the Labour Relations Department of the Ministry was set up. This Unit monitors retrenchment trend, advises companies on how retrenchments can be carried out smoothly and fairly to the extent possible, provides conciliatory assistance to resolve disputes, disseminates information relating to retrenchment through brochures and leaflets. The Unit also manages a Retrenchment Assistance Hotline to enable employers facing excess manpower to seek timely advice and assistance on retrenchment issues. Companies are urged to retrench workers as a last resort and are advised to consider the following alternatives if they have excess manpower. One, take the opportunity to train and upgrade their workers' skills under the Skills Redevelopment Programme (SRP), which is exactly what we did in terms of our assistance schemes during the SARS crisis for tourism and hospitality-related sectors. The Government issued a $57 million budget for training and for some sectors, as you might have read, the uptake was significant and did allay further retrenchments. Two, look for alternative areas of work within the company to deploy the surplus workers, including implementing job-sharing and part-time work, as well as other cost-cutting measures. Three, implement shorter work week or temporary lay-offs. Four, if it has a flexible wage system in place, use it to adjust its wage cost. To help promote the adoption of the above-mentioned alternatives to retrenchment, the Ministry proactively visited companies with excess manpower. In other words, we do not wait for them to call us. We monitor the trends and then we go down to the ground and try to manage it. Between March and October 2002, MOM visited 110 companies ranging from SMEs to large firms employing over 500 staff. With the implementation of the various alternatives to retrenchments, many jobs have been saved as companies could avoid retrenchments and where retrenchment is unavoidable, the number of workers affected could be minimised.

asked the Acting Minister for Manpower will the Government consider liberalising the use of Central Provident Fund (CPF) monies for purposes of (i) supporting overseas education of children who are not able to gain admission into local universities so long as any housing loan owing has been paid up by the CPF account holder; and (ii) subsidising the start-up of a small business (up to a comfortable limit as determined by CPF) as part of the Government's encouragement for self-employment by the unemployed.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the primary objective of the CPF is to help members save for their retirement, healthcare and housing needs. While often stated in these simple terms and often repeated, we should be reminded again that our CPF system remains a cornerstone on which we build our social and indeed economic well-being. We should resist strenuously attempts to adulterate the original aims and intents of the CPF system. Yes, from time to time, we may have to recalibrate the amount we put aside to meet these basic needs because there is a trade-off from too high a statutory burden for wages. We risk becoming less competitive and thereby restrict employment creation, we create less jobs. In other words, we should make sure that the majority of the population has enough to cover these basic needs and we should neither under or over-provide. The CPF Education Scheme was introduced in 1989 as a special concession to help lower-income families support themselves or their children through full-time local tertiary education. To allow CPF savings for overseas tertiary education would be a further deviation from the aims of the CPF scheme. It would also introduce opportunities for over-consumption. For example, an overseas engineering course could cost as much as $58,000 a year as compared to $5,650 at the NUS for the academic year 2003/2004. Further, if we did allow it, this availability of the use of CPF savings would put unwelcome pressure on parents to fund an ever-increasing aspiration of children to pursue a tertiary education. I am not for it. I would rather we hold the line than ask parents to do it. There are other avenues of scholarships and loan schemes available to good students who would benefit from an university education, anywhere. It is for this same reason of remaining pure to the original and focused aims of the CPF scheme that I am against allowing the early withdrawal of CPF savings for business start-ups. There is no certainty that all start-ups will thrive and indeed data proves the contrary, that the majority of start-ups fizzles out. We run the risk of many members losing their retirement savings for a few to make good. For those intending to start their own businesses, they could look to the Government or private incentives and financing schemes for assistance. The Micro Loan Programme, for example, administered by SPRING Singapore and offered through participating financial institutions, is a fixed interest rate financing programme designed to help the very small local enterprises gain better access to financing. Other assistance for start-ups include the Franchise 21 Assistance Programme, Local Enterprise Financing Scheme (LEFS) and New Business Creation Incentive.

Sir, I would like to check with the Minister whether he could verify and clarify that investment in overseas education of children can be reclassified as a form of investment, just as we have CPF-approved investment schemes. Similarly, whether small businesses could also be classified as such under the Government-approved small business scheme. And if they can be classified, then why is it that a portion, under qualified conditions of CPF, could not be utilised as a form of subsidy for such investments?

Sir, I agree wholeheartedly that education is an investment. The question is whether we should allow CPF to be used for that investment. And as I have said, we should stay sharply focused on the original intent of the CPF scheme, which is, retirement, housing and healthcare. If we have provided enough and it is a big "if", I would tell Members that currently, only 42% of CPF members meet the $40,000 Minimum Sum. And this $40,000 Minimum Sum is not calculated from the air, but in adequacy terms, if we withdraw annuities, in other words, monthly payments based on the principal sum, it only yields about $238 a month. It is not a large sum. It is enough to keep body and soul together. 42% of CPF members reach this amount. Sir, in the sense of under-provision, I would say that the urge for the CPF system is to really provide adequacy and not to increase the avenues for consumption. As to the specifics of the small businesses, I would have to look into the specifics and answer the question from the Member separately.

I would like to seek a clarification with the Minister. He said that the objective of the CPF is for retirement, healthcare and housing. Would the CPF Board consider expanding its objective to include loans from the CPF Board for rainy days to CPF members, especially when they are unemployed?

Sir, I mentioned that there is a trade-off in terms of the statutory burden. In other words, over-consumption, over-saving or over-investment from the CPF has to be measured against the trade-off of wage rigidities and employment creation. If we impose too high a statutory burden on wages, we are going to be less competitive. So the first premise we have to understand is that, while we want to put aside for our retirement, healthcare and housing needs, there is a trade-off in terms of what we get in terms of employment creation. The first objective is to arrive at whether we have provided enough for these three essential aspects. And as I have said, the figures tell us that we have not quite provided enough. Having said that we have not quite provided enough, it really makes no sense to further expand the opportunities in which the CPF could be consumed because the first task is to make sure that we have provided enough for the majority. If we do not, there will be serious implications downstream in the long-term. We would have conscribed our economic opportunities, we would have forced ourselves into a tighter fiscal position and we would have engendered and encumbered future generations with our problems, something which we would not want to do.

Sir, if the CPF member has enough funds in his CPF account and, in times of need, why can he not borrow from his account which he has to return back when he is gainfully employed? This is not over-consumption. Is it not better that he borrows from his CPF account at a marginal interest than to borrow from some loansharks or maybe from the banks at very high interest rates which he will have to return? It is not an over-consumption issue.

I agree with Mr Chia in principle that if, and it is a big "if", a particular member has accrued enough Minimum Sum, we could consider that he could dip into that pool. But it is a big "if" for a very small number that exists currently. And in individual cases, we will look at it, but as a general principle, as I have said, only 42% of CPF members meet our Minimum Sum which, I will tell Members, is an under-provision, even as it stands. Because the way it is structured currently, we have not asked members to fulfill a Medisave minimum sum before the amount goes into their Ordinary and Special accounts. So while we say it is provision for medical care, that is not even taken care of. So there are these real limitations that we need to solve before opening up the CPF scheme and allowing members to further diminish that amount.

I would like to seek a clarification. The Minister talked about CPF for retirement, housing and medical needs. But today, we are also using it for purchasing of shares, unit trusts and bonds. But because of the lack of adequacy that the Minister talked about, is the Minister signalling a shift in the Government's policy on the use of CPF because - it is a very important principle along the lines of discussion that is going on - to me, education is as much less a risky investment compared to shares, bonds and unit trusts.

The Ministry will take Mr Inderjit Singh's comments about investable amounts into stocks, shares and loans when we review the policy.

asked the Minister for National Development, in view of the recent problems experienced by the Housing and Development Board (HDB) with its construction and upgrading projects and in order to avoid the future occurrence of such problems, what steps have been taken or are being taken in relation to (i) the HDB's internal systems and processes to evaluate tenders and manage main and sub-contractors, (ii) its communication with affected lessees; and (iii) the tendering procedures and registration of contractors for HDB and other public sector projects administered by the Building and Construction Authority.

asked the Minister for National Development whether the recent failures of the HDB's main contractors and sub-contractors are due to a systemic problem on how HDB awards and manages its contracts in relation to (i) its tender system and (ii) its timing of payments to these contractors for services rendered that may have burdened the cash flow of these contractors.

asked the Minister for National Development (a) why about 560 HDB flats at Punggol Field were not completed on time and abandoned by the contractor; and (b) whether compensations were paid or will be paid by the HDB to purchasers of those flats.

Mr Speaker, Sir, may I have your permission to take Question Nos. 7, 8 and 9 together?

Yes.

Sir, the construction industry is currently going through some very tough times. The demand is weak and competition in the industry has become more intense. As a result, some contractors are facing financial difficulties and have been unable to fulfill their contractual obligations. This has disrupted some public sector construction projects. Members have asked whether these problems are due to HDB's tender system. Let me first explain the HDB's process for selecting contractors. There are three steps in the procurement process: First, contractors are pre-qualified based on their financial resources, their professional and technical qualifications and track record, using the Building and Construction Authority (BCA)'s Contractors Registry as a guide. HDB will specify the category of contractors who are eligible to participate in the tender based on the estimated project value. Second, after the close of the tender exercise, HDB will verify that the tender proposals fully comply with the tender requirements. The tender proposals are then evaluated based on their price competitiveness, their conformance to the required specifications, the tenderer's ability to undertake the project, his financial solvency and his performance in other public sector projects. The third and last stage of the process is for the HDB to conduct due diligence on the tenderers and their tender prices. All things being equal, HDB will award it to the lowest tenderer who can do the job. If HDB finds that the lowest tender price is significantly below the other tender bids as well as its own estimates, it will interview the tenderer and ask him to re-examine his bid. If he decides to withdraw from the tender, HDB will recall the tender or award it to the next lowest bidder. Sir, the objective of the tender system is to award the contract to the company that offers the best combination of price, quality and reliability; in other words, best value for money. It has to do so in a way that is objective and fair, to ensure that there is transparency and accountability in the use of public funds. On the whole, the system is sound and working well, as shown by the large number of contracts which have been awarded and successfully completed. While HDB has put in place a rigorous selection process, there is no guarantee that selected firms will not run into difficulties later, especially during this economic downturn. HDB will monitor the contractors' performance closely during construction. If any contractor is in trouble, HDB will take immediate action to minimise the impact on residents. For upgrading projects, HDB will activate a contingency contractor to complete the essential works. It will also keep residents informed through circulars and house-to-house visits. For construction projects of new flats, HDB will keep buyers informed early if there are changes in the estimated completion date. Nevertheless, in view of recent concerns, MND and BCA are presently seeking views from industry representatives and key Government agencies, to see whether and if so, how the system can be further improved. Let me now address the specific questions raised by Members. Dr Amy Khor asked about the management of main and sub-contractors. In HDB's projects, the main contractor will choose and manage his own sub-contractors, but they must be registered either with BCA or the Singapore Contractors' Association Limited (SCAL). Miss Penny Low asked about HDB's timing of payments to its contractors. HDB is prompt in its progress payments and usually pays its contractors within two to three weeks after they have submitted their claims and their claims are validated. If the Member has any specific information to the contrary, she can let me know. Mr Chiam raised a question on the delay of flats at Punggol Field. HDB is legally required to complete new HDB flats and deliver them to flat buyers by the Delivery Possession Date (DPD), which is provided in the Agreement for Lease. Besides the DPD, HDB also informs flat buyers of an Estimated Completion Date (ECD), which it reviews and updates as construction progresses. In the case of the flats at Punggol Field, the novated contractor ran into financial difficulties and stopped work in January 2003. After several unsuccessful attempts to resume work, HDB terminated and re-tendered the contract. A new contractor was engaged, and the blocks are now expected to be completed between January 2004 and September 2004, instead of August 2003 to October 2003, which was the original estimate. HDB notified all affected buyers of these changes in February 2003, so that they could adjust their housing plans. Those who require urgent alternative accommodation can approach HDB for assistance. The flats will all be completed before their respective DPDs, which range from August 2004 to October 2004. Thus, the issue of compensation to flat buyers does not arise.

Sir, I would like to ask the Minister on the registration of contractors by the BCA. How is financial standing and solvency of a firm evaluated? I would also like to ask the Minister if it is indeed the case, as reported, in the press that the current registration system, which is fundamentally sound and rational, is subject to abuses and, inadvertently, encourages some unhealthy practices, such as the contractors who are financially unsound shifting their monies around just for registration as well as bidding for jobs at very low or tiao lao bids. Again, this is just to ensure that they can qualify for registration.

Sir, the BCA's Contractors' Registration Scheme (CRS) was aimed at making sure that there is a certain minimum qualification before contractors are allowed to tender for public sector jobs. I believe the CRS is also being used as a basis for contractors to tender for private sector jobs but, essentially, it is for the public sector to find a way to prequalify contractors. Contractors are graded based on several factors - financial strength is only one of them. Other criteria include track record, whether they have been debarred in the past, etc. So, financial strength is only one of the factors but it is a very important factor. Because, as the Member would probably realise, the construction industry is very much driven by cash flow. And if contractors do not have the requisite financial strength, they would find themselves in trouble. That is the reason why the BCA requires a certain minimum financial strength before they are put on the registry. And then within the registry, there are different grades - A1 to C3. A1 and A2 would be the highest grades, followed by B1, B2, etc. A question arises: what happens if a company qualifies for the registry and thereafter shifts its funds around? There are certain mechanisms in place, eg, accounts have to be audited at certain regular intervals. Obviously, within those regular intervals, something can still take place but the BCA does try to ensure that those intervals are reasonable for the contractors as well as reasonable for the BCA to check. Having said all that, of course, it does not guarantee that the system is foolproof. It is a fact that there have been some abuses of the system but, like all systems, if abuses are detected, then severe penalties will result. What about the so-called tiao lao bids or suicide bids? I must say it is not a good practice in the industry to have such bids. I am equally concerned about such bids which are unrealistically low. But having said that, I think we must realise that the contractors are professionals. They are going in for a bid with the intention of getting that contract. They do not go putting in a bid which they would have to withdraw subsequently. So, it can be for several reasons. One is that they are trying to buy market share, or they could be trying to establish a track record, or they could be going in because they want cash flow, or they may have made a genuine mistake. So, for these reasons, HDB takes the view that it does not benefit anybody to award a tender to a bid which, in its opinion, is too low. That is the reason why if a bid comes in which is below the others or which is way below HDB's own estimates, it will, as I explained earlier, call up that tenderer and conduct an interview to see whether the bid that has been put in is a genuine bid. In some cases, the tenderers, after going through the specifications, decide to withdraw their bids. If the tenderer had proceeded with the bid, the chances are that he will not be able to complete that job. And who would benefit from such a situation? HDB would not benefit. The contractor would not benefit and, certainly, the residents would not benefit. I think it is in nobody's interest to award a tender to such a bid. Because of this, the present procurement process does allow for the tender evaluation committee not to award the tender to such a bid. As I said earlier, the objective of the tender system is to get the best value for money on the basis of quality, reliability and price. For quality and reliability, we have to base on the track record. We have to base on the past. But price is what is on the table. If the price is not realistic then, obviously, that tender should not be awarded. And the record shows that there have been several cases where the lowest tenders have not been awarded. In the case of Government agencies, as much as 25% of tenders are not given to the lowest tenderer. In the case of HDB, about 10% of contracts are not awarded to the lowest tenderer.

Sir, I would like to ask a question regarding the case of Marine Terrace MUP Batch 14, because I think that the lessons that we have learnt from this particular experience are relevant to the matters under discussion. Firstly, I would like to ask the Minister whether the Ministry and HDB have identified the reasons why the main contractor for Marine Terrace MUP Batch 14 suddenly abandoned the project. I believe this contractor took over from the previous contractor. In fact, there were two other contractors earlier on, who bid for this project well below the HDB's estimates. Secondly, why was the HDB project management unable to anticipate the problems which the project faced? And what measure will the HDB take to ensure that the project will resume quickly without undue delay, and also help to minimise inconvenience to residents? Will the Minister give an assurance that the project will be completed without any more delays? Finally, the question of payments to sub-contractors. Many sub-contractors have complained that they have not been paid by the main contractors, although they have completed the projects. Could some arrangements be made by HDB, or the Government for that matter, for payments to be made directly to the sub-contractors when the projects are done and completed satisfactorily?

Mr Speaker, Sir, Mr Othman asked about the Marine Terrace upgrading project. First of all, the tender was awarded in 2001 to a company known as Seatown Construction. The performance record of Seatown Construction was good and acceptable. It was a G8 contractor, meaning that it was a contractor which was in the highest category of the BCA's CRS. So, no question about its financial strength or its track record at that time. It was not debarred and there were no adverse reports on the contractor. However, Seatown Construction went into financial difficulties and the project was novated to Hong Lai Huat Construction in August 2002. Hong Lai Huat Construction was an A1 contractor. The CRS had been changed, and A1 is equivalent to G8. Again, it was the top of the range. Again, it had a good performance record. It was not debarred. There were no adverse reports. So, by all accounts, it was a good contractor. Hong Lai Huat went into difficulties and the project was novated to Sum Keong Construction on 18th March 2003. Sum Keong Construction is an A2 contractor - not the top but the next level down. A2 means that it can tender for jobs between $30 million and $65 million. So it was more than qualified to do the Marine Terrace project - good track record, no debarment status, etc. Up till the 2nd June, the progress of works of Sum Keong was ahead of schedule. It was not just on schedule, but it was ahead of schedule. I think it was doing something like 55% of the project, which was more than what was on the time-line. On 2nd June, HDB's site management team found that the contractor had suddenly stopped all works inside the flats. And on 3rd June, the contractor had stopped all works outside the flats very suddenly. There was no indication by the contractor that such a thing was going to happen. I spoke to some of the grassroots leaders who indicated the same thing to me because they obviously were on the ground and they could sense when work was being slowed down or delayed. From all accounts, this was a very sudden stoppage. Why? I can only go by what the contractor told the newspapers. Apparently, the contractor said that he had run into major financial difficulties and he had no choice but to stop work. So, the contractor had to face the consequences of the stop-work. And the residents on the ground had to face more disruptions and inconveniences. HDB on the same day, 3rd June, took the necessary measures to try to minimise these disruptions. A circular was sent to the residents on the same day, 3rd June, to inform them that there had been a stoppage of work by the contractor, and also to inform them about what other measures would be taken by HDB to recover, including, for example, the appointment of contingency contractor to quickly take over the emergency works and to complete them. It also appointed the same contractor to make sure that housekeeping and the conservancy works in the area were properly carried out - mosquito control, rodent control, security in the area, and so on. This was done virtually straightaway. The very next day when works were stopped, all these were put into place. Could it have been anticipated? As I said, the procurement process tries to conduct due diligence on all the successful tenderers. In this particular case, there was no indication that the contractor would not have completed the job. But, for various reasons, it went into financial difficulties. And, unfortunately, in the case of Sum Keong, it went into difficulties so suddenly that HDB could not warn the residents earlier. But having had its attention brought to the problem, I believe it acted swiftly, promptly and efficiently to try and recover and to make sure that the disruption to the residents was minimised. I am glad to inform the Member that to-date, the outstanding internal works that were the most disruptive to the residents in 15 of the flats - these were works pertaining to the works in the bathrooms and the toilets - had been completed in that week. Similarly, the internal works for the remaining units in the blocks have also been completed and external works are going to be started by the contractor in July, and they expect that they will finish it by the end of August. As for the remaining balance of the works, HDB will be calling a re-tender. This re-tender will be expedited and works will resume on site by the new contractor by August 2003. The Member asked whether we can guarantee that there will be no further delays. I wish I could. But, to be realistic, while we will do whatever is necessary this time in selecting a tenderer, I cannot promise that there will be no further breakdowns or delays. But I can promise the Member that such a possibility will be minimised. I can also promise that, if there is such a thing happening again, the recovery will be as swift and efficient as it was in the first episode. The Member also asked about sub-contractors. The problem with sub-contractors is that the contract that they have is between them and the main contractors. It has nothing to do with HDB. But having said that, I do sympathise with the sub-contractors because they are, as it were, at the lowest end of the food chain. When HDB pays the main contractor, the main contractor is supposed to pay the sub-contractors. But when the main contractor gets into difficulty or trouble, invariably the sub-contractors suffer. So we will have to look into the possibility of how this problem can be solved, because it is a problem. If sub-contractors, which are part and parcel of the whole construction industry, are not paid or treated properly, then I think the industry as a whole must suffer. I have asked BCA and other Government agencies to look into the system and to see in what way we can minimise this problem of sub-contractors not being paid, including the possibility perhaps of legislating such payment. But such changes, if any, must be practical and doable and it is something that the industry as a whole must accept.

Mr Speaker, what is the Ministry's response to the call by the contractors for the security bond to be reduced to 10% of the initial amount upon obtaining TOP for contractors, the accounts to be finalised after six months, after the TOP has been obtained, and also the 5% retention sum to be waived? As regards the suicide tender bids, will the contractors be penalised if they withdraw the suicide tender bids, if it is really a genuine mistake being made?

I think nobody goes into business to commit suicide. They all go in with the hope of winning the tender. So, if a tender bid is low, as a result of a mistake, then we would definitely look at the waiver of the penalty sympathetically. We are not going to penalise somebody who has, say, added an extra "0" or has subtracted an extra "0" from one of the line items. So, if it is a genuine mistake, we will waive the penalty. As far as the other issues are concerned, eg, the performance bond, the accounts being finalised quickly, the retention sum, etc, basically the common denominator in all these is that there must be a certain guarantee in the form of a performance bond or an insurance bond or a banker's guarantee, to ensure that the contractor completes the job within the time that is specified and to the specifications that he has promised. If he does not meet this promise and does not fulfill his obligation, then the performance bond will be forfeited. So, it is a matter of how much performance bond is a reasonable amount. In the case of HDB or Government agencies, it ranges from 5-10%. In the case of the private sector, I believe the norm is 10%. These are issues which, again, the industry would have to sort out. And I have asked BCA to also look at these issues of performance bond, retention sum, etc. But bear in mind that all this, while it incurs a cost, is part and parcel of the contractual obligation between buyer and seller of that service. Without the performance bond, without any retention sum, the balance must be tilted on the side of the contractor. For example, what is to prevent a contractor from not fulfilling his obligations, if there is no performance guarantee? What is to stop a contractor from not finishing his job to the complete satisfaction of the owner, if there is no retention sum? The contractor just walks away. You call him back to rectify certain works, even within the one-year defect liability period, he does not show up. What do you do? So I think there has got to be a balance between the interest of the buyer and the seller of the service. But, of course, that balance has to be struck in such a way that everybody in the industry understands, and this is one of the issues which the industry is now trying to grapple with. And I hope that there will be a consensus reached on a new equilibrium.

Sir, with regard to the registration of contractors by BCA, will the Ministry consider further tightening the measures, together with inputs from the industry, as regards, say, financial standing and solvency of the firm where specific projects are analysed, like profitability ratios or breakeven analyses? Because if the contractors appear to have suicidal tendencies, as every project is a loss, then some alarm bells must ring with regard to their financial standing.

Sir, I am not sure where the Member gets this idea that people go into business to commit suicide. I do not believe so. The so-called suicide bids, I think, are the result of several factors, but let us leave that aside for the time being. Specifically, to answer the Member's question on whether we will consider tightening the Contractors Registration System, let us bear in mind that the more you tighten the less will be the number of contractors who will be on that list. You will find that the contractors will not be too happy with this. Of course, that does not mean that we do not do it. But I am just pointing out that we will have to again make sure that the criteria are sufficient to pre-qualify the good, suitable contractors and not to be so tight as to preclude many contractors who would otherwise have been able to do the job. So the CRS has undergone a lot of reviews and examinations. I am sure that there will be another round of review some time. But we have just done the last review last year. I would like to seek the Member's cooperation for us to examine the results of that past year. If she has any inputs for us to improve the system any further, we will be happy to hear from her, including how much to tighten.

Sir, I have two supplementary questions for the Minister. First, may I ask the Minister, over the last two years, how many HDB contracts were not completed according to the stipulated completion time and how much liquidated damages were imposed on those contractors who failed to complete the project on time? Secondly, will the Ministry consider reviewing the public sector standard contract form so that the interests of the third parties, especially consumers, sub-contractors and suppliers, are better protected?

I can give the Member an indication about how many contracts were not completed over the last year. I believe it is something in the region of 4%. 4% of the total number of contracts awarded by HDB were not completed on time for some reason or other. As to how much liquidated damages were forfeited, I do not have the figure offhand. But I will be happy to provide it to him at an appropriate forum. As far as the review of the public sector tender form is concerned, yes, this is one of the issues that is being discussed by BCA and the industry. The objective is to make sure that the terms in the public sector procurement system and the form are transparent and fair to all the parties involved and I include, in this case, the sub-contractors, in response to Encik Othman's question just now, and the consumers as well.

Sir, may I ask the Minister about the problem concerning the main contractor and sub-contractor. When the main contractor gets the contract, usually he will sub-contract to the sub-contractors who sometimes sub-contract to so many sub-contractors. Has the Ministry any form of control on the main contractor, ie, after getting the contract, how many percent of it should be carried out by the main contractor and how many percent by the sub-contractor? The Minister mentioned that the contract was not awarded to the lowest tenderer. Could he enlighten the House, for the last two years, how many contracts under MUP and IUP were not awarded to the lowest tenderer?

The issue of main contractor awarding jobs to sub-contractors is a peculiarity of the construction industry in Singapore. I am not saying that it does not happen in other countries. The prevalence of such a practice in our industry is quite unique to us. As the Member suggested, it is not just one level but maybe several levels down where the main contractors will appoint sub-contractors, sub-contractors will appoint their own sub-contractors, and so on. Why is this so? There are several reasons. One perhaps is the fact that the barrier to entry of contractors in Singapore is very low and we do not require too much qualifications nor other prerequisites. But it is, by and large, I would say, an efficient system. It is efficient in the sense that after getting the job the main contractors find, on their own accord, the best people to help them to do the job. They either appoint sub-contractors, or they hire people to do the job. Some contractors prefer to hire their own staff. They train the staff and keep them for the long-term. Others prefer to virtually hire all sub-contractors. But should the Government get involved in deciding how much sub-contracting they should do, how much of their own direct workers they should employ? I do not think so. I think the main contractor is the one who knows best how to get the job done at the price that he has tendered for. For us to specify these things is virtually to manage the project for him. How can the Government be in a better position than the contractor to actually complete the job? And if we were to do that, the contractor would have every reason to come back to us if the job is not done properly and say, "You are the one who told me to do all these things. Now it is not done." It is a system that has generally worked well. There are certain problems in the system, one of which is this issue of non-payment. But this is a problem that has surfaced now when the construction industry or the construction pie has shrunk rapidly. This was not such a problem when the construction industry was booming. The sub-contractors were paid, suppliers were paid, and nobody faulted the system. So we have to be careful that we do not try and come out with the wrong solutions to the problems that we are facing. I have indicated earlier that the issue of payments between the main contractor and sub-contractors is something that needs to be looked at. The industry is now looking at it together with the Government agencies and I hope that there will be some practical solutions arising out of this discussion. But I would not advocate the Government getting involved in running the construction companies or running the contracts for the main contractors. I would leave it to them. His second question was on the number of contracts under MUP and IUP which have not been awarded to the lowest tenderer. I am afraid I do not have the information offhand. But if the Member would file a Question, I will be happy to answer.

Does HDB set a timeframe for halted projects to resume work? In the case of Punggol 21, some projects were stopped for a considerable period of time before work resumed. In a particular case where the blocks of flats were all completed and in fact inhabitants had already moved in, some sub-contractors took away some installations at the void deck, leaving exposed steel wires and all because the main contractor could not pay them. That is a safety hazard.

As far as resumption of work is concerned, HDB will endeavour to make sure that the work resumes as quickly as possible. As quickly as possible can range from one or two months to probably four, five, or six months. The difficulty is mainly when there are legal difficulties involved in the winding up of the current contractor. This, of course, is no comfort to the residents. So I would like to assure the Member that HDB, even within this constraint, will endeavour to engage the new contractor as quickly as possible, but it would not be sooner than, say, a couple of months. In the case of Punggol Field, the example that was mentioned, the delay will ultimately be in the range of anything from two months to as long as 10 months from the original estimated completion date.

Dr Wang, last question.

Thank you, Mr Speaker, Sir. Would the Minister consider that, despite his assertion that nobody goes into business to commit suicide, for a company which is already in "terminal" difficulty, it is possible that such a contractor will tender with a suicide bid and, not only that, he will tender as many bids as possible so that it will go down with a big bang rather than with a whimper? And having looked at this evidence, would he take this into consideration as a lesson learnt when he reviews the tendering system?

The Member said that the contractor is already "terminal". I do not know whether ---

I mean "terminal" internally, but not known outside.

My statement was apropos a company that starts off in business. Nobody, when you start off in business, goes into a tender and puts in a suicide bid. But, yes, a company which is in great difficulties probably would. The safeguard of course for us is that we do not have to automatically accept such bids. The IM does not require HDB to accept the lowest bid irregardless, our own internal systems do not require us to do so, and common sense tells us that if the bid is really too low, if we accept that bid, it is not the contractor alone which is committing suicide, we are also committing suicide because the amount of work involved in trying to recover is not insignificant. So it is not in anybody's interest to accept such so-called suicide bids.

Sir, I have two supplementary questions. One is in regard to Marine Terrace and the other is in regard to Punggol Field. In regard to Marine Terrace, can I have some clarifications? Is this an MUP? And if it is, how much has each resident there co-paid for the works? There are three contractors involved in Marine Terrace - Seatown, Hong Lai Huat and Sum Keong - and even the Minister says that he is not sure whether Sum Keong can finish the job. I am just wondering whether HDB has been soft on all these contractors and has not been rigorous in enforcing the contract. The other supplementary question is in regard to Punggol Field. It is quite obvious that, for Punggol Field, the contractors had breached the contract. They were unable to complete the job on time and even abandoned the project. I heard one complaint from a purchaser that, in fact, she had already sold her flat and could not get the replacement flat at Punggol Field in time. She had to go and find accommodation somewhere else. Such a case is clear cut that she has suffered damages. I am a bit surprised when the Minister says that HDB has not paid any compensation at all. In fact, I would also imagine that the HDB has the right to claim damages from the contractors. So, out of these 560 purchasers, how many have been compensated in regard to their claims, if any?

Yes, Marine Terrace is an MUP project. And like all MUP projects, the residents pay only a fraction of the total cost. It depends on the particular project itself. It depends also on what is involved in that particular MUP. It could be $10,000. It could be less, or it could be more, depending on whether there is an SAI. But it is heavily subsidised. In fact, in all MUP projects, the Government foots 70% or 75% and for the smaller flats, as much as 90% of the total cost. I am not sure what is the point of the question. That is a fact. Whether the HDB has been soft on these contractors, as I explained earlier, the works of both the first contractor and the second contractor were satisfactory until the point of time when they felt that they could not carry on. HDB has a system in place to monitor the works, ie, regular monitoring of the progress of works to make sure that disruption to the residents is kept to a minimum and there are regular site meetings. I have seen records of these site meetings. I am satisfied that HDB has carried out its work diligently and properly. Notwithstanding all these, the contractors did get into difficulties, and once they got into difficulties and they could not carry on, HDB had to take the necessary steps to recover. In the case of Marine Terrace, the first disruption was when the first contractor could not finish and it went to the second contractor. There was a novation. The second contractor could not complete, and it novated to the third. In Sum Keong's case, it was not able to carry on. So, instead of novating to yet another contractor, HDB has decided to terminate the contract and to call for a new tender. In calling for the new tender, the chances of the work being completed in time will be that much better. Of course, in calling for a new tender, the cost involved would be much higher.

Would damages be paid?

Why should damages be paid? In the case of Marine Terrace, the work is going on as scheduled. It will be completed, but with a minimal delay of about two or three months, as I have explained to Mr Othman Haron Eusofe. In the case of Punggol Field, again the issue of compensation does not arise because, first of all, the contractual obligation of HDB is very clear - that in the lease agreement that is signed between the buyer and the seller, this flat would be delivered by a certain date, in what is known as the development completion date. That obligation will be fulfilled. In so far as delays are concerned and residents getting alternatives, anybody who is in urgent need of a flat as a result of the flat not being completed as originally estimated can approach HDB for assistance, and such assistance will be given. So, again, I do not see any reason why there should be any question of a compensation. Many of the residents in Punggol Field have asked for and have been given assistance in the form of an alternative flat if they are really in need, and in the form of transitional rental housing if they do not want an alternative. So, in that respect, HDB has taken great pains to ensure that the effects of this delay, even though it is not its fault, are minimised.

Sir, can I seek a clarification on the Minister's reply to the supplementary question by Mr Chiam?

Yes.

Sir, the Minister said that the cost of the project will increase. But can I have the Minister's assurance that residents will not pay more than what was indicated to them when they voted for the project?

This sounds more like a question than a clarification, Mr Othman.

Yes, I am happy to give him that "clarification", that this additional cost would not be passed on to the residents.

asked the Minister for Trade and Industry in view of the Singapore Confederation of Industries (SCI) survey findings on the perceived benefits of the US-Singapore Free Trade Agreement (USSFTA) that were reported in the Straits Times of 19th June 2003, (a) will his Ministry explain the finding that (i) 71% of those polled indicated no benefits and (ii) while his Ministry has hailed the Integrated Sourcing Initiative (ISI) to be of significant impact, 92% of the respondents stated that ISI will not affect them; and (b) whether his Ministry (i) has embarked on its FTA "outreach" programme to inform and educate the business community on the benefits of FTA and (ii) will intensify these efforts in view of the SCI findings.

Sir, since the beginning of this year, the Ministry of Trade and Industry (MTI) has conducted 17 briefings involving over 1,500 participants, explaining to them in detail how the various free trade agreements we have negotiated could be of advantage to them. These include separate briefings to members of the Singapore Business Federation (SBF) on our FTAs with Australia, Japan and the United States. Our programme for raising awareness ranges from open seminars and business briefings to one-to-one consultations with individual companies, which have approached MTI officials to conduct tailored briefings for them after attending our general briefings. Some companies have also sent in enquiries through the MTI website. To cast as wide a net as possible, we work closely with organisations, such as the SBF and the individual chambers of commerce. For instance, we staged a major event on the US-Singapore FTA in partnership with SBF in May 2003, which attracted over 600 participants. Our events are not solely conducted in English. In June, MTI organised a seminar in conjunction with SBF to reach out to businessmen more familiar with Mandarin. Another is planned for late July with the Singapore Chinese Chamber of Commerce and Industry. We will also be conducting a briefing for the Singapore Malay Chamber of Commerce and Industry on 8th July 2003. Our activities are targeted at all businesses, both large corporations and SMEs. We have paid special attention to SMEs. My Ministry has worked closely with industry-specific associations as well as through SPRING, IE Singapore and, in the future, ASME, to ensure that the SMEs are not left out. The overall response to our outreach activities has been positive, with many follow-up enquiries being received after the events. Many participants have indicated that the briefings have helped them to understand the FTAs much better, and are keen to explore the possible opportunities presented. Our pre-negotiation consultations for FTAs, like the India-Singapore CECA and the ASEAN-China FTA, have also attracted more interest since our outreach programme started. To date, we have conducted seven sessions of pre-negotiation consultations, involving nearly 100 participants from the processed food, chemicals, construction and logistics industry clusters. Participants at such consultations are now more forthcoming with their inputs and are more aware of how they can use FTAs to help them in these markets. Let me now turn to the results of the survey by the Singapore Confederation of Industries (SCI). I would like to first commend the SCI for its initiative in conducting the survey. The results are extremely helpful to both SCI and MTI in identifying the information gaps that exist in the minds of our business community. As part of MTI's outreach activities, MTI had, even before the survey, worked with SCI to organise a seminar on 30th July 2003 for its members. We hope that, like Miss Penny Low, SCI members will be intrigued by the results of the survey, and attend the seminar so as to find out how they can benefit from the US-Singapore FTA. The money is in the details, and I believe that once our business community studies the parts of the agreement that affect their industry, they will find numerous benefits. Under the US-Singapore FTA, tariffs on all products have been eliminated, including electronics and precision instruments. Firms with a high volume of exports where there are substantial tariff elimination will get to gain most. Textiles companies, should they meet the rules of origin, will face lower tariffs and gain a price advantage after the textile quota system lapses in 2005. These benefits will be immediately reaped by companies that already export to the US. I note from SCI's survey that although 71% of respondents perceive no benefits from the US, 50% of respondents also acknowledged that they do not currently export to the US. I would urge these companies to review their business plans in the light of the US-Singapore FTA. The US is a large market and will be a big boost to their business if they successfully enter it. As for the Integrated Sourcing Initiative (ISI), it is confined to 266 IT products and certain medical devices. Manufacturers producing these goods and exporting them through Singapore will benefit directly from the provision. Although these products already enjoy zero tariffs going into the US, the ISI confers three additional benefits. First, such goods will enjoy a waiver of the 0.21% merchandise processing fee imposed by the US Customs. Second, the ISI reduces the paperwork relating to documentation procedures, thus saving on time-to-market costs for these manufacturers. Third, these manufacturers will enjoy faster customs clearance as Singapore-origin products. Not all firms will see direct benefits from the ISI. But the exporters of the 266 ISI products should see higher sales which, in turn, generate a greater volume of business with Singapore companies that supply them with components or support their activities here. Hence, our industries will benefit indirectly from the ISI. I should emphasise that the benefits of the FTA extend beyond tariff savings. Enhanced investment and IP protection, liberalisation of trade in services and other important provisions of the agreement help us to draw in more investments, while facilitating the internationalisation of Singapore-based enterprises. All these will have important secondary spin-offs to the economy. We must therefore view the FTA in totality. For firms, I would urge them to study the details of those portions that affect them directly, and see how their operations can be re-configured to benefit from these. MTI will work with SBF and other chambers to help businesses in the coming months in this area.

Sir, I am heartened to hear that there are one-to-one consultation sessions for interested parties. Are these limited to only companies of a certain size or are they available to all entrepreneurs, including start-ups? Is there also some form of one-stop enquiry centre for FTAs, whether it is the US-Singapore FTA or the other FTAs?

Size is not a criterion for the one-to-one consultation. It is open to all. For the US-Singapore FTA, we are working on a handbook, for instance, so that they can get all the information in a particular handbook, and there will be a website, going ahead. For the other FTAs which are under negotiation or which have been concluded, MTI is working very closely with SBF. So, SBF will be a key point of interface with businesses.

asked the Minister for Information, Communications and the Arts (a) how effective has been the use of dialects on TV and radio in communication with the public during the SARS epidemic; and (b) what is the policy on the use of dialects on TV and radio in future emergencies where the audience is more conversant in dialects.

Mr Speaker, Sir, during the SARS outbreak, dialects were used on TV and radio to reach out to those older Chinese Singaporeans who are more conversant in dialects than Mandarin. It was a practical approach as, like many of us, the elderly also need to be equipped with the knowledge on precautionary measures in order to protect themselves from SARS. I am glad that the dialect broadcast had achieved its purpose. Feedback from the public had been generally positive, and a vast majority of the dialect-speaking Chinese who were surveyed said that they had listened to the SARS messages in dialect on TV and radio. Sir, we recognise that there are pockets of older Singaporeans who remain conversant only in dialects. When the need arises in future emergencies, the Government will use dialects to communicate with them. However, our stand is that we will continue to actively promote the use of Mandarin, and to use dialect only as an exception.

asked the Minister for the Environment whether he will reduce the water consumption charges by 30% to 50% for town councils and hospitals where extra washings of their premises are still being required as a prevention against the recurrence and spread of SARS.

Mr Speaker, Sir, the SARS outbreak has reminded us of the need to keep improving on the standards of personal hygiene, environmental cleanliness and public health. This is why we are seeing more cleaning and washing at public places. However, I want to emphasise that achieving a higher standard of cleanliness and hygiene is not just a short-term concern because of SARS, but also a long-term challenge because we need to remain vigilant against all other viruses and infectious diseases. If we were to lower water charges by 30-50%, as suggested by Mr Chiam, we could end up not only doing more washing and cleaning, but also making less careful use of water at the same time. This combination of using more water and wasting more water at the same time is clearly not the best way forward in our battle against viruses and infectious diseases. So, instead of calling for water to be subsidised, I suggest that we focus on how to make more efficient and smarter use of water. First, if all of us can practise good personal habits and keep public places clean and hygienic, we will be able to keep the frequency of cleaning to the minimum. Second, if we can all use every drop of water more wisely and waste less water, then these savings could help to offset any increase in water consumption for cleaning. In this way, our estates and public places can be cleaner, greener and more hygienic, and hopefully, without a corresponding increase in water and utility consumption.

Sir, I must remind the Minister that town councils are non-profit bodies ---

You have only half a minute left to remind the Minister, Mr Chiam.

Yes. We have not increased our SC&C charges for the last six years. We have no increase in revenue, but we play our part and we spend more, by 30-50%, on water usage to clean up the place to prevent the recurrence of SARS. Does the Minister not think that the Government should play its part also to help out the town councils, otherwise we will be lowering our standards of cleanliness generally, with less income?

You have 10 seconds, Mr Lim.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I will be brief. Just to mention two points. Firstly, I think it is incorrect for Mr Chiam to say that the consumption of water in his town council has gone up by 30-50%. I have made a check. In fact, across all town councils, water consumption in the last three months, from March to May, has come down by about 11-12% compared to a year ago, and about 4-5% compared to the previous three months. In the case of Potong Pasir, in fact, the water consumption there has come down by 10% compared to a year ago, and has gone up by 1.5% compared to December 2002 to February this year. So, if we compare this year with last year --- 3.00 pm

Order. Mr Lim, end of Question Time. [Pursuant to Standing Order No. 21(3), Written Answers to Question Nos. 13-20, 22 and 23 on the Order Paper are reproduced in the section, "Written Answers to Questions for Oral Answer Not Answered by 3.00 pm" (Cols. 2321-2334). Question No. 21 has been postponed to the next available sitting of Parliament.]

"to amend the Enlistment Act (Chapter 93 of the 2001 Revised Edition)", presented by the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Defence (Dr Tony Tan Keng Yam); read the First time; to be read a Second time on the next available sitting of Parliament, and to be printed.

"to amend the Police Force Act (Chapter 235 of the 1985 Revised Edition)", presented by the Minister for Home Affairs (Mr Wong Kan Seng); read the First time; to be read a Second time on the next available sitting of Parliament, and to be printed.

"to establish and incorporate the Singapore Workforce Development Agency, to provide for its functions and powers, and for matters connected therewith, and to make consequential and related amendments to certain other written laws", presented by the Acting Minister for Manpower (Dr Ng Eng Hen); read the First time; to be read a Second time on the next available sitting of Parliament, and to be printed.

Order for Second Reading read.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." Sir, the Street Works Act (SWA) was first passed and came into effect in 1995. This Bill contains a range of amendments. Its primary objective is to update the legislation to support new developments and to facilitate LTA's operations. In this regard, Sir, the Bill: (a) empowers LTA to carry out enforcement actions against obstructions, so as to keep passageways clear for pedestrians; (b) empowers LTA to require plans to be submitted before engineering works are carried out within the road structure safety zone. This is to ensure integrity of the road structures; (c) empowers LTA to enter into non-State lands to carry out road works and install traffic control and monitoring equipment; (d) facilitates the introduction of a lodgement scheme to allow for self regulation; and (e) winds up the Municipal Provident Fund. Sir, let me now elaborate on these and highlight the key provisions in the Bill for the proposed amendments. Enforcement actions against obstructions Sir, there is a need to ensure that the public is not inconvenienced by obstructions placed along passageways. These passageways include public streets and backlanes vested in Government, five-footways and certain private footways that serve as key linkages for pedestrians. Currently, LTA only has the powers to seize and remove obstructions on public streets but has no powers to dispose of the articles should they remain unclaimed. If the goods remain unclaimed, LTA needs to seek further directions from the court via a court application. Hence, LTA needs to be empowered to seize and dispose of obstructions found on passageways, particularly those that are heavily used by pedestrians. Clauses 17 and 18 create new sections in the SWA to empower LTA to clear obstructions on these passageways. The amendment will also allow LTA to enact regulations to dispose of all seized articles if their owners do not claim them within a specified time. I would also like the House to note that enforcement action will only be carried out against movable obstructions. Where immovable obstructions, such as illegal structures and walls are found on passageways that are located on State lands, the Government has sufficient powers under the State Lands Encroachments Act and the Building Control Act to deal with these. Powers to ensure integrity of road structures Sir, clause 4 introduces a new section to empower LTA to regulate engineering works carried out within the road structure safety zone, which is defined as 20 metres from the outermost edge of any part of a road structure such as bridges and flyovers. Prior to the commencement of such works, engineering plans and other relevant information will have to be submitted by qualified persons to LTA for approval. Any failure to do so will be considered an offence. Powers to enter into non-State lands Sir, we also propose to amend the SWA to empower LTA to enter private lands to: (a) construct earth retaining walls and ancillary buildings; (b) install traffic control and monitoring equipment; (c) operate and maintain earth retaining walls, ancillary buildings and traffic control and monitoring equipment; and (d) improve walkways. Currently, LTA has powers to enter private lands to construct road structures such as bridges, underpasses and tunnels. However, for the construction of earth retaining walls and ancillary buildings, LTA has to acquire the lands. In some cases, only the underground portions of these structures extend into private lands. As LTA does not require the land above the underground portion, acquisition is not a good option as it will lead to unnecessary sterilisation of this land. To avoid this, clause 3(d) amends the definition of "road structure" to include earth retaining walls and ancillary buildings. With the amendment, LTA can now enter private land to construct the underground portion of these structures without the need to acquire the land. Notwithstanding this, Members can be assured that as far as possible, LTA will locate road structures on State land so as not to inconvenience private owners. Similarly, LTA currently also has powers to enter private land to construct road-related facilities such as traffic signs, street name signs and directional signs. However, for the installation of traffic control and monitoring equipment, the current practice is for LTA to negotiate with private landowners on commercial terms. This process of negotiation may take months, resulting in inefficiency and delays in implementing traffic control systems. To expedite the process, clause 3(d) expands the definition of "road-related facility" to include electronic and computerised traffic monitoring and display equipment. Examples of such equipment include EMAS cameras, Junction Eyes, dynamic traffic information display signboards and electronic signs. With this amendment, LTA can now enter private land to install, operate and maintain road-related facilities such as traffic control and monitoring equipment, without engaging in lengthy negotiations with the private owners. Owners who wish to make a claim for compensation as a result of this entry can do so in accordance with the Land Transport Authority of Singapore Act. Apart from the above, there are occasions when LTA will need to tap electricity from private premises to operate and maintain road-related facilities, such as traffic surveillance equipment erected on non-State land, or to light up signages at bus and taxi stands located on adjoining State land. Clause 7 will empower LTA to tap electricity from the private premises. LTA will pay the electricity supplier directly based on the amount indicated on the electrical meters. In cases where no electrical meters are installed, the electricity supplier will be paid in accordance with the formula specified in section 10A. In no circumstance will the owners of the private premises from which the electricity is being tapped be billed for the electricity that is tapped for this purpose. Third, the SWA will also be amended to empower LTA to enter any land to improve walkways. LTA currently has powers to enter any land to construct walkways for use by the public, but no powers to enter the land to improve it. Clause 15 amends the SWA to enable LTA to do this. LTA will only exercise this power as a last resort in the interest of public safety. Self-regulation for submission of plans Sir, in line with Government's policy to streamline the approval process, clause 10 amends the SWA to enable LTA to set up its own lodgement scheme for the submission of plans for the construction of new streets. Instead of requiring LTA's approval for each plan, the plans will be deemed as approved upon lodgement by a qualified person with LTA. The new scheme will be based on self-regulation. In other words, the onus will be on the qualified persons to ensure that the street plans are in compliance with the requirements of the SWA and its regulations. LTA will carry out random checks to ensure that the submitted plans comply with the requirements stated in the SWA. LTA intends to start the scheme with landed housing developments that are not affected by road widening. It will be extended to other developments if it proves to be effective in ensuring that qualified persons check their plans for compliance with LTA's requirements before making their submissions. It will be an offence if the qualified person makes a false declaration when submitting plans under the new scheme. Winding up of Municipal Provident Fund Sir, we also propose to take the opportunity of amending the Street Works Act to wind up the Municipal Provident Fund. The Municipal Provident Fund was established in the 1920s by the then City Council under the provisions of the Municipal Ordinance. Currently, it is provided for under the Second Schedule of the Street Works Act after the Local Government Integration Act was repealed in 1995. The Fund was set up to receive contributions from its members and to make payments to them on death, resignation or retirement. Its members comprised employees in the Housing and Development Board and the Public Utilities Board as well as those in Government ministries who had prior service with the City Council. The last eligible member was paid in September 2001. The Fund also has an unclaimed balance of $6,645 due to some ex-members. Many of these payments had remained unclaimed since 1979, with some unclaimed since 1960s. The Accountant-General's Department (AGD) has made many attempts to contact these ex-members. However, these attempts have not been successful. As the AGD does not envisage any further transaction, it intends to wind up the Fund. Clause 22 seeks to dissolve the Fund. The balance in the Fund will be transferred to the Consolidated Fund upon the Fund's dissolution. Any person who wishes to make a claim to the unclaimed moneys in the Fund may still do so at any time in the manner set out in clause 24. The remaining amendments proposed in the Bill concern the refinement of existing procedures and consequential amendments to the SWA and other written laws arising from the amendments I have spelt out. Sir, I beg to move. Question proposed.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of the Street Works (Amendment) Bill moved by the Minister of State for Transport. However, I have two concerns with respect to this Bill which I would like the Minister to clarify further. The first concerns clause 5 which amends section 9(1) to enable entry by LTA into non-State land and take possession of any land with the intent of constructing and improving streets or install or remove road structures and road-related facilities thereon. It is my hope, Sir, that such works, as far as possible, are performed on State lands and that entry into private properties is considered only as a last resort with the interest of the general public in mind. Section 9 of the Street Works Act 1995, subject to the provision of a two-month notice period, empowers the Authority to enter private land for the purpose of constructing road-related facilities or structures without providing any compensatory claims to the person entitled beforehand. The person entitled is required to file his claim for losses if he desires so. Sir, as our nation inches towards developed nation status, it is imperative that we pay particular attention to legislation that leaves a segment of our population without proper legal recourse. I see the provision of the Act to acquire land which the Authority feels necessary in the public interest without determining compensation for the land before the acquisition takes place, such as being provided for in the Land Acquisition Act, as denying property owners of their basic rights. It appears not to be in congruence with our objective of building a nation with a competitive mindset. As our Government enterprises and Government-linked companies sell land and charge rents based on prevailing market conditions, we need to bear in mind that acquiring land under such forced situations and uncompetitive conditions is unfair and not in the direct interest of our citizens. This amendment to the Street Works Act should therefore take this issue into account by removing the injustice of disregarding due process for our citizens who own land. The amendment should take into consideration Singapore's maturing status and address this issue so that land may be acquired under firm means but paid for at a reasonable and, preferably, prevailing market price. Consideration should also be given for inconveniences that private property owners have to be subjected to when such works are carried out within their premises. It is important that the message comes through to those outside of our Parliament's walls that their Government is firm but also fair. Clarifying this section will reinforce public sentiment that a fairer playing field is now on stage. Private owners of land need not worry about losing their properties but will find due recourse through fair consideration and compensation. The second concern is the amendment to section 27 as provided for in clause 15 of the amendment Bill. The same concerns I have expressed earlier also apply to the newly substituted subsections (1) and (2) of this clause. In addition, as Singaporeans are encouraged to use public transport and simpler modes of transportation, we will require better walkways and footpaths to traverse on. While subsection (2) of section 27 of the 1995 Act states in minimal wordage that "footways should be up to a maximum of 3.6 metres wide", the clause is silent in specifying a minimum width for footpath. As we progress as a nation, I think it is important for the Government to place on equal parity the safety and well-being of the population that uses its public walkways for its everyday needs to that of the Government's when it comes to managing efficient and smooth-flowing roads. This will help, albeit in a small way, to encourage more to use public transport than to depend on private methods of transportation. Every little bit counts in our drive to conserve land by discouraging the use of private vehicles. This is an opportune time for us to realise our vision as part of this legislation. What the public would like to see and what the Street Works (Amendment) Bill should consider providing at the minimum is legislation that ensures (a) convenience; (b) safe; and (c) accessible walkways for a large segment of the population. I feel that our present Bill needs a clearer mandate to help encourage people to make use of our walkways in a manner that provides a seamless connector to their destinations or their travel origins. I would like to propose a broader and better defined set of characteristics that will help our population make use of our walkways to get to our bus stops, MRT train stations, public buildings or simply move from one neighbourhood to another. These include (a) setting a minimum width for a footpath where two adults walking abreast can have enough room to traverse comfortably; and (b) having a set of guidelines that would provide for a comfortable gradient when a footpath comes to an end, eg, at road crossings or at level shifts between buildings. In addition to this, it would also benefit our pedestrians to have these walkways offset some distance from the road tarmac, wherever possible. This would make them safer in the minds of our pedestrians and, possibly, discourage jaywalking if immediate accessibility to the road tarmac is removed. These proposals will go a long way in encouraging our senior citizens, families with children, those with strollers and especially the handicapped gain greater mobility, independence and ease to get from one point to another. It is a concern that as we progressively develop more sophisticated modes of public transportation that the last mile to and from our stations is left only for the brave and adventurous. We must, as a progressive nation, look ahead to building a footpath network that will complement our otherwise world-class transportation infrastructure. On that note, Sir, once again, I support the amendment Bill.

Thank you, Sir, for allowing me to speak on this Bill. Sir, I cannot support this Bill. Some of its provisions are too unfair. For example, clause 5 which amends section 9 of the principal Act is one of them. This clause gives the Authority more power to acquire land compulsorily to build roads without paying any compensation at all to the landowner whose land has been taken by the Authority. I do not see why compensation should not be paid to the landowner. The land is acquired to make it into a public road. True, a public road does provide a public good. But the Government is not providing the public good for nothing. On the contrary, in these days of COE and high motorcar registration and licence fees, the Government is reaping millions of dollars each year from motorists for road use and the privilege of owning a car. In view of the fact that the Government is making huge profits for road use by motorists, I think it is fair that clause 5 of the Bill should be amended to include a provision for the payment of compensation to landowners whose land has been compulsorily acquired for building a public road. In practice, in the past, the Government did pay compensation to landowners whose land was compulsorily acquired for construction of public roads. The amount paid was normally $1. The reason for that token payment is that the Government wants to protect itself in law. The Government does not want to end up in a situation later on where the landowner turns around and claims the land back on the ground that his land was acquired without payment of a valuable consideration. As all lawyers know, a contract without a valuable consideration later may be declared null and void. So, the Government pays the landowner a compensation of $1 which is a valuable consideration in the eyes of the law. But with this amendment in clause 5 of this Bill, the Authority is armed with statutory powers to compulsorily acquire land for construction of public roads without payment of any compensation at all. So, the past practice of paying $1 to provide a valuable consideration for the compulsory acquisition of land is now redundant. I had a former client, when I was still in legal practice, whose land was compulsorily acquired for road building. He was paid $1 compensation by cheque. He did not bother to bank in the $1 cheque into his bank account. He had the $1 cheque framed up and hung on his office wall. I am just wondering whether that $1 cheque, which was in payment of compensation for land taken for road building by the Government, is still on his office wall. If it is, then it is a valuable collector's item. Because with this amendment today, the Government shall not be making payment of $1 cheques anymore to compensate for the compulsory acquisition of private land to construct public roads. The other provision in the Bill which I am dissatisfied with is new section 10A(6). Under this clause, the Authority is allowed to tap electricity from adjoining land when the Authority is carrying out construction or improvement works on a piece of land. Later, should there be a dispute in the quantity of electricity used by the Authority, the landowner's only recourse is to make an appeal to the Minister. We must remember that it is the Minister's department which is a party to the dispute with the appellant over the amount of electricity used. Sir, at this point, I must make it clear that I am not saying or insinuating that the Minister is an unfair person, and is sure to side the officers of his own department. But in the eyes of the law, justice must not only be done but must be seen to be done. In this case, the Minister cannot be made the arbiter when his own department's officers are involved in the case. To me, I think it would be fairer if this new section 10A(6) be amended to allow the appeal to be made to a manifestly neutral person, say, either a judge in chambers of the High Court or the subordinate court. This clause, as it stands, makes the appeal to the Minister where his decision is final very unfair. The other amendment which I do not agree is new section 32A(3)(c). New section 32A(1) states: "No person shall -

Mr Speaker, Sir, I rise in support of the Street Works (Amendment) Bill. Many a time when I see street works in progress, I wonder how much more public streets and their related road structures and facilities can Singapore conti- nue to bear without encroaching onto private land or State land that has already been built upon. As a country progresses and aspiration increases, new buildings for offices and homes will continue to sprout up. Street works then become more complicated as demand for common space in a limited land area increases. A sensible and fair handling of plan for the construction, improvement, repair, maintenance and management of streets and back-lanes and the prevention of obstruction of footways are necessary. Clause 3 introduces new definitions to section 2 of the Street Works Act (Chapter 320A). Public streets are now clearly defined to mean only streets that are vested in the Government. This is important as otherwise any street which is privately owned but through the goodwill of the owner allows public to use may over time be wrongly classified as "public streets". Such clarification will also help in the valuation of private properties. The addition of a new section 32A (under clause 18) is certainly a necessary power for the LTA to ensure that Singapore's public streets, five-footways and private footways are clear and clean. However, I would like the Minister to clarify what does "obstruction" mean. The new section 32A, subsection (1), states that: `No person shall -

I thank the Minister of State for explaining the rationale to the amendments in this Bill, which I agree will help to improve the conditions for commuters and pedestrians. However, I have two concerns that I hope the Minister of State will kindly clarify. First, like my other colleagues before me, I would like to refer to clause 5 which amends section 9(1) to authorise the Land Transport Authority to take possession of any land to construct or improve any street, or install or remove any road structure and road related facility. Could the Ministry please clarify and give details on how the owners of land will be notified or compensated under this Bill? Currently, there are such provisions under the Land Acquisition Act for the LTA to negotiate with land owners for land that is needed on a non-urgent basis. Does the property purchasing section of the LTA function in the same way under the Street Works Act when land is being acquired for better roads? Could the Ministry please clarify should some amendments be included in the Schedule to this Bill? My second concern is in reference to clause 15 (section 27). Land can be acquired to improve existing walkways or to construct new ones. In the process of designing or redesigning walkways, may I please ask that provision be made for wider footpaths to accommodate especially the width of wheelchairs. In some cases, some footpaths are really narrow. And I think with an aging population and more people wanting to be mobile as they use their wheelchairs, it becomes important that our footpaths are wide enough. Some of our elderly do use walking sticks; some mums and dads do push their babies out in strollers; and where the walkways are concerned here, sometimes the quality is not there and they are not well maintained. As such, under the Street Works (Amendment) Bill, is it possible then to add a clause where safety issues are considered such that maintenance of walkways will always be there, so that people can use them knowing that they will not be injured? Like my colleague Mr Andy Gan said earlier, we have seen tree roots in the walkway itself. We have seen lamp posts intruding into the footpath that has been beautifully constructed. We have also seen those huge grey utility boxes taking up almost a third of the width of a footpath. One special section of a footpath that I would perhaps like to draw attention to would be Bedok South Avenue 1 along Upper East Coast Road. It is a very narrow footpath that I think anyone who is not able will not be able to use. While we spend much money on such construction, it will be good to have a safety clause so that that becomes a maintenance issue that we can take into consideration. Before one can support this Bill, I would like some assurance, please.

Mr Speaker, Sir, I thank the Members for their speeches on this Bill and I shall clarify some of the questions that have been asked by Members. Mr Ahmad Magad asked if we were depriving property owners of their basic rights with the amendment made by clause 5. Mr Chiam See Tong was also concerned about this and so too were the other two Members. Mr Ahmad Magad has also mentioned that we should consider using the powers to enter into non-State land as a last resort. Let me assure the House that these are indeed our intentions, ie, to try and protect the basic rights of owners and to try and enter into their land as a last resort. As I mentioned earlier, this amendment will allow LTA to construct earth-retaining walls and ancillary buildings without the need to sterilise the land above the underground portions of the structures. This will therefore reduce the need for land acquisition. Furthermore, LTA will try as far as possible to carry out all such works on State lands and entry into private properties will only be carried out as a last resort. In cases where LTA needs to enter private land, LTA will also compensate the owners for the displacement loss, ie, the loss of use for the period of time when LTA is carrying out the works. The owners are required to submit the claims because the details may vary from case to case. Without this amendment, LTA would be forced to acquire the land in order to do this work. But with this amendment, LTA can avoid acquiring the land. So the aim of this amendment is actually to allow property owners to keep their land. However, in cases where the owners would prefer LTA to acquire the land, the Bill also provides for flexibility for LTA to consider this option. Mr Ahmad Magad has also suggested minimum width and guidelines for gradient to be set for walkways to ensure that they are convenient, safe and accessible. Ms Braema Mathia is also concerned about the width of the walkways so that the disabled on wheelchairs can use them. I would like to assure the House that the LTA does have standards for the construction of footways. This varies from between 2.4 metres and 4 metres and its width is more than comfortable for more than two people to walk or a wheelchair to be used. However, the preferred approach is to use these standards as guidelines rather than mandatory minimum requirements, as there may be situations that call for flexibility in the exercise of such standards. For example, a footpath may need to be a couple of inches short of the minimum width requirement at a specific point, for example, when there is a heritage tree. In such an instance, we would not want to chop down the tree so that we can meet the minimum width requirement, nor would we want to avoid building the footpath because of the tree. Mr Andy Gan has asked what is considered an obstruction. He also asked whether the proposed amendment will allow us to remove trees. Allow me to clarify that obstructions in the context of the Street Works (Amendment) Bill refer to articles or things that a person deposits or allows to remain on any public street, five-footways or private footways. Trees will not fall within this definition. If any particular tree is causing an obstruction or danger to the public, the Government has powers under the Parks and Trees Act to deal with it and NParks enforces this Act. Mr Chiam was concerned about LTA tapping electricity from private premises. The purpose of having this amendment is so that in the construction of roads, special cables need not be laid just for obtaining electricity for the purpose of the construction. As this electricity tap from private premises will have meters, it is quite easy to determine how much electricity has been used by LTA and to pay directly to the Electricity Board the amounts due. He was also concerned about the liability of owners of private property to obstruction in public land in the vicinity of the private property. The amendment in new section 32A will only affect the owner of the private walkway when he has a legal duty to maintain that walkway in a manner without obstruction.

Sir, may I get some clarifications from the Minister of State. I cannot understand when he says that, under clause 5, the authority can take possession of any land without owning it. Am I correct? So you are only taking physical possession but not legal possession. When the authority uses this land for road use, is there a transfer of legal title to the authority? I would want this point clarified. I have got two more points. As regards the point on tapping of electricity, I was more concerned of the manner in which the appeal is made. The appeal is made to the Minister and the Minister is, at least, outwardly a biased person because it is his own department that is appealing to him. So in law, not only justice has to be done, but it has to be seen to be done. In other words, when people say that the appeal is to the Minister, they would straightaway say it is not fair. But if you appeal to a neutral person, they will be quiet. So we should have the appeal to a neutral person. As regards new section 32A, I do not think there is anything in the section which says that the owner of the land, or the occupier of the land adjacent to the public street, has the duty to take charge of the street. It does not say that. As long as you are living adjacent or abutting the public street and if somebody throws some rubbish there, you are liable if a notice is served on you for 21 days and you do not do anything about it. That is how I read it. Is that correct?

Mr Speaker, Sir, without going into detailed legal arguments with Mr Chiam, as he is a lawyer and I am not, I would like to clarify the three points that he raised. With regard to the first point, yes, LTA will possess the land in order to build ancillary structures, but it will not acquire the land, and it will pay compensation for the use or displacement during that period. With regard to the second point, I do not see a major problem in determining how much of electricity that is being taken from the private premises as there will be a meter which will record how much electricity is being used. And with regard to his third legal point, the principle is, if the owner has the legal duty to maintain that space and he does not keep that space free of obstruction, such that pedestrians cannot use the walkway, then the LTA will act.

Sir, I am sorry I have to take up this point again. Whatever the Minister of State says, it is not reflected in the amendment. He says that compensation shall be paid to the land owner when his land is taken by LTA. Where does it say that in clause 5? Can he point out to me? Under clause 5, there is no legal duty for the authority to pay any compensation to the land owner for the land in which it has taken possession of. It does not say that at all. And it does not say that the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act shall also have effect. It does not say that. So I do not know where he gets the legal standpoint from. As regards new section 32A, it does not say that the owner or occupier of any land or building fronting, adjoining or abutting a public street, five-footways or private footways has got any legal duty to take charge of this public street. It does not say that. As long as you are living or occupying next to a public street and somebody throws something and you have a 21-day notice served on you, you have to clear the rubbish. It is as simple as that.

Mr Speaker, Sir, again, I would like to explain to Mr Chiam that the reason why there is no compensation for acquisition is that, under this amendment, we are not acquiring the land. The compensation that is being paid is therefore not compensation for acquisition, but compensation for displacement or loss, that is, the loss of use for the period of time when LTA is carrying out the work. We have checked with the AG's Chambers on the language of the Bill and it feels that it is sufficiently clear in explaining these and the other points that have been raised by Mr Chiam.

Sir, I want to clarify one point. If the authority occupies or takes possession of the land, my question to the Minister of State is: who has got legal title of the land?

The legal owner has title of the land.

Sir, I am a little bit more confused now. How temporary is temporary because if we are widening the walkways under the other clause, surely we are not going to give back the land at some point? In other words, it is not a displacement issue, is it?

You have got the clauses confused. Clause 5 is entry into State land to build ancillary structures. Most of the ancillary structures we are talking about here are underground structures. You are talking about the clause that covers walkways. The amendment in the clause that covers walkways is to repair walkways. Currently, we have the power to build walkways on private land but we do not have the power to improve or maintain them, and the amendment allows us to do that.

Sir, I just want a clarification. In the new section 32A, it specifies that LTA can dispose of whatever that is taken or removed from obstruction. It says that it would dispose of within a specified time. Can the Minister of State clarify what is a specified time in new section 32A? And if he tells me it is within a reasonable time, then what is a reasonable time?

Currently, when objects are found to obstruct the private walkway, they are removed and a court order is required for the objects to be disposed of. Under this amendment, my Ministry will have the power to draw up regulations and to stipulate how much time is given to people to claim the objects before LTA can dispose it. And I would like to assure Members that we will give a reasonable amount of time. I will inform the Ministry officials to study the problem. I presume it will be several weeks to two months.

Sir, I would like to put on record that I am dissatisfied with the answers of the Minister of State as they do not reflect what appears in the provisions of this amendment Bill.

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

Resolved, "That Parliament do now adjourn to a date to be fixed." - [Mr Mah Bow Tan]. Adjourned accordingly at Four o'clock pm to a date to be fixed.

asked the Minister for Health how much has been spent and disbursed by the Government since March this year on expenditures in connection with the SARS epidemic.

Singapore was declared SARS free by WHO on 31st May 2003. This was achieved by Singaporeans coming together to deal decisively with the disease. Our healthcare workers in particular rose to the challenge. The battle against SARS, however, has been costly. To date, 32 people, including five healthcare workers, have died as a result of SARS. SARS has also imposed a high financial cost on Singapore. As of 31st May 2003, the Government has spent $192 million on direct SARS operating expenditure. The Government has also introduced a $230 million economic relief package to assist businesses adversely affected by the SARS outbreak. The largest share of direct operating expenditure as a result of SARS has been incurred by my Ministry. MOH and its two healthcare clusters have up to 31st May 2003 spent about $117 million on items such as: a) the purchase of medical supplies and protective gear for healthcare workers and patients (eg, gloves, gowns, masks); b) provision of free medical screening for SARS at Tan Tock Seng Hospital (TTSH); c) provision of free ambulance service for persons requiring SARS screening; d) setting up of fever clinics at polyclinics; e) the administration and enforcement of home quarantine orders; and f) setting up of contact tracing centre and SARS-hotline centre. MOH has also committed to fund the healthcare clusters' essential SARS-related development expenditure for the setting up of isolation facilities in the hospitals and retrofitting existing medical facilities for provision of SARS treatment. The SARS-related development cost is estimated at $105 million. These estimates exclude the indirect costs associated with SARS, such as the designation of TTSH as a SARS hospital which resulted in the closure of hospital wards, cancellation of elective surgeries and outpatient appointments. The financial impact of SARS will not be one-off. The changes that we are instituting in our hospitals are here to stay, to ensure that we have in place proper infection control processes and procedures to deal with future outbreaks, be it SARS, or any other disease. My Ministry, with inputs from the two healthcare clusters, is in the process of working out the financial impact of SARS on a steady state basis. The baseline operating costs of hospitals will need to be adjusted to take into consideration the changes in requirements for personal protective equipment and patient management and work processes that are necessary to prevent another spread of SARS or other infectious diseases in Singapore. We will lose some efficiency but we will gain in stronger infection control measures. We are conscious of the potential impact of these changes on patients' fees and will try to moderate the impact, especially on lower income patients.

asked the Minister for Education in view of the emphasis placed on personal and collective responsibility and on personal and social hygiene in the attempt to combat SARS, (a) will his Ministry reinstate "Hygiene" as a subject or, at least as a component of an existing subject, in the school curriculum; and (b) how will his Ministry inculcate self-discipline on students and their parents so that the students will put on face masks in the event that they contract ordinary colds and influenza.

Topics relating to personal hygiene and social responsibility in hygiene matters are currently covered in the Health Education syllabus at the primary level. Pupils are taught how to take care of their body, maintain a healthy lifestyle, and keep the environment around them clean and safe. They also learn about germs and how diseases can be prevented. Since the outbreak of SARS, personal hygiene has been further emphasised at school assemblies and in classrooms. All parents have been reminded, through an advisory, not to send their children to school if they are unwell. They should take their children to see a doctor immediately and return to school only when they are well. There is therefore no need for students to put on masks to attend school. If they have a common cold or flu, they should not come to school. Instead, they should see a doctor. And, they should put on a surgical mask when they proceed from home to see the doctor. This education message is being propagated at the national level by the Ministry of Health. The Ministry of Education will reinforce this message through the schools. In the event that a student is discovered to have a cold or flu in school, and there is a need for the student to put on a surgical mask, the school will provide the mask and ask the student to put it on whilst waiting for his/her parents to fetch him to see the doctor.

asked the Minister for Education under the Compulsory Education Act, (a) how many children amongst those due for Primary 1 this year (2003) were given deferments on non-medical grounds; (b) what are the other approved reasons for exemptions; and (c) what is the process for getting these children into school.

This year, 55 children were granted deferment to enrol in Primary 1 on non-medical grounds. These children started their kindergarten education late. Their parents applied for deferment to enable them to complete their kindergarten education before entering Primary 1. b) The following categories of children can be granted exemption from compulsory education (CE): (i) Children given approval to attend designated schools. Up to 400 children given approval to attend the six madrasahs offering full-time religious education, and up to 10 children given approval to attend San Yu Adventist School will be granted exemption. (ii) Children undergoing home-schooling. Approval will only be granted if the parents are able to satisfy MOE that the children will receive a strong foundation for further education and training, and develop a sense of national identity. (iii) Children with special needs who are not able to follow the national curriculum in our schools. These children should be enrolled in a special education school where their needs can be met. c) The Ministry will remind parents of all the children who are given deferment to enrol their children in Primary 1 in 2004. A registration pamphlet with information on P1 Registration will be sent to them before registration for Primary 1 commences in July 2003.

asked the Minister for Education if he will consider compulsory counselling sessions for Primary 6 students who have to cope with the stress of the Primary School Leaving Examination.

MOE adopts a comprehensive and systemic approach in ensuring the psychological well-being of pupils. Though there is no compulsory programme for Primary 6 pupils, schools do pay particular attention to pupils at important stages in their school lives, such as when they first join a school, or during examinations. Schools do have various programmes for all students such as orientation and dealing with examinations. These are in effect mass counselling sessions though they do not have a compulsory or standardised format among the schools. In parallel with these counselling and psychological support programmes that cater to all pupils in a school, schools do provide more focused counselling support according to the needs of the pupils. Such counselling support is available in school for pupils from Primary 1 through to JC2/PU3. Every school has a counselling referral system in place to facilitate the early identification and extension of help to pupils with problems. All teachers are first-line care-givers and given training in Basic Counselling Skills so that they may provide immediate basic counselling to pupils in need. Pupils with more difficult problems are referred to Teacher Counsellors of which there are two in each school. The Teacher Counsellors are trained in more advanced counselling skills and crisis intervention. Pupils with serious problems are referred to MOE Guidance Specialists, school counsellors or external professionals. Children and teenagers go through significant developmental changes and may face different difficulties at different stages in their development. Teachers would have knowledge of their pupils and would be able to help identify pupils who need counselling. We should also not forget that it is not just the school, but also the home environment that contributes to the overall psychological well-being of our children as they grow up.

asked the Minister for Home Affairs in view of manpower demands in areas such as terrorism prevention, whether (i) the Singapore Police Force has sufficient resources to respond to ordinary crime concerns, and (ii) there is a need to commit additional resources to the Police.

Let me reassure Members that the Police has not lowered its readiness to deal with the crime situation. The need to combat both crime and security threats after 9-11 has certainly stretched Police resources. However, the Singapore Police Force has reorganised itself and has drawn on additional resources to deal with these twin challenges. Following September 11, both anti-crime and security patrols were increased significantly. For example, Police crime patrols increased by 49% as compared to the period before 9-11. Police was able to achieve this by leveraging on every available staff including Police NSmen. Immediately after 9-11, Police froze all leave. For 2002, Police restricted leave to urgent cases. Police also scaled down non-essential services, such as the handling of lost and found reports and rescuing of trapped animals, in order to free up resources. In addition, the re-organisation of the Neighbourhood Police Post (NPP) system to the Neighbourhood Police Centre (NPC) system in 1996 has enabled the Police to deploy more officers on patrols, thus increasing police visibility in the neighbourhood and to respond quickly to crime cases. More importantly, Police has been able to handle the twin challenges of combating crime and preventing terrorism because it taps the resources of other Home Team departments, as well as the community at large. Many Singaporeans are involved in the Community Safety and Security Programme and Neighbourhood Watch Zone activities such as Citizens-on-Patrol and crime prevention discussions for the elderly. Terrorism prevention, in particular, involves the Home Team and does not fall solely on the shoulders of the Police. Hence, the Singapore Civil Defence Force and the Immigration and Checkpoint Authority also play key roles. Indeed, Singapore remains one of the safest cities in the world to live in. The Home Team will continue to ensure this to be so.

asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs what is the Government's position on the arrest and detention of democracy campaigner Aung San Suu Kyi and members of her political party in Myanmar.

Singapore is concerned about the recent developments in Myanmar. The 30th May events were a setback not just for Myanmar but for ASEAN as well. We conveyed our concerns to the Myanmar government shortly after Aung San Suu Kyi was taken into "protective custody". On that occasion, we also urged the Myanmar government to cooperate with the Special Envoy of the UN Secretary General and, in particular, to grant him access to Aung San Suu Kyi. Subsequently, when the ASEAN Foreign Ministers met at the recent Retreat in Phnom Penh, we joined the other ASEAN Foreign Ministers in expressing concerns about the safety of Aung San Suu Kyi and in calling for the early lifting of restrictions on her movement. We also urged the Myanmars to stay on the course on national reconciliation and dialogue with all the parties involved, including Aung San Suu Kyi and her party.

asked the Minister for Trade and Industry whether he will clarify (i) his rejection in the media of having a 5-day work week for civil servants; and (ii) how will individual civil servants scheduled to work any five days a week affect the functioning of the civil service on weekends.

The Government will study the recommendations of the Remaking Singapore Committee, including the proposal for a 5-day week, before deciding which recommendations to accept. But from the Public Service Division's perspective, Government ministries are given some flexibility in deciding on their working hours, so long as the work week remains at 42 hours, and ministries continue to be open for business at least five and a half days a week. Within this framework, most Government agencies are able to set up alternate Saturday-off arrangements, while offering longer operation hours to service the public. Adopting a 5-day work week for the civil service now will send the wrong signal. Private sector companies are facing immediate difficulties, arising from SARS and the economic downturn. They need to tide over this difficult period, and also implement urgent wage reforms. Going on 5-day week should not be a top priority for them or the civil service. As I have said, many MNCs, and their production lines, are working 24-7. It is important that our working hours be in tune with the needs of the global economy, and not be bound by rigid rules on working hours.

asked the Minister for Information, Communications and the Arts since the question on signing and captioning of key programmes for the hearing impaired was posed last year and the then Acting Minister had replied that Singapore Broadcasting Authority would explore with broadcasters the possibility of providing the hearing impaired with subtitling of major Government speeches, how many programmes have been so subtitled and if more will be done.

The Media Development Authority or MDA has explored with broadcasters, the possibility of providing subtitles for major Government speeches for the benefit of the hearing-impaired. MDA has informed that to provide accurate subtitling of all important speeches by Government leaders, the broadcaster would need advance copies of the prepared text. However, prepared texts of important Government speeches that are aired 'live', such as the National Day Rally speech, are normally not ready until hours before actual delivery. In some cases the prepared text may not be available to broadcasters before the delivery of the speeches. Also, for `live' broadcasts such as the National Day Rally speech, it is difficult for accurate subtitling as actual delivery may include off-the-cuff remarks which differ somewhat from the prepared text itself. MDA has also assessed that while it is not practicable for broadcasters to subtitle all important speeches, they should be able to provide selective subtitling. For a start, MediaCorp has agreed to provide subtitling for the English version of this year's National Day Message to cater to the needs of the hearing impaired. I would also like to point out that there are other practical means for the hearing-impaired population to get news information. Channel NewsAsia (CNA) provides captions during its news bulletins, summarising key points from the news story that is being featured at that point in time. Summaries of the latest news are also available on CNA in the form of crawlers that run throughout the day. The information on these crawlers is updated regularly and includes breaking news. For the "live" coverage of the National Day Rally and Budget speeches, CNA also summarises the speeches through short captions. In addition, the CNA website provides up to date information on newsworthy items. Hearing impaired viewers can also refer to short news write-ups on Teletext. On MediaWorks channels, captions are provided at the end of the news bulletins on Channels i and U to summarise the main news items that were presented. MDA will continue to explore ways in which information can be made more easily available to hearing impaired viewers.

asked the Minister for Community Development and Sports (a) how many Indian women have committed suicide each year from 2000 to 2002; (b) whether the figure is a disproportionate representation; and (c) what are some of the measures his ministry is exploring to help the community.

The number of Indian women who committed suicide was eight in 2000, 11 in 2001 and 16 in 2002. In the last three years, out of the total number of women who committed suicide in Singapore, the average proportion of Indian women who committed suicide was about 8.4%. The reasons for suicide are multi-faceted and often inter-related. The most common reasons are poor health, depression, relationship problems, financial problems and mental illness. Whatever the reasons, we must do our best to prevent suicides and see to it that there are enough channels for women to turn to if they need to talk to someone about their problems. For example, counselling services are readily available at the Family Services Centres which are located in the heartlands. The Samaritans of Singapore has a 24-hour crisis hotline for those who need help or just a listening ear. Treatment programmes are available at the Institute of Mental Health (IMH) to help those with psychiatric disorders or depression. Social service agencies, Polyclinics and General Practitioners can make referrals to the IMH as and when necessary. The Samaritans of Singapore (SOS) organises suicide prevention programmes annually. This September, the Singapore Indian Development Association (SINDA) will be jointly organising with SOS, a talk in Tamil on suicide prevention. SINDA also plans to disseminate information on how to get help for someone who has suicidal tendencies through the media such as the Tamil radio station. My ministry applauds such pro-active measures to reach out to the community on sensitive issues. More importantly, friends and relatives who notice that their loved ones could be at risk of suicide or manifesting suicidal tendencies should seek help to prevent such mishaps from happening. The public may contact these agencies for help if they know anyone who may be at risk for committing suicide: Samaritans of Singapore: 1800-2214444 (24-hour crisis hotline) Family Services Centre: 1800-8380100 Singapore Association for Mental Health: 1800-2837019 Association of Women for Action and Research (AWARE) 1800-7745935

asked the Minister for Trade and Industry (a) if building a light-rail train from HarbourFront MRT to Sentosa is the solution to making Sentosa exciting; (b) if he expects the $140 million invested in the monorail to be recoverable, and within what timeframe; and (c) will this project be a waste of public money.

The Sentosa Express is a light rail line linking HarbourFront MRT Station to Sentosa. Sentosa Development Corporation (SDC) is embarking on this project as part of its Masterplan to remake Sentosa as a world-class resort destination. To make Sentosa a more attractive resort destination for both Singaporeans and foreign tourists, SDC is bringing in major new leisure offerings. Under the Master Plan, visitorship to Sentosa is expected to grow from 4.1 million in 2002 to six million in 2006, and eight million in 2012. The Sentosa Express will connect seamlessly with the MRT network, and facilitate this larger movement of visitors to and around Sentosa. Visitors will be able to enjoy greater convenience and much shorter waiting times. The current bus service plying between the mainland and Sentosa will not be able to cater to the growth in visitors without causing congestion at the causeway and the surrounding roads. Similarly, the existing monorail system on Sentosa island, which is 20 years old, has limited capacity and has become increasingly difficult to maintain. The Sentosa Express project costs $140 million, and is expected to fully recover the capital and operating costs in the eighth year of operation. Besides being economically viable in its own right, it will generate spin-offs for Sentosa by allowing more visitors to access the island's attractions, and by encouraging new investments. It is also part of the broader infrastructure that will support a larger flow of tourists to Singapore.

asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance what is the amount of tax forgone from 2000 to 2002 if Foreign Maid Levy relief were to be extended to single men and women.

The Ministry of Finance is unable to estimate this figure as it would require substantial effort to verify the marital status of every employer of a foreign maid, and estimate the personal tax savings to each employer who is single. The objective of the Foreign Maid Levy relief is to encourage women to rejoin or to remain in the workforce after marriage. Since this objective is not relevant to singles, data on single men and women have never been needed or compiled.

asked the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Defence (a) if he is aware that military aircraft have been flying overhead in the vicinity of Jurong West at three to five minute intervals, causing great noise nuisance to the HDB residents and resulting in the difficulty in selling the HDB flats; and (b) whether he can do something to abate the noise nuisance due to military aircraft flying overhead.

MINDEF is aware of the noise issue and understands the concerns about the noise level generated by aircraft flying activities. The Republic of Singapore Air Force (RSAF) has been minimising its aircraft from flying over densely populated residential areas. However, due to our country's limited airspace, it is inevitable that our aircraft will overfly some residential estates in the vicinity of airbases. The RSAF needs to conduct day and night flying to maintain operational readiness for the defence of our country. We are already conducting a lot of aircraft training overseas, but in-country flying still needs to be done as our pilots need to be familiar with our local airspace environment. RSAF first instituted noise abatement measures in the late seventies. Over the years, other measures have been implemented incrementally. These include the following: a) Raising the minimum transit altitudes of RSAF aircraft overhead Singapore; b) Revising departure and arrival routings to minimise over-flights of residential areas; c) Having our aircraft take the quickest route to the training areas; d) Ceasing night-flying by 11.00 pm (unless absolutely necessary for operational reasons); and e) Scaling down the flying activities during the year-end examination period. We would like to assure residents that MINDEF/RSAF will continue to find ways to further reduce aircraft noise, while maintaining the operational readiness of the RSAF.

asked the Minister for Transport what is the consideration determining that the North-East line be built underground and that it be driverless.

The North-East Line (NEL) has to be built underground because it passes through many areas which are already densely developed. By building it underground, we also achieve several benefits. First, it gives us maximum flexibility to site stations at more accessible locations for the greater convenience of commuters. Second, it minimises the environmental impact by reducing visual intrusion and noise pollution for residents living along the corridor. Third, it allows us to optimise land-use. A fully automated system was chosen for the NEL because of the significant benefits it would bring. First, it is safer. Experience around the world shows that most rail accidents are caused by train drivers. A fully automated system eliminates such a risk. Second, it provides greater operating flexibility as the deployment of trains is no longer dependent on the availability of train drivers. This allows the operator to schedule train services better and to deploy additional trains to cope with any sudden increase in passenger volume. This means shorter waiting time for commuters on such occasions. Third, it makes better use of manpower. Instead of putting an officer in the driver cabin on each train to perform routine and repetitive functions, the officer can now, if necessary, provide direct customer services to commuters on the train while continuing to attend to the other train operations.

asked the Minister for Transport if he will give (i) the total cost of building the North-East Line and (ii) the breakdown of the cost.

The North-East Line cost a total of $4.6 billion to build. This comprised (a) $2.7 billion for civil and architectural works, (b) $1.4 billion for mechanical and electrical works and systems (including the trains), and (c) $0.5 billion for land costs. The entire cost was funded by the Government.

asked the Minister for National Development, in this bad economic climate, whether HDB is willing to review its selection criteria, in particular, to deviate from its normal practice of awarding a tender to the contractor with the lowest bid.

asked the Minister for National Development whether he will review all contracts which HDB has accepted on the lowest tender prices to enable these contractors to complete the jobs for which they have tendered.

HDB's tender system is guided by the Government's policy to award a tender to the company that gives the best value for money, and not necessarily the lowest bidder. First, contractors are pre-qualified based on their financial resources, professional and technical qualifications and track record, using the Building and Construction Authority (BCA)'s Contractors Registry as a guide. Second, HDB will verify that the tender proposals fully comply with the tender requirements. The tender proposals are then evaluated based on their price competitiveness, conformance to the required specifications, the tenderer's ability to undertake the project, his financial solvency and his performance in other public sector projects. Finally, HDB conducts due diligence on the tenderers and their tender prices. If HDB finds that the lowest tender price is significantly below the other tender bids and its own estimates, it will interview the tenderer and ask him to re-examine his bid. He can withdraw his bid if he so chooses. On the whole, HDB's tender system is sound and working well. Since 2000, the number of HDB contracts that had to be terminated was only 4% of the total number of contracts awarded. However, even with a rigorous selection process, there is no guarantee that selected firms will not meet business difficulties and flounder later, especially during this economic downturn. Under HDB's tender system, the company that offers the best combination of price, quality and reliability will be awarded the contract. All things being equal, HDB will award to the lowest bidder who can do the job. It is objective and fair, and ensures transparency and accountability in the use of public funds. Nonetheless, in view of recent feedback, MND and BCA are presently reviewing the current tender system, and seeking views from industry representatives and key Government agencies. For ongoing projects, contracts have already been entered into between HDB and its contractors and these are legally binding. HDB will continue to monitor its contractors' performance closely. If any contractor runs into difficulty, HDB will take immediate action to rectify the situation and minimise the impact on the public. TERRACE

asked the Minister for National Development whether he will hold a public inquiry to enquire why the upgrading of the HDB flats at Marine Terrace could not be completed.

The upgrading works at Marine Terrace stopped on 3rd June 2003 due to the latest contractor's financial difficulties and cash flow problems. HDB had exercised due diligence before engaging the original and subsequent two novated contractors for the project. Unfortunately, they all ran into financial problems. HDB has employed a contingency contractor to minimise inconvenience to residents, complete the more urgent works first and provide essential services like conservancy work, housekeeping and site security. A limited tender has been called to select a new contractor to finish the work. The new contractor should be on site by August 2003. Completion may be slightly delayed by one to two months. Since HDB is not the cause of the delay and measures have been taken to complete the works expeditiously, there is no need for a public inquiry.