E.W. Barker
Singapore
“Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." This is a simple Bill which seeks to amend section 33 of the Land Acquisition Act on the amount of compensation payable to owners of land compulsorily acquired under the Act.”
“For the five-year period from 1st July, 1981 to 30th June, 1986, the HDB demolished a total of 8,098 units. As the HDB's new accounting system was only implemented from 1st April, 1985, the Board does not have ready information on the value of flats demolished prior to 1st April, 1985. RELOCATION OF CREMATORIUMS 4.”
“The HDB did not allocate any MP's office to the previous PAP MPs for Anson and Potong Pasir constituencies. NUMBER OF H.D.B. UNITS DEMOLISHED 3.”
“I would not know. Why don't you ask them? I don't know. Sir, to put things in a nutshell, it is the legal profession amongst all the professions that help in the administration of Singapore. Doctors help to cure you of diseases.”
“I am not saying it's wrong. I am not telling you stories. I am relating. So they decided to take us on. When we went into Select Committee, the first day and the later part of the second day, there was confrontation between the Committee and the lawyers.”
“As the Member for Anson would know, the Minister for Law is not in charge of prosecutions or the conduct of any criminal proceedings in court, nor does he give any directives on these matters.”
The complete record
Every one of 2,152 lines we hold for E.W. Barker, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 13 of 44.
“The last report covered the period 14th July, 1973 to 31st July, 1974 and was presented to Parliament on 7th September, 1974 as Paper Cmd. 13 of 1974. Copies of the report were circulated to all Members. In that report it was stated that the Council had examined 44 Bills and three Acts after their passing by Parliament and had received a large number of subsidiary legislation for examination, and that it had made no adverse report on any of them. The Council meets whenever Bills which have been passed by Parliament are referred to it for consideration and reports in accordance with its terms of reference. As always, the Council's reports are presented to Parliament and copies are circulated to Members. Proceedings of the Council are conducted in private.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the functions of the Presidential Council are spelt out in Articles 811 and 811. They are: `(1) . , to consider and report on such matters affecting persons of any racial or religious community in Singapore as may be referred to the Council by Parliament or the Government. (2) . , to draw attention to any Bill or to any subsidiary legislation if that Bill or subsidiary legislation is in the opinion of the Council a differentiating measure.' A differentiating measure means: `any measure which is, or is likely in its practical application to be, disadvantageous to persons of any racial or religious community and not equally disadvantageous to persons of other such communities, either directly by prejudicing persons of that community or indirectly by giving advantage to persons of another community.' The Council is served by the Office of the Clerk of Parliament, and for the present it is intended to continue with this arrangement. A total provision of $54,010 is included in the Main Estimates of Expenditure to meet expenditure on manpower and other operating expenses for the servicing of the Council in case at some later date it should be decided that a separate office be set up for the Council. The anticipated expenditure to be met will be expenditure on purchase of subsidiary legislation, Supplements to the Gazette, printing of the Council's Annual Report and stationery. Council members are not remunerated in any way. The total expenditure under the vote in FY 73 was $1,549.20. Expenditure to-date in the current financial year is $2,277. Under Article 81K (5), the Council is required yearly to compile and present to the President a report on the working of the Council during the preceding 12 months, and such reports are presented to Parliament.”
“Ministry/Department FY 73 FY 74 Mindef $264,822.38 $193,143.13 Environment 47,151.90 25,272.67 Police 14,950.02 62,879.94 Public Health 13,605.50 83,060.10 Postal 8,585.25 620.00 Public Works 7,609.76 1,501.24 Culture 3,426.00 - Customs 1,400.00 - Health 909.35 1,200.00 Home Affairs 500.00 - Fire Brigade 433.00 1,379.59 Trade 429.58 - Prime Minister's Office 350.00 - Social Affairs 269.80 - Broadcasting 241.32 5,500.00 Primary Production 209.65 - Parks and Trees 160.00 - Social Welfare 137.30 - Survey 754.55 Narcotics - 457.30 Foreign Affairs - 359.28 National Development - 271.00 ----------- ----------- $365,190.81 $376,398.80 =========== =========== TRAFFIC POLICE MOBILE SQUAD 3. Mr J. F. Conceicao asked the Minister for Health and Home Affairs what is the present strength of the mobile squad (including women) in the Traffic Police and if there is any intention to increase this strength.”
“The reclamation at Ponggol, involving about 10 acres of the foreshore and estimated to cost about $4 million, is complementary to the reclamation of the foreshore off Coney Island which was approved by this House at its sitting in March this year. On completion of the reclamations, it is proposed to construct a bridge linking Coney Island with Ponggol. Fill for this reclamation, which is expected to be completed in about nine months, will be obtained from the Alang Perimbi Shallows, off West Ponggol. The reclamation at Pulau Sebarok, covering about 91 acres of its foreshore and seabed, is necessary for the expansion of the Port of Singapore Authority's slop disposal centre on the island. Fill for this reclamation will be obtained from the Sisters' Shoal and Sawa Pemalang. The reclamation is expected to be completed in two years' time and is estimated to cost about $17 million. The reclamation at Pulau Busing is for industrial development. About 60 acres of the foreshore and seabed at this island will be reclaimed. Fill will be obtained from the Sisters' Shoal and Beting Kapal. The reclamation is estimated to cost about $9 million and is expected to be completed in about two years' time. Sir, I beg to move. Question put, and agreed to. Resolved, That this Parliament, in accordance with section 4 of the Foreshores Act (Chapter 270), approves the reclamation by Government of those portions of the foreshore and seabed at- 1. Pulau Tmbakul/Kusu Island 18 acres 2. Buran Darat 59 acres 3. Ponggol 10 acres 4. Pula Sebarok 91 acres 5. Pualu Busing 60 acres 6. Pulau Seletar 70 acres as depicted coloured pink on the plans marked "LAND OFFICE RECLAMATION PLANS NOS. 9/74, 10/74, 11/74, 12/74, 13/74 and 14/74", respectively, which are deposited in the Land Office, Singapore.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move the motion* standing in my name, as it appears in item 8 on the Order Paper. * The motion reads as follows: That this Parliament, in accordance with section 4 of the Foreshores Act (Chapter 270), approves the reclamation by Government of those portions of the foreshore and seabed at - 1. Pulau Tmbakul/Kusu Island 18 acres 2. Buran Darat 59 acres 3. Ponggol 10 acres 4. Pula Sebarok 91 acres 5. Pualu Busing 60 acres 6. Pulau Seletar 70 acres as depicted coloured pink on the plans marked "LAND OFFICE RECLAMATION PLANS NOS. 9/74, 10/74, 11/74, 12/74, 13/74 and 14/74", respectively, which are deposited in the Land Office, Singapore.' Sir, it is proposed to reclaim the foreshores and seabeds at Pulau Tembakul (Kusu Island), Buran Darat, Ponggol, Pulau Sebarok, Pulau Busing and Pulau Seletar as shown coloured pink on the plans marked as "LAND OFFICE RECLAMATION PLANS NOS. 9/74, 10/74, 11/74, 12/74, 13/74 and 14/74" respectively, copies of which are displayed in the Library of this House for the information of hon. Members. Sir, the projects at Pulau Tembakul, Buran Darat and Pulau Seletar involving the reclamations of 18 acres, 59 acres and 70 acres respectively, of the fore-shores and seabeds at these islands are for recreational development. Fill for the reclamations at Pulau Tembakul and Buran Darat will be obtained from Sisters' Shoal and that for Pulau Seletar from the Alang Perimbi Reef in Johore Straits. The reclamations estimated to cost about $3.5 million for Pulau Tembakul, about $11 million for Buran Darat and about $13.5 million for Pulau Seletar are expected to be completed in two years' time.”
“Resolved, That this Parliament, in accordance with section 4 of the Foreshores Act (Chapter 270), approves the reclamation by Government of those portions of the foreshore and seabed around Pulau Ayer Merbau, containing a total area of approximately 335 acres as shown coloured yellow on the plan marked "LAND OFFICE RECLAMATION PLAN NO. 7/74", which is deposited in the Land Office, Singapore. RECLAMATIONS AT PULAU TEMBAKUL (KUSU ISLAND) 6.40 p.m.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move the motion* standing in my name, as it appears in item 7 on the Order Paper. * The motion reads as follows: `That this Parliament, in accordance with section 4 of the Foreshores Act (Chapter 270), approves the reclamation by Government of those portions of the foreshore and seabed around Pulau Ayer Merbau, containing a total area of approximately 335 acres as shown coloured yellow on the plan marked " LAND OFFICE RECLAMATION PLAN NO. 7/74", which is deposited in the Land Office, Singapore'. Sir, the Jurong Town Corporation proposes to reclaim, as agent of the Government, about 335 acres of the foreshore and seabed around Pulau Ayer Merbau as shown coloured yellow on the plan marked as "LAND OFFICE RECLAMATION PLAN NO. 7/74" for industrial development. A copy of this plan is displayed in the Library of this House for the information of hon. Members. Sir, the reclamation is expected to cost about $40 million. Some of the fill required will be available from materials dredged by the Port of Singapore Authority from Selat Sakra and the remaining fill required will be brought in from sources outside the island. On completion of the reclamation, the reclaimed land will be proclaimed as State land and alienated to Jurong Town Corporation on terms and conditions to be agreed with the Commissioner of Lands. Subsequently, the whole island will probably be leased out by the Corporation to a group of companies led by Sumitomo Chiba Chemical Co. Ltd, of Japan to set up a petro-chemical complex involving an investment of more than $1,000 million. Sir, I beg to move. Question put, and agreed to.”
“Under clause 4, which amends section 7 of the Act, it will be an offence for any person to trespass on State land by depositing, placing or throwing any article or thing whatsoever, or any waste, refuse or other thing onto State land. A new subsection will be added to section 7 to punish any director, manager, partner, secretary or other officer of a body of persons, corporate or incorporate who is convicted of an offence of trespassing on State land unless such persons can prove that they had exercised due care and diligence to prevent the commission of the offence. A new section 12 has been enacted under clause 5 of the Bill to provide that State land shall not be acquired by adverse possession. The maximum penalty of a fine of $50 prescribed (under section 13 of the Act) for the offence of unlawfully depastoring on State land will be increased to $500 by clause 6 of the Bill and the maximum penalty of a fine of $200 prescribed (under section 14 of the Act) for the offence of trespassing on State land by the removal of timber, minerals, shells and stones therefrom will also be increased to $2,000 by clause 7 of the Bill. Sir, I beg to move. Question put, and agreed to. Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House, The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill.-[Mr E. W. Barker]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed, ABORTION BILL Order for Second Reading read. 3.23 p.m.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move "That the Bill be now read a Second time." Sir, the Bill now before this House seeks to make certain amendments to the State Lands Encroachments Act (Cap. 286) to provide, inter alia, for more speedy removal of unlawful occupants of State land and the movable properties dumped thereon and to provide that the Government's right to recovery of possession of State land shall not be barred by any period of limitation. It also seeks to revise the penalties provided for certain offences prescribed under the Act. Clause 2 of the Bill seeks to repeal subsection (2) of section 3 of the Act which enables an unlawful occupant of State land to defeat the action of the Commissioner of Lands to recover possession of State land by merely raising a claim of title to the land. In most cases, there is no substance in the claim, which merely delays proceedings. A new subsection is to be enacted in its place to provide that when a claim of title is made by the occupant charged with the unlawful occupation of State land, the defendant may apply to the High Court for the action to be transferred to that Court on the ground that the defendant is claiming title to the land. The new subsection will prevent frivolous claims. In the past some unlawful occupants of State land have not made efforts to remove their property which has been deposited on State land even after they have been served with a notice requiring them to do so. Under clause 3, which amends section 4 of the Act, the Government will now be empowered to seize and forfeit any movable property found on State land when it is not removed within 28 days of an eviction notice.”
“Sir, the Public Works Department began repairs along Jalan Satu and Dakota Crescent on the 16th of October, 1974. Work is still in progress and is expected to be completed by about the middle of this month. Tenders will be called soon for repair works along the Old Airport Road and along Jalan Dua, Jalan Tiga and Jalan Empat in the Kallang and Guillemard Road Estates. Work will commence as soon as the tenders are accepted. OLD AIRPORT ROAD (Deletion of white line) 6. Mr Ng Yeow Chong asked the Minister for Health and Home Affairs if he will request the Traffic Police to delete the white line along the stretch of the Old Airport Road between its junctions with Jalan Lima and Jalan Tiga so as to allow the parking of cars in front of the Kallang Estate Market. The Minister for Health and Home Affairs (Mr Chua Sian Chin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I am pleased to inform the Member for Mountbatten that the continuous white line along Old Airport Road between its junctions with Jalan Lima and Jalan Tiga was replaced by a broken white line on 31st October, 1974. Motorists may now park their vehicles along Old Airport Road next to the Kallang Estate Market. ENLISTMENT (AMENDMENT) BILL Order for Second Reading read. 2.55 p.m.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, there have been a few accidents at the junction of Upper Serangoon Road and Lim Ah Pin Road, namely, four in 1973, and seven in 1974, only one of which was serious. Following a request by the hon. Member and his Citizens Consultative Committee in Ponggol for a traffic light system to be installed at this junction, the Public Works Department carried out traffic counts and studies of the accidents at the junction and found that the volume of traffic does not justify the installation of a traffic light system. The left-hand side of Upper Serangoon Road (going towards Ponggol), between Florence Road and Lim Ah Pin Road, has double yellow lines marked thereon, restricting parking on that side. The visits by mobile squad policemen have indicated that this parking restriction is generally observed. However, on the opposite side of the road, there is a bus terminus and double parking of buses is not unusual due to lack of parking space. This restricts the view of motorists and results in some impatient drivers taking unnecessary risks. The situation, however, will be kept under review and consideration is now being given to a proposal that the bus terminus be re-sited. OLD KALLANG AIRPORT ESTATE (Repairs to footpaths) 5. Mr Ng Yeow Chong asked the Minister for Law and National Development if he will request the Public Works Department to expedite the repairs to damaged and sunken footpaths along Old Airport Road and other estate roads in the Kallang and Guillemard Road Estates.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That this Parliament resolves that the following amendment, as recommended in paragraph 5 of the First Report of the Standing Orders Committee and contained in Paper Parl. 4 of 1974, be and is hereby made to the Standing Orders of Parliament:- Standing Order No. 95: Paragraph (2): In line 10, leave out "as Parliament may refer to the Committee" and insert "a5 the Committee may think fit". Sir, hon. Members will have noticed that the Standing Orders Committee had in its Report, Parl. 4 of 1974, recommended an amendment to Standing Order 95 (2) for the purpose of improving on the accountability of statutory institutions by making the Statements of Accounts for such institutions which are laid before this House stand referred to the Public Accounts Committee for examination. It is now necessary to adopt this amendment, hence this motion. Sir, I beg to move. Question put, and agreed to. Resolved, That this Parliament resolves that the following amendment, as recommended in paragraph 5 of the First Report of the Standing Orders Committee and contained in Paper Parl. 4 of 1974, be and is hereby made to the Standing Orders of Parliament: -- Standing Order No. 95: Paragraph (2) : In line 10, leave out "as Parliament may refer to the Committee" and insert "as the Committee may think fit". ADJOURNMENT Resolved, "That Parliament do now adjourn to Wednesday, 6th November, 1974." -[Mr Barker]. Adjourned accordingly at Seven minutes to Six o'clock p.m, to Wednesday, 6th November, 1974.”
“The reclaimed area north of the proposed coastal road will probably be used for public housing as part of the Clementi New Town, while that to the south between the coastal road and the new foreshore will probably be used for marine industries or for port use. However, the final use of the reclaimed land will be decided by the Master Plan Committee after all claims of the relevant authorities have been studied. Clearance and resettlement of those affected by the proposed reclamation will be undertaken by the Resettlement Department in accordance with its current policy. Sir, I beg to move. Question put, and agreed to. Resolved, That this Parliament, in accordance with section 4 of the Foreshores Act (Chapter 270), approves the reclamation of those portions of the foreshore and swampland at Pasir Panjang Road/West Coast Road containing an approximate area of 98 acres and 122 acres respectively as shown edged red on the plan marked as "LAND OFFICE RECLAMATION PLAN NO. 5/74", which is deposited in the Land Office, Singapore. AMENDMENT OF STANDING ORDERS 5.51 p.m.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move the motion* standing in my name as it appears on the Order Paper. * The motion reads as follows: That this Parliament, in accordance with section 4 of the Foreshores Act (Chapter 270), approves the reclamation of those portions of the foreshore and swampland at Pasir Panjang Road/West Coast Road containing an approximate area of 98 acres and 122 acres respectively as shown edged red on the plan marked as " LAND OFFICE RECLAMATION PLAN NO. 5/74", which is deposited in the Land Office, Singapore. You may recall, Sir, that the reclamation of about 228 acres of foreshore at Pasir Panjang has so far been approved by this House. A plan marked as "LAND OFFICE RECLAMATION PLAN NO. 5/74", which is displayed in the Library of this House for the information of hon. Members, shows the various phases of the reclamation. As an extension of this reclamation, the Housing and Development Board now proposes to reclaim another 98 acres of the foreshore and 122 acres of swampland at Pasir Panjang Road/West Coast Road 8 1/2 m.s, as shown edged red on the plan. The proposal will complete the plan for reclamation at Pasir Panjang and link it up with Jurong Town Corporation's own reclamation at Jurong. It will also enable the early construction of a new coastal road linking Pasir Panjang Road at about 5 1/2 ms, to Jurong. The proposed reclamation is estimated to cost about $7 million including earth works, and will be carried out in late 1974 or early next year in conjunction with the proposed development of the Clementi New Town to the north, using surplus earth therefrom as fill.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, due to the need to provide urgently essential ancillaries to the refinery operations, the following structures were constructed on Pulau Bukom Besar without first obtaining Parliamentary approval under section 4 of the Foreshores Act: - (a) Vehicle Landing Ramp (marked `Q' on the plan); (b) Pipe tracks from Wharf 3 to Wharf 6 (marked `T'); (c) Second Bridge between Pulau Bukom Besar and Pulau Bukom Kechil (marked `R'); (d) Materials Jetty Landing Ramp (marked `S'). Covering approval of this House is now sought for the construction of these structures. On completion of the reclamation, the reclaimed land will be proclaimed as State land and alienated to Shell on terms and conditions to be agreed with the Commissioner of Lands. Sir, I beg to move. Question put, and agreed to. Resolved, That this Parliament, in accordance with section 4 of the Foreshores Act (Chapter 270), approves - (a) the reclamation of Pulau Ular of 77.70 acres as shown coloured orange and marked `Z' on the plan marked "LAND OFFICE REXCLAMATION PLAN NO. 4/74", which is deposited in the Land Office, Singapore; (b) the reclamation of a total of approximately 48.64 acres of the fore-shore and seabed at Pulau Bukom Kechil as shown coloured pink and grey and marked `P' and `Y' respectively on the same plan; and (c) the construction of the various fore-shore structures on Pulau Ular, Pulau Bukom Kechil and Pulau Bukom Besar as shown coloured blue, brown (marked `Q', `R', `S', `U', `V' and `X') and purple (marked `T') respectively on the same plan. RECLAMATION AT PASIR PANJANG ROAD/WEST COAST ROAD 5.48 p.m.”
“Pulau Ular, located north-west of Pulau Bukom Besar, is actually a submerged reef with two visible islets as shown coloured green on the plan. One-third of the fill for this reclamation will be obtained from hillocks in Pulau Bukom Besar whilst the remaining two-thirds and granite blocks will be obtained from Pulau Ubin. The reclamation, which is scheduled to commence in mid-1975 and to be completed in January, 1978, is expected to cost about $15 million. Ancillary to this reclamation, three fore-shore structures - a bridge connecting Pulau Ular with Pulau Bukom Besar, `a jetty to berth tankers at the northern end of Pulau Ular and a material ramp will be constructed at Pulau Ular. These structures are shown coloured blue on the plan. On the recommendation of the Head, Anti-Pollution Unit, an impounding basin to provide anti-pollution measures on both Pulau Bukom Besar and Pulau Bukom Kechil (in view of the large crude oil storage capacity on these islands) was constructed on an urgent basis in Pulau Bukom Kechil by reclaiming about 20.60 acres of the fore-shore and seabed at the island as shown coloured pink and marked `P' on the plan. It is now proposed to reclaim another 28.04 acres of the foreshore and seabed at Pulau Bukom Kechil as shown coloured grey and marked `Y' on the plan for siting of additional oil tanks. Fill for this reclamation will be obtained from site clearings on Pulau Bukom Besar. The reclamation which will commence at the end of this year is expected to take about a year to complete at an estimated cost of $2.2 million.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move the motion* standing in my name as it appears on the Order Paper. * The motion reads as follows: That this Parliament, in accordance with section 4 of the Foreshores Act (Chapter 270), approves (a) the reclamation of Pulau Ular of 77.70 acres as shown coloured orange and marked `Z' on the plan marked `LAND OFFICE RECLAMATION PLAN NO. 4/74", which is deposited in the Land Office, Singapore; (b) the reclamation of a total of approximately 48.64 acres of the foreshore and seabed at Pulau Bukom Kechil as shown coloured pink and grey and marked `P' and `Y' respectively on the same plan; and (c) the construction of the various foreshore structures on Pulau Ular, Pulau Bukom Kechil and Pulau Bukom Besar as shown coloured blue, brown (marked `Q', `R', `5', `U', `V' and `X') and purple (marked `T') respectively on the same plan. Sir, Messrs. Shell Eastern Petroleum (Pte) Ltd. is embarking on a $600 million expansion project at Pulau Bukom Besar and Pulau Bukom Kechil. The project provides, inter alia, for the construction of a Chemical Complex to manufacture aromatic chemicals, i.e, benzene, toulene and xylene together with storage and loading facilities. It will be undertaken in two phases over a period of three years and is expected to provide employment for some 3,000 workers and on its completion, permanent employment to some 200 persons. Due to the magnitude of the proposed complex and the limited land area available on the two islands, it is proposed to reclaim approximately 77.70 acres around Pulau Ular as shown coloured orange and marked `Z' on the plan marked as "LAND OFFICE REXCLAMATION PLAN NO. 4/74", a copy of which is displayed in the Library of this House for the information of hon. Members.”
“Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House. The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill.-[Mr Barker]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. Mr Speaker: Order. I suspend the Sitting now and shall take the Chair again at 5.00 p.m. Sitting accordingly suspended at 4.29 p.m. until 5.00 p.m. Sitting resumed at 5.00 p.m. [Mr Speaker in the Chair] ESTATE DUTY (AMENDMENT) BILL Order for Second Reading read.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." As hon. Members are aware, I have from time to time sought the approval of this House under section 4 of the Foreshores Act for the Government to construct public works along the fore-shore or in the sea-bed. Section 4 of the Act as it now stands requires Government to seek the approval of Parliament for the reclamation of the foreshores or sea-bed as well as for the construction of public works, including wharves or jetties, along the foreshores. In order to expedite the construction of public works, the Bill now before this House seeks to amend section 4 of the Act to enable Government to construct such public works along the foreshores or in the sea-bed without the necessity of seeking approval of this House. The Bill also seeks to authorise the Government to reclaim the foreshore or sea-bed without having to seek the prior approval of this House if the area to be reclaimed does not exceed 20 acres or, if the area to be reclaimed is within port limits, 10 acres. The Bill further seeks to delete paragraph (b) of subsection (4) of section 9 of the Act which implies into a lease of the foreshore or sea-bed certain covenants and provisos with regard to the construction and use of any works to be made or done thereon. It is considered that these covenants are not necessary in the light of present-day requirements. Opportunity is also taken to amend subsection (6) of section 3 of the Act to provide that section 3, which imposes restrictions on the construction of sea and river walls and buildings on the banks of any port, river or channel, shall not apply to any statutory body as the Minister may, by notification in the Gazette, appoint. Sir, I beg to move, Question put, and agreed to.”
“Clauses 3 and 4 of the Bill provide for cancellation of any planning permission granted before 11th September, 1973, including any granted under section 61 of the Singapore Improvement Ordinance if no construction work had commenced before that date. Clause 5 provides for the exemption of certain categories of planning permission from cancellation, such as minor alterations and additions to existing buildings and housing development involving not more than four residential units. Clause 6 empowers the Minister to restore in his discretion any permission cancelled upon such conditions, as he sees fit to impose. It is necessary to make the Act operative as from the 11th day of September last year. This is so provided in clause 1. Sir, I beg to move. Question put, and agreed to. Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House. The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill.-[Mr Barker]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. FORESHORES (AMENDMENT) BILL Order for Second Reading read. 4.23 p.m.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." Hon. Members will recall that Government made a policy statement on the 10th of September last year and announced certain measures which it proposed to take to curb excessive speculation in land and property and to check the steep rise in their values. One such measure was that all planning approvals granted but on which no attempt had been made to get on with the work would be cancelled unless there was a firm contract for construction work between owner and building contractor signed on or before the 10th of September last year or the owner/developer had signed binding contracts for the sale of residential properties with purchasers. In order to implement the above decision, it was necessary to cancel all planning approvals granted before 10th September, 1973, under section 9 of the Planning Act. These would otherwise be valid for a period of two years by virtue of subsection (8) of section 9 of the Act. There were, in all, 329 cases of development affected by this policy. Planning permission for 270 cases have since been restored. It is also necessary to treat as cancelled all planning permission granted before 1st February, 1960, under section 61 of the Singapore Improvement Ordinance, and those granted between 1st February, 1960, and 12th December, 1965, under the 1959 Planning Ordinance if no work had been carried out by 10th September, 1973. Although sections 10 and 11 of the present Planning Act empower the Competent Authority to cancel such planning permission, there was no provision in the Singapore Improvement Ordinance or the 1959 Planning Ordinance to allow planning permission to lapse automatically after three years if no development took place.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move "That the Bill be now read a Second time." Sir, the Naval and Air Bases Ordinance (Chapter 83 of the 1955 Edition) vests in the Lord High Admiral, or the Commissioners for the time being executing the office of Lord High Admiral, of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the Air Council established under the United Kingdom Air Force (Constitution) Act, 1917, certain rights over portions of the foreshore and seabed of Singapore in trust for Her Majesty for the purpose of establishing and maintaining a naval and air base in Singapore. In the Exchange of Notes on Defence Arrangements between the Government of the Republic of Singapore and the Government of the United Kingdom, it was agreed, inter alia, that the Ordinance should be repealed. The Bill now before this House seeks to give effect to this Agreement and will repeal the Naval and Air Bases Ordinance. On the repeal of this Ordinance, such rights as mentioned will vest in the Singapore Government. Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move. Question put, and agreed to. Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House. The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. -[Mr Barker]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. CANCELLATION OF PLANNING PERMISSION BILL Order for Second Reading read. 4.17 p.m”
“Because of the peculiar nature of prison work, it is not possible to give Prison officers regularly four off-days per month. They are given one off-day in a fortnight and, they do not, on the aggregate, work more than 44 hours per week.”
“There will be a public address system in the Senior Magistrates' Courts in the new Subordinate Courts building to enable parties appearing thereto to hear their summonses being called. This Court will be the Court where the majority of criminal cases are first mentioned. REORGANISATION OF PRISONS DEPARTMENT (Progress made) 4. Mr P. Govindaswamy asked the Minister for Health and Home Affairs (a) what progress has been made in the reorganisation of the Prisons Department since early 1973; (b) if his Ministry proposes to recommend revision of salaries of Prisons Officers; and (c) what steps have been taken to give Prisons Officers the four off-days per month. The Minister for Health and Home Affairs (Mr Chua Sian Chin): Mr Speaker, Sir, the Government appointed a Committee to study the reorganisation of the Prisons Department in February 1973. The Committee made a comprehensive review of the Prisons Department and studied, inter alia, the sentences imposed on criminals, the systems of rehabilitation of prisoners and the pay and service conditions of the staff of the Prisons Department. The final Report was submitted to the Ministry of Home Affairs in March 1974. The Committee made various recommendations, including a salary revision for the Prisons staff. The Government has since accepted in principle the recommendations (other than those relating to the salary scales) and directed that the reorganisation of the Prisons Department as recommended should be proceeded with. Agreement has also been reached with the Finance Ministry to revise the salary scales of the custodial ranks in the Prisons Service and these have been implemented with effect from 1st August, 1974.”
“Sir, the Government does not consider that there is a need to provide for the installation of public address systems in the air-conditioned courtrooms in the Supreme Court.”
“Sir, I beg to move, That Standing Order No. 95 (2) be amended by deleting the words "as Parliament may refer to the Committee" appearing in the tenth line thereof and substituting therefor the words "as the Committee may think fit". Sir, the Government has accepted certain proposals of the Auditor-General for improving on the accountability of statutory institutions. One proposal recommends that Statements of Accounts of such institutions which are laid before Parliament be examined by the Public Accounts Committee. However, under paragraph (2) of Standing Order No. 95, only accounts showing the appropriation of the sums granted by Parliament to meet public expenditure and laid before Parliament stand referred to the Public Accounts Committee for examination. To implement this proposal the Public Accounts Committee, in paragraph 12 of its Second Report to Parliament as contained in Paper Parl. 3 of 1973, recommended that an appropriate amendment be made to the Standing Order. The amendment suggested in my Motion is to give effect to the Committee's recommendation. Moreover, it is so worded as to give the Committee discretion in the selection of accounts for examination. Sir, I beg to move. Mr Speaker: The Motion stands referred to the Standing Orders Committee under the provisions of paragraph 4 (b) of Standing Order No. 95. ADJOURNMENT Resolved, "That Parliament do now adjourn to a date to be fixed." - [Mr Barker]. Adjourned accordingly at Twenty minutes past Four o'clock p.m, to a date to be fixed.”
“Under section 4 of the Foreshores Act, approval of this House is necessary before the construction of these structures can be carried out. Upon approval being given, foreshore leases covering these structures will be issued by the Commissioner of Lands to the Jurong Town Corporation under section 9 of the Foreshores Act. Sir, I beg to move. Question put, and agreed to. Resolved, That this Parliament, in accordance with section 4 of the Foreshores Act (Chapter 270), approves the construction by Government of two dolphins and associated footbridges on the toreshores off Lot A704B, Jurong Industrial Estate, Mk VII and one dolphin on the foreshore off Lot Al327, Jurong Industrial Estate, Mk VI as shown coloured red on the plan marked "LAND OFFiCE PLAN NO. 3/74" which is deposited in the Land Office, Singapore. AMENDMENT OF STANDING ORDERS 4.16 p.m.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move the motion* standing in my name as it appears on the Order Paper. * The motion reads as follows: `That this Parliament, in accordance with section 4 of the Foreshores Act (Chapter 270), approves the construction by Government of two dolphins and associated footbridges on the foreshores off Lot A704B, Jurong Industrial Estate, Mk VII and one dolphin on the foreshore off Lot Al 327, Jurong Industrial Estate, Mk VI as shown coloured red on the plan marked "LAND OFFICE PLAN NO. 3/74" which is deposited in the Land Office, Singapore.' Sir, Lot A704B Mukim VII and Lot A1327 Mukim VI in the Jurong Industrial Estate as shown edged in blue on the plan marked as "LAND OFFICE PLAN NO. 3/74", a copy of which is displayed in the Library of this House for the information of hon. Members, have been leased out by the Jurong Town Corporation to the Singmarine Shipyard (Private) Limited and the Jurong Shipbuilders (Private) Limited respectively. The Singmarine Shipyard (Private) Limited have applied for permission to construct two dolphins (each measuring approximately 6 meters by 4 meters) and a footbridge (2 meters by 13 meters to link the dolphins to the shore) and the Jurong Shipbuilders (Private) Limited have also applied for permission to construct a breasting dolphin (10 meters by 5 meters), which are necessary for the shipbuilding and ship-repairing activities of these companies. The proposed structures, which will be on the foreshore adjoining the respective companies' lands and the actual construction of which will be carried out by these companies as agents of Jurong Town Corporation, are shown coloured red on the plan.”
“Resolved, That this Parliament, in accordance with section 4 of the Foreshores Act (Chapter 270), approves the reclamation by Government of those portions of the foreshores and seabed at Terumbu Retan Laut, containing a total area of approximately 37 acres as shown coloured pink on the plan marked "LAND OFFICE RECLAMATION PLAN NO. 3/74" which is deposited in the Land Office, Singapore. JURONG INDUSTRIAL ESTATE (CONSTRUCTION OF DOLPHINS) 4.14 p.m.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move the motion* standing in my name as it appears on the Order Paper. * The motion reads as follows: `That this Parliament, in accordance with section 4 of the Foreshores Act (Chapter 270), approves the reclamation by Government of those portions of the foreshores and seabed at Terumbu Retan Laut, containing a total area of approximately 37 acres as shown coloured pink on the plan marked "LAND OFFICE RECLAXMATION PLAN NO. 3/74" which is deposited in the Land Office, Singapore.') Sir, you may recall that this House in November, 1973, approved the reclamation of a total area of approximately 32.3 acres of the foreshores and seabed at Pulau Hantu and Sisters Islands as shown coloured pink on plans marked as "LAND OFFICE RECLAXMATION PLAN NO. 12/73" and "LAND OFFICE RECLAMATION PLAN NO. 13/73" respectively, copies of which are displayed in the Library of this House. The Port of Singapore Authority now proposes to develop Terumbu Retan Laut. For this purpose, it is proposed to reclaim approximately 37 acres of the foreshore and seabed of Terumbu Retan Laut as shown coloured pink on the plan marked as "LAND OFFICE RECLAMATION PLAN NO. 3/74", a copy of which is also displayed in the Library of this House for the information of hon. Members. Fill for the reclamation will be obtained by dredging parts of the reef to form the marina and from the nearby navigational channels. The cost of the reclamation including foreshore protection, which is estimated at $7.3 million, will be borne by the Authority. This reclamation is expected to take about two years to complete. Sir, I beg to move. Question put, and agreed to.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, financially, of course, it is a strain on the resources of the Housing Board to provide recreational or sports facilities, but the dividends do not come by way of money. They come by way of better and healthier citizens. Besides, nowadays tenants and occupiers of Housing Board flats expect swimming pools and parks. When the Housing Board first built flats in 1960, all it did was to provide homes with very little recreational or sports facilities. But our standards have gone up and their demands have gone up, and we will provide these sports and recreational facilities even if we lose money on them. I think the dividends that come by way of higher standards of sports, or healthier citizens (social dividends if you like) are really worth the money spent. TOURIST AGENCIES (Complaints against and plans to control) 14. Mr Yeo Choo Kok asked the Minister for Finance (a) how many travel or tour agencies have been registered with his Ministry to date; (b) how many of them are ticket agents of the Singapore Airlines; (c) how many of them are conducting overseas group tours; (d) whether and how many complaints of breach of contract against travel agencies have been lodged with the Authorities by persons who had participated in group tours; and (e) whether his Ministry plans to tighten control over group tour orientated travel agencies in order to save the public from being taken for a ride by fly-by-night travel agencies.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, there was no intended discrimination between owners and tenants even in respect of the service of these notices. Under the law it is necessary to serve a tenant or a lessee-owner with a notice which is headed, "Notice to Quit", before the service and conservancy charges can be raised; the intention is to terminate the tenancy so that a new tenancy can be offered and signed between the Board and the tenant. In the same way, notices had to be served on owners of flats, telling them that the old rates do not apply and that new rates will apply as from the 1st of July. Under the terms of the tenancy agreement, of which I have a blank copy here, clause 18 reads: `all notices, including notices to quit, which the Board may require to be given to the tenant shall be in writing and shall be deemed to be sufficiently served if they are posted upon some conspicuous part of the premises or if they are addressed to the tenant at the premises and forwarded by AR registered post.' To have served nearly 196,000 occupiers of HDB flats with letters by AR registered post would have cost a lot of money. Even the post office charges have gone up! So where a tenant was not at home the notice was posted on to the premises. As far as the owners or lessees were concerned, there was no such similar provision in any of the clauses of the lease. Letters, therefore, had to be sent.”
“For the 66,744 owners of Housing Board flats, the maximum increase (for the larger-sized flats) is only $10 per month. Fifty-five per cent of these owners are using their CPF credits to pay for their flats. The only cash outlay per month for their homes is the service and conservancy charges and property tax, which together come to less than the rental they would otherwise have to pay. The Housing and Development Board subsidises the rents of tenants. It cannot subsidise increases in service and conservancy charges. The 90,450 tenants of Housing Board fiats, who previously enjoyed lower service and conservancy charges than owners, have to pay the same rate as owners of Housing Board flats. But to minimise hardship, the increase ranging from $6 for 1-room (emergency) flats to $18.50 for 4-room flats, is being implemented in two stages. To equalise subsidies between old and new flats, service and conservancy charges for sold SIT flats are now the same as for owners of HDB flats. 14,990 tenants of SIT flats will now pay service and conservancy charges similar to HDB tenants. These SIT tenants have been enjoying free service and conservancy for the last 17 years. This was due to an administrative oversight. Nevertheless, to relieve hardship, the Housing Board has implemented the increase of these charges also in two stages. The Housing and Development Board has to revise the service and conservancy charges to be more equal in its treatment of old and new tenants, and between owner-owned and rented, premises. Lastly, may I remind Members that the Board must also be ready to meet increased subsidies as interest rates for loans from CPF funds go up for the new estates.”
“In the last 10 years, there have been mounting increases in the service and conservancy costs. The charges for water used in cleaning the common areas have increased by about 248 per cent. Charges for electricity for lighting of public areas, the running of lifts and power to pump water to the roof tank has increased by about 69 to 70 per cent. Wages of workers and salaries of management staff have also increased with the National Wages Council recommendations and higher Central Provident Fund contributions, while the inflation in our construction industry has raised the costs of redecoration and maintenance works by more than 100 per cent. Lift contractors charged from $30 to $50 per month to maintain a lift in 1964. Now they charge $80 per month. Residents in Housing Board estates now enjoy better environment, services and amenities than they did 10 years ago. More greenery, gardens and playgrounds have been added in the estates. Sports complexes and swimming pools are provided in each new town. There is emergency repair service round the clock for repairs to electrical and sanitary fittings in their flats. They can call upon the service of the Lift Rescue Unit. Residents will enjoy even better environment, services and amenities in the future. Swimming pools and other sports facilities are being extended to old housing estates. The first such swimming pool is under construction for the Old Kallang Airport and Tan jong Rhu Estates. Other swimming pools are being planned for the Bukit Ho Swee and Alexandra Estates while a sports complex will serve residents in the Tiong Bahru, Redhill and Henderson Road Estates. The increase in service and conservancy charges has been modest. They appear large only because they had not been gradually adjusted since 1960.”
“Thank you, Sir,I refer Members to the budget of the Housing and Development Board for 1974/75, which was published in the Government Gazette on 24th May, 1974. The Board will spend $40 million on management, maintenance and repairs in its estates for the current fiscal year. It hopes to recover $18 million from its collection of service and conservancy charges at the old rates. The increases in service and conservancy charges will bring in another $15 million, making a total of $33 million. So the Board has still to provide a subsidy of $7 million for the maintenance and management services to its estates. The financial statements which I referred to do not include the capital costs of constructing swimming pools, sports complexes and recreational and other amenities in the housing estates, nor the increase in loan servicing expected for all new Government loans as a result of the new Central Provident Fund rates. Members will recall that when I announced in Parliament on 30th November last year the increases in the selling prices of Housing Board flats, I also informed Members that the service and conservancy charges for HDB flats will be increased in 1974 and that rentals may be increased. Rentals have not been increased but the service and conservancy charges have been revised with effect from 1st July, 1974. The reasons for the revision have been explained in the press statement issued at the time. The service and conservancy charges have never gone up since 1960 when flats were first built for rental by the Housing and Development Board nor for flats sold under the Home Ownership Scheme, first introduced in 1965. Most of the tenants in flats built by the former Singapore Improvement Trust do not pay any service and conservancy charges. This is an anomaly.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, with your permission, I would like to answer Questions 12 and 13 together in order to avoid repetition.”
“Sir, the Housing and Development Board does not consider it advisable to convert the site between Kampong Kayu Road and Geylang River into a car park, because there are sufficient car parks at Kallang Park within walking distance of the housing estate. The flats, Sir, referred to in the Question, are the emergency-type flats. It is difficult to install additional rubbish chutes for these flats without major reconstruction. However, the Board will study the feasibility of installing additional lifts in the flats, provided the costs are not prohibitive. HOUSING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD (Reasons for increased service/conservancy charges) 12. Mr Ong Teng Cheong asked the Minister for Law and National Development if he will give reasons to justify the quantum of the recent increases in service/conservancy charges in the Housing and Development Board housing estates. 13. Mr P. Selvadurai asked the Minister for Law and National Development for the details of the financial and other factors that have necessitated the recent increases in the Housing and Development Board conservancy charges.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, in the long term, the Kampong San Teng area may be developed for housing and industrial estates, but at the moment there is no planned development programme. TANJONG RHU HOUSING ESTATE (Provision of car park, lifts and rubbish chutes) 11. Mr J. F. Conceicao asked the Minister for Law and National Development if he will ask the Housing and Development Board to give consideration to (i) converting the planted area along Kampong Kayu Road and next to the Geylang River into a car park; and (ii) constructing additional lifts and rubbish chutes for Blocks 10 to 13 in the Tanjong Rhu Housing Estate.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, we have been active for more than a week. May I take this opportunity of thanking Backbenchers for all their contributions and on behalf of each and every Member of the House, may I thank you, Sir, for listening to us for more than a week so patiently? Sir, I beg to move, "That Parliament do now adjourn to a date to be fixed." Question put, and agreed to. Resolved, "That Parliament do now adjourn to a date to be fixed." Adjourned accordingly at Nine minutes past Six o'clock p.m, to a date to be fixed.”
“We have succeeded to some extent, as my colleague has pointed out, in bringing down the prices of land by about 20 per cent in some cases. We hope it will stay that way, and does not rocket to the skies again. Question put, and agreed to. Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House. The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. - [Mr Hon Sui Sen]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. COMPANIES (AMENDMENT) BILL Order for Second Reading read. 5.40 p.m.”
“Sir, I think that point deserves a reply. Firstly, I think the hon. Member does not know exactly the boundaries of my constituency when he said that housing development is confined to 4-storey flats. To give him an example, he will find that flats opposite the Botanic Gardens have gone far, far beyond the 4-storey height which he has referred to. And that is not the only place in Tanglin. Tanglin stretches from Lido Theatre to the MacRitchie Reservoir. Regarding densities, we have been allowing developers to build higher and higher. But if a developer had bought a piece of land knowing that the plot ratio is 3:1, and then having bought it expect to get a plot ratio of 10:1, it means he is going to make a lot of money, and the prices of land will still go much higher. But there have been many cases where the ratios have been relaxed, especially in town where the plot ratio is now 10:1. It used to be 3:1 before. That is why there are buildings going up to 50 storeys. There is one developer who wanted to go up to 100. Every developer in Singapore wants to go higher and higher. He builds 36, I go 37. Someone else goes 50. They all want to go the highest. So there must be some planning control. I do not know the particular statutory board that the Member has referred to, but statutory boards are given special attention by my Ministry. Obviously we cannot favour statutory boards and give them high plot ratios when perhaps next door we have confined a private developer to a certain plot ratio. But I agree with Members that the price of land bears an important part to the total price. Hence Government's measures to try and bring down the price of land, and this Bill helps to further stabilise the price of land.”
“Sir, I had no intention of joining in this debate. I am sure my colleague can look after himself very well. But there was a point raised by the Member for Changi that if population densities were higher, plot ratios increase and on a given plot of, say, one acre, if a building goes higher, then the total cost will be cheaper. I agree with that. In fact, it has been the practice of my Ministry to relax and increase plot ratios, especially in the heart of the City. That is why we see the high buildings that are being erected, some of which have been completed. But obviously there is a limit beyond which we cannot go, and the density aspect, of course, is just one part of the cost. Costs have gone up because building materials have gone up, and I have spelt out the details earlier on. I thought I should clarify to the Member on this point which has not been answered by my colleague.”
“Sir, I beg to move, In page 2, line 3, after "Government", to insert "or the Authority". This is a drafting error which needs correction. Amendment agreed to. Clause 2, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 3 to 17 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill. Bill reported with an amendment; read a Third time and passed. MARTIAL ARTS INSTRUCTION BILL Order for Second Reading read. 4.08 p.m.”
“Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." The Urban Redevelopment Authority Act (No. 65 of 1973), which was passed by this House in November last year and assented to by the President in January this year, will be put into operation on the 1st of April this year. Under the provisions of the Act, the Car Parks Division of my Ministry will be integrated with the Urban Redevelopment Authority. However, matters presently administered by the Car Parks Division will continue to be governed by the Parking Places Act (Cap. 19, 1970 Edition). The Bill now before the House seeks to repeal and re-enact, with amendments, the Parking Places Act, 1970. I will draw Members' attention to only some of the more significant features, namely, clause 3 which empowers the Minister to provide suitable parking places for vehicles. Clause 4 prohibits persons from maintaining or operating any private parking places unless he is a holder of a valid licence, and empowers the Minister to prescribe the manner in which a licensed private parking place is to be maintained or operated. Clause 6 provides for the appointment of a Superintendent of Car Parks. Clause 8 empowers the Minister to make rules to regulate the use of public and private parking places. Clause 16 provides for the payment of all charges collected and all fines imposed into the funds of the Urban Redevelopment Authority. Sir, I beg to move. Question put, and agreed to. Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House. The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill. - [Mr E. W. Barker]. Bill considered in Committee. Clause 1 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 2 -”
“Yes, Sir, if the Member can come along to Changi, he will see what is going on there. It is not in the research stage. Research goes on all the time. But assistance to farmers and fishermen has gone on for a considerable time, in fact, for many years.”
“Sir, anyone who is paid compensation must be a bona fide farmer. If he grows vegetables and just depends on that for his living, then I would say he is a bona fide farmer. If there are cases of that nature in Potong Pasir, perhaps the Member could give me specific instances and I will look into the matter. I referred to pigs and poultry because that is the practice in Singapore. The farmers do not only grow vegetables; they have chickens and pigs, and sometimes even a taxi too.”
“But I am happy to say that, since its opening in 1969, an increasing number of fishing vessels have made use of the port facilities. The number of fishing vessels visiting the port in 1973 was only 387, and last year numbered 659. The fishing port has attracted fishing vessels not only from our own Republic but also those from Japan, Taiwan, Korea and Russia. About 2,000 local fishermen and 4,000 fish merchants and retailers make use of the market facilities. Members will be interested to know too that seven factories are now in production, producing filleted fish meat and fish meal for animal feed. 3.15 p.m.”
“The Farm School at Sembawang is one example of organised training conducted by the Department, it runs a one-year residential course and trainees can choose one of three subjects, animal husbandry, horticulture or fish culture for specialisation. The school has turned out 173 graduates who are now either managing their own farms or gainfully employed in the primary production sector. Members may be interested to know that the Department has successfully experimented with the cultivation of straw mushroom, and yields of up to 15 per cent of the weight of the growing medium have been obtained. The Department has also run a number of courses for the public, and there are now a few commercial farms producing straw mushrooms. A limiting factor to this development is the lack of padi-straws, the medium used for cultivating the mushroom. But the Department is now experimenting with substitutes, such as sawdust, cotton waste, coconut fibre and paper waste. The results are inconclusive. As for hydroponics, the Department has successfully experimented with the cultivation of high value crops, such as capsicum, under this system. Yields of up to one pound per plant per crop may be obtained, and with three crops in a year. The Department is now extending its experiments to leafy vegetables, and these have shown encouraging results. Yields are much higher than those produced from the conventional methods of cultivation. The Department is now intensifying its efforts to transmit its findings to the private sector. As for the fishing port at Jurong, Members will remember the opposition we met when the port was first opened and the fishmongers had to shift to Jurong.”
“No one is prevented from exporting orchids if he can find the right contacts overseas. As for fishing, there is a Fisheries Research Station at Changi and I would be happy to show the Member around. If he goes there he will see that fish are reared. There are also the giant fresh water prawns. The young fish and prawns are sold to the farmers or fishermen for breeding. Every year the Primary Production Department is asked to help farmers. Well, it does help them. But there is a shortage of land in Singapore, and there are priorities. The town itself is expanding and with the creation of new towns like Toa Payoh, Queenstown and Woodlands, there is less land for farming. But the Department is not asleep. It has the Veterinary Diagnostic Laboratory at Kampung Java which provides routine diagnosis of pigs and poultry which have died. It finds out what is wrong and tells the farmers. Specific disease control schemes are conducted by the Primary Production Department. There is also the control of pullorum disease in poultry, and swine brucellosis in pigs, a disease which causes abortions in fertility, resulting in loss of production. We have a scheme which enables farms to get rid of this disease. We have also a free swine fever vaccination service, a poultry vaccination service, a plant protection service, and there are 10 treatment centres strategically located throughout the island providing treatment services to pig and poultry farmers on the island. We even have training facilities and both ad hoc training and organised training are conducted by the Department to enable farmers to learn more recent techniques on farming, breeding and disease control.”
“This was done in order to bring the price down. But this was not done by my Ministry because we are not in charge of the quota. However, we have warned the Ministry of Finance of the dangers of leaving that quota too long. Our prime concern, like the Member for Jurong, is the protection of our farmers. Having seen the poultry industry grow to such a strong position that we export chickens and eggs - this was not easily done, but done over many years - we are naturally conscious to see that this industry is not affected by foreign competition. We have already warned the Ministry of Finance of these dangers and we are keeping a finger on it. The Member for Potong Pasir talked about bona fide farmers. If someone keeps a few chickens and a pig in his backyard for the Chinese New Year or Christmas, that does not make him a bona fide farmer, especially if he works in Jurong or drives a taxi. By a "bona fide farmer", we mean a farmer who genuinely does farming. There are, of course, genuine or bona fide farmers. But there are also people who do farming part-time just to have eggs for breakfast or chicken for the week-end. They do not depend on farming completely as a means of subsistence, and that is why we say they are not bona fide farmers. The Member for Anson wants the Primary Production Department to grow vegetables on the roof-tops of Housing Board flats. It is an ingenious idea, but it has practical difficulties. The Member for Sembawang wants the Primary Production Department to find a market for orchids. There are already several orchid exporters in Singapore who have their contacts overseas, and hence the export of orchids brings in considerable foreign exchange. But it is not for the Primary Production Department to compete with these firms.”