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 25 of 44.
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Third time." Members will recall that the Bill was-referred to a Select Committee on the-27th January this year to enable further representations of the profession and those of the public to be made and consideration given thereto. Three written representations were received and the Select Committee heard oral evidence from three witnesses representing a group of qualified land surveyors resident and/or practising in Singapore. Some contributions made to' the Select Committee were most valuable and a number of suggestions, particularly those relating to disciplinary powers of the Land Surveyors Board, were accepted. The Select Committee's-Report was published on the 19th September this year as Parliamentary Paper No. 5 of 1970. Mr Speaker, Sir, the Bill now tabled before this House incorporates the recommendations of the Select Committee. Sir, I beg to move. Question put, and agreed to. Bill accordingly read a Third time and passed. STANDING ORDERS (Amendment) 6.06 p.m.”
“With the introduction of these amendments, the charge becomes permanently attached to land whether registered or unregistered, and it will not, therefore, be necessary to provide for any restriction on dealings in land which are subject to the preservation order. Amendment agreed to. Clause 9, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clauses 10 to 17 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill. Bill reported with amendments; react a Third time and passed. LAND SURVEYORS BILL (As reported from Select Committee) Order for Third Reading read. 6.04 p.m.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, In page 6, line 12, to leave out from "the" to the end of line 13 and insert the words set out in the Order Paper Supplement*. *The words appearing in the Order Paper Supplement read as follows: "land which is the site of the monument and shall operate as if it were a charge on land, whether that land is registered or unregistered land. The preservation order shall, -- Ord. 21 (a) if it affects registered land, be regarded as of 1956. a statutory obligation under paragraph (c) of Cap. 225 subsection (1) of section 28 of the Land Titles Ordinance, 1956; and (b) if it affects unregistered land, be regarded as if it were a charge under. the Registration of Deeds Ordinance and, upon registration of a memorandum of the charge, created by the preservation order, the charge shall, notwithstanding the provisions of that Ordinance, have priority over all other instruments (including charges and other encumbrances) affecting that land.". Sir, this is to remove doubts as to the precise effect of the land charge which is created by a preservation order, particularly as it affects unregistered land. The most effective means of achieving this is to treat the preservation order as if it were a charge under the Registration of Deeds Ordinance and to provide that, upon registration of a memorandum of the charge, such charge shall have priority over all other instruments. As regards registered land, the charge will have effect as a statutory obligation under section 28 (1) (c) of the Land Titles Ordinance, 1956. This means that the charge will be an over-riding interest on land.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, In page 6, line 4, to leave out from "withheld)" to the end of line 10 and insert "be demolished, removed, altered or renovated or have any addition made except in case of urgent and immediate necessity for the safety of persons or property.". Sir, this is an amendment consequential to the other amendment in clause 9 which renders paragraph (a) of sub-clause (1) of clause 9 unnecessary. Paragraph (b) onwards is retained. Amendment agreed to. 6.00 p.m.”
“Mr Speaker. Sir, I beg to move. In page 5, line 30, after "Board", to insert "and that preservation order shall take effect and come into operation on the date of that notification and shall remain in force until revoked by the Minister or until it otherwise ceases to have effect". Sir, this amendment seeks to state with precision the date of the coming into operation of each preservation order and its duration. Amendment agreed to. Clause 8, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 9 -”
“All I need say, Sir, is thanks to the Member for his support. 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. [Mr Speaker in the Chair] 5.59 p.m. Clauses 1 to 7 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 8 -”
“A copy of the preservation order will be served upon the owner or occupier of the "monument" as defined in the Bill. A preservation order will bind all subsequent owners and occupiers of the land on which the monument is sited and will operate as if it were a charge on the land. Where a preservation order is in force, the monument to which the order relates may not, without the consent of the Board, be demolished, removed or altered in any way except in the case of urgent necessity. To assist the Board in carrying out its objects, a fund to he known as the Preservation of Monuments Fund is to be established and it is hoped that the public will respond generously by making donations, grants and gifts to this Fund. Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move. Question proposed. 5.52 p.m.”
“These monuments will be specified in preservation orders to be made by the Minister on the advice of the Preservation of Monuments Board which is to be set up in order to carry out the task of marking out, preserving and maintaining monuments. The members of the Board will be drawn from many walks of life and from all spheres of activity, but will all be united in the purpose of conserving our "monuments" an expression which is defined in the Bill as those which are of "historic, traditional, archaeological, architectural or artistic interest". The Board is charged with the task of augmenting the amenities o, these monuments, stimulating public interest and preserving all records, documents and data relating to such monuments. Among the powers which are to be conferred on the Board are the powers to advise on and supervise alterations and renovations to the monuments: to contribute by means of a grant or loan towards the expenses incurred in the upkeep and preservation of monuments; to acquire any land, site or monument appearing to tile Board to be of outstanding historic, traditional or artistic interest; and to regulate and control public access to monuments and to charge fees for such access. The Bill contains an interesting provision for the saving of monuments which are occupied as dwelling houses. If within the period of one year from the date of the preservation order the monument is not acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1966, the preservation order is to cease to have effect. A word on these preservation orders will not be amiss. The Minister will notify in the Gazette preservation orders which he will make on the advice of the Board placing the specified monuments under the Board's protection.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." Singapore now stands in the 151st year of its foundation. We have achieved much since the days when the island was largely jungle and swamp land. Both low-cost and luxury buildings rise skywards and hundreds of acres are being reclaimed from the sea. The vitality of our citizens, our desire to demonstrate that the world does not owe us a living, our rapid industrial and economic advancement and other factors have contributed towards a surge of progress in the last decade, the like of which Singapore has not seen in its previous history. In this forward-looking state of mind and in our enthusiasm for urban renewal, we may wake up one day to find our historic monuments either bulldozed or crumbling to dust through neglect. As new Singapore is being built, we must not let the worthwhile part of older Singapore disappear, and the time has therefore come for us to take stock of what we have of the past and seek to preserve objects and buildings that will remind us of our heritage, even though it be short in span of time. It is to this end that the Preservation of Monuments Bill is now before this House. This piece of legislation will, we hope, assist in preserving for the benefit of our future the buildings, monuments and sites that have been associated with people, events and periods in our history. There are a number of monuments already in full use, and the Preservation of Monuments Bill will not in any way detract from such use. The multi-racial composition of Singapore has given us a rich and varied number of monuments which will come within the purview of this Bill.”
“They are two different Ordinances administered by two different persons. The Member should, in fact, be happier that we are catching granite quarries, as it were, under two separate Ordinances. The Factories Ordinance imposes certain conditions and regulations. This is another Ordinance. But surely they can work together. Is the Member unhappy that this Bill is being passed?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move. "That the Bill be now read a Second time." The purpose of this Bill is to provide for the licensing and control of sand and granite quarries. The Sand Quarries Ordinance, 1961 (No. 33 of 1961) is to be repealed. At the moment, whilst sand quarries are licensed, granite quarries are not. This is an obviously anomalous position which it is now proposed to put right. Granite quarrying is a major operation involving, amongst other things, the use of explosives and heavy plant and equipment. Further, granite is an important building material to the building industry which is rapidly expanding in Singapore. There is, therefore, a pressing need for granite quarries to be licensed and their activities brought under proper control. The control is to ensure that there will be proper supervision of the use of mechanically accepted plant and equipment for quarrying operations, as well as the imposition of adequate safety measures to prevent any nuisance or danger or damage to life or property. This is laid down in clause 13. As such, the penalty for the offence of operating a quarry without a licence has been increased from the existing fine of $1,000 with a continuing fine of not more than $50 a day provided under the Sand Quarries Ordinance, 1961, to a maximum fine of $5,000 with a continuing fine of $100 a day. This is provided for in clause 4. The provisions of the Bill, in the main, follow the provisions Sand Quarries Ordinance which repealed. Sir, I beg to move. Question proposed. 5.27 p.m.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, In page 6, after line 33, to insert- "Chapter 64 Contribution to The whole.". Imperial Defence Ordinance Sir, like the other enactments in the Second Schedule to the Bill, this Ordinance is obsolete since the payments it required are no longer necessary. Amendment agreed to. Second Schedule, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Bill reported with amendments; read a Third time and passed. SAND AND GRANITE QUARRIES BILL Order for Second Reading read. 5.23 p.m.”
“Mr Speaker. Sir, I beg to move. In page 2, after line 33, to insert - " Printing Presses In each of sections 6, 19, 20 Ordinance for the words "Justice" of the (Chapter 226) "Peace" there are substituted the words "person authorized by the Minister in that behalf".". Sir, these amendments will make administrative procedure under the Ordinance conform with present-day practice, dependence on Justices of the-Peace being outmoded. Persons authorized by the Minister will perform the functions hitherto carried out by the Justices of the Peace under the sections in question. Amendment agreed to. First Schedule, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Second Schedule -”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, In page 2, after line 21, to insert - "Explosives In each of sections 3, 4, 5, Substances for the word "whipping" there is Ordinance substituted the word "canning". (Chapter 217)". Sir, the substitution of "caning" for `whipping" follows the general abolition of whipping in 1959. Amendment agreed to.”
“For one or more of these reasons, each enactment contained in the Second Schedule can be removed from the statute book without affecting any administrative processes or any person's rights. The amendments affected by the Bill will be incorporated in the revised edition of Acts publication of which will commence soon, and the repealed enactments will be omitted from the edition. 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. [Mr Speaker in the Chair] 5.19 p.m. Clauses 1 to 3 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill. First Schedule -”
“A cross-reference in the Moneylenders Ordinance, 1959 (No. 58 of 1959), is corrected to conform to an amendment made to the Ordinance in 1967. Similarly in the Income Tax Ordinance (Reprint 16 of 1966) some cross-references were adjusted in view of the amendments made in that year. In the Estate Duty Ordinance (Reprint 17 of 1966) the rate of interest on unpaid duty for deaths occurring before 1965, which was fixed by section 32 of the Ordinance in the 1955 edition, will be placed in the Fifth Schedule of the Ordinance along with the rates for deaths in and after 1965. By the last amendment in the Bill the form prescribed in the Hire-Purchase Act, 1969, is altered to conform to the substantive provisions of the Act. The Second Schedule to the Bill lists a number of enactments which will be repealed. The first column shows the number and year of the enactment. Its Short Title is given in the second column, and the third column shows how much of it will be repealed. In most cases, the whole statute or so much of it as has not yet previously been repealed is specified. In every case, the enactment is now obsolete for one reason or another. Some of these laws have been superseded by more recent legislation but were not repealed at the time. Some have outlived their original purpose, such as dealing with public loans or with some aspect of early post-war conditions of the colonial administration in Singapore. Some are Malaysian laws which have never been brought into operation in Singapore, or which can have no useful operation now, or in respect of which there are more appropriate Singapore-enacted laws, and some were intended to operate only for a transitional period and are no longer needed now.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." Similar in all respects to the Statute Law Revision Act, 1969, the Bill now before this House also seeks to amend and repeal a number of statute laws as recommended by the Law Revision Commissioners who are presently preparing a revised edition of our Acts. `The amendments and repeals to be made under the Bill are set out in the First and Second Schedules thereto and will be given effect by clauses 2 and 3 thereof respectively. In the First Schedule to the Bill, each amendment is aimed at adapting a statute to some change that has taken place since it was enacted for removing an obsolete provision or incorrect reference. It will not, however, change the substance of the law but will merely ensure that the law has the operation and effect originally intended for it. The amendments in the Mental Disorders and Treatment Ordinance (Cap. 145) will adjust some references in the Ordinance so that they will conform with the amendments that were made to sections 32 and 34 of the Ordinance in 1957 and 1960 and an obsolete form is removed. The changes in the Rubber Estates Assessment Ordinance (Cap. 168) are to conform to the present Constitution of Singapore. The Price Control Ordinance (Cap. 225) is amended to conform to the more recent Hire-Purchase Act, 1969 (No. 1 of 1969). The Seamen's Registry Board Ordinance, 1957 (No. 11 of 1957), will be made to refer correctly to the present means of declaring a port. The Nursing Homes and Maternity Homes Registration Ordinance, 1959 (No. 5 of 1959), which was passed when there were local authorities of the City Council and the Rural Board, will be adapted to the integrated health administration we have now.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, there are 189 families living in the one-room emergency flats in the Kampong Tiong Bahru Estate who have registered for transfer to but have not yet been offered larger accommodation. The majority of these families have requested for transfer to one-room improved and two-room flats in Kampong Tiong Bahru and Redhill Estates. Most of the available flats in these estates will, however, be offered to re-settlement cases who are required to vacate their present premises to make way for development projects. However, the Housing and Development Board is now embarking on extensive development schemes in Henderson Road, Tiong Bahru and Telok Blangah and a substantial number of flats will then be available for allocation when these new housing estates are completed. However, this will take some time, at least three years. KANDANG KERBAU MARKET (Conversion into two-storey market) 10. Mr Yeo Toon Chia asked the Minister for Health if he will consider the feasibility of converting the Kandang Kerbau Market into a two-storey market to accommodate the increasing number of hawkers' stalls which are at present outside the market and so enhance the cleanliness of the vicinity.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the Housing and Development Board has plans to convert the one-room semi-communal flats at Bukit Ho Swee into two-room self-contained units. Conversion work will commence as soon as some 500 units of one-room improved flats now being constructed at Delta Estate opposite Bukit Ho Swee are completed in the middle of next year. The Member will appreciate that we cannot do any work on the one-room flats until there is alternative accommodation available for the present occupants. The existing tenants at Bukit Ho Swee will be given the choice of either renting the modified two-room self-contained units or moving into the new improved one-room flats at Delta Estate. KAMPONG TIONG BAHRU ESTATE (Larger accommodation for families living in one-room flats) 9. Mr Ch'ng Jit Koon asked the Minister for Law and National Development if he will ascertain from the Housing and Development Board (a) how many families, who are living in the one-room emergency flats in Kampong Tiong Bahru Estate, have registered for transfer to, and have not yet been offered, larger accommodation; and (b) when those families can expect to be offered larger accommodation.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I regret to inform the Member for Delta that there is no plan to widen Prince Philip Avenue because there is not sufficient land on either side of the road for road widening. The P.W.D, has no plan for the installation of street lights along the footpath next to the Alexandra Road Market. However, the Urban and Rural Services Committee will be pleased to consider an application from the Member or from his Citizens' Consultative Committee for the installation of lights along this footpath. BUKIT HO SWEE (Conversion of semi-communal flats into self-contained flats) 8. Mr Seah Mui Kok asked the Minister for Law and National Development if he will ascertain from the Housing and Development Board if the Board has any plans to convert all the semi-communal one-room flats with toilets outside at blocks 1, 3, 5, 7 and 9 at Jalan Bukit Ho Swee into one-room improved self-contained flats with toilets and to provide more accommodation space for the tenants.”
“No firm decision has been made on the proposed utilisation of the reclaimed land. This will, however, be made by the planners, in conjunction with other authorities, at a later stage. Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move. Question put, and agreed to. Resolved, That this Parliament, in accordance with section 4 of the Foreshores Ordinance (Chapter 246), approves the reclamation by Government of that portion of the foreshore and sea-bed containing an area of approximately 1,306 acres from Bedok to Tanah Merah Besar as delineated on the plan marked "LAND OFFICE RECLAMATION PLAN 1/70" which is deposited in the Land Office, Singapore.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move the motion standing in my name, That this Parliament, in accordance with section 4 of the Foreshores Ordinance (Chapter 246), approves the reclamation by Government of that portion of the foreshore and sea-bed containing an area of approximately 1,306 acres from Bedok to Tanah Merah Besar as delineated on the plan marked "LAND OFFICE RECLAMATION PLAN 1/70" which is deposited in the Land Office, Singapore. This is the fourth phase of the scheme for the reclamation of the foreshore and sea-bed along the east coast of our Republic. The third phase of the reclamation scheme, which was approved by this House in 1967, was originally envisaged to cover an area of 306 acres from the Singapore Swimming Club right up to the end of Tanjong Rhu and from Nicoll Highway to Elizabeth Walk. This area has now been amended to cover 289.5 acres only - 125 acres from the Singapore Swimming Club to the end of Tanjong Rhu, which is expected to be completed in October this year, and 164.5 acres from Nicoll Highway to Elizabeth Walk, the contract for which has already been awarded and the reclamation of which is expected to be completed in early 1971. The Government now proposes to reclaim a further 1,306 acres of the foreshore and sea-bed from Bedok to Tanah Merah Besar. A copy of this reclamation plan is deposited in the Library of this House for the information of Members. Sir, this phase of the reclamation, which will also be undertaken by the Housing and Development Board as agent of the Government, is estimated to cost $35 million. Some 405 acres of land at Upper Changi Road are being acquired to provide fill for this reclamation. Work on the reclamation, which is expected to take four years to complete, will begin in early 1971.”
“For example, a person aged 18, otherwise fit and eligible, might have to be left out of the armed forces because he is known to have pro-Communist or other extremist tendencies, or that he comes from such a family. We had envisaged these teething problems when the Presidential Council Act was passed. When the President formally swore in members of the Council, he had this to say: `From the experience of the workings of your Council and of any teething problems that may arise, amendments to the law governing the Presidential Council may be necessary.' This has been found to be the case in a Bill relating to defence and security. Normally it would have been the President who would certify such a Bill. But as the Presidential Council advises the President, it has been thought more appropriate that the Prime Minister should so certify. Perhaps in conclusion, Sir, it may be useful if I were to recall what was said in this House when the principle of a Presidential Council was agreed to, namely, that this Council cannot limit the sovereignty of Parliament. It is not a supra-Parliamentary body overseeing this Parliament. Only the Courts can interpret what has been legislated, and only the electorate can bring about a change in the legislative policies of this Parliament. 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. ENVIRONMENTAL PUBLIC HEALTH (AMENDMENT) BILL Order for Second Reading read. 4.05 p.m.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." This Bill seeks to amend the Constitution in order to ensure that Bills affecting "the defence or security of Singapore or which relate to public safety, peace or good order in Singapore" can be introduced into this House and made law without the need of further scrutiny by the Presidential Council. As the law now stands, Money Bills (as defined by the Constitution) and Bills certified as urgent by the Prime Minister may be made law without prior consideration thereof by the Council. In respect of Money Bills, provisions in the Constitution itself exclude their consideration by the Council. Bills certified as urgent by the Prime Minister are, after their having been made law, referred to the Council for its opinion. Hon. Members may therefore ask why the need for this amendment. Recently the Presidential Council considered the Enlistment Bill (Bill No. 17/70). I understand that among other arguments against some of the provisions, there was one that Ministerial discretion was so wide as to be possible of discrimination. In this case, a majority of the Council upheld an interpretation of the legislation which did not cause the Bill to be referred back to the House. But it brought home to the Government the realisation that it could have been extremely difficult to explain, either to the Presidential Council, or in this House, sensitive issues as to why exemption or deferment of call-up for any person or group of persons would not be in the national interests. On matters of defence or security, there are times when a Minister cannot give his reasons.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the clause be read a Second time." Question put, and agreed to. Clause read a Second time and added to the Bill.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, may I seek your consent and the general assent of Members to introduce a new clause without notice? Sir, this new clause is to amend section 128 of the principal Ordinance by merely deleting subsection (5) thereof. This is, in fact, an amendment consequential on the amendment made by clause 17 to section 127.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, In page 13, after line 31, to add - "(2) The amendments effected by this section in relation to section 35 of the Property Tax Ordinance, 1960, shall be deemed to apply to all transfers executed or lodged in for registration by the Comptroller of Property Tax before the date of the coming into operation of the Land Titles (Amendment) Act, 1970, and all such transfers so executed shall accordingly be deemed always to have been, or to be, validly executed.". Sir, the amendment as now proposed is to remove any doubt as to whether the Comptroller of Property Tax has powers to execute transfers as regards registered land under sections 35 and 38 of the Property Tax Ordinance, 1960, and at the same time ensure that the intention of section 116 of the Land Titles Ordinance, 1956, is carried out. It will not, however, affect any accrued or vested rights to property. Amendment agreed to. The Chairman: There is a consequential amendment, In page 13, line 18, after "16.", to insert "-(1) ". This will be done. Clause 16, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clauses 17 to 21 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill. New Clause -”
“At present there is provision under section 131 of the Ordinance for rectification only by the Registrar where errors have occurred in the land-register. Sir, the amendments to which I have referred up to this point cover the new concepts of major importance that are sought to be introduced into the Ordinance. The other amendments which are not without importance are intended either to remove anomalies, for example, clause 19, or to strengthen and improve the administration of the Ordinance (clauses 3, 4, 5, 8 and 16), or to protect the interests of the Government (clause 12), or the interests of the legal profession (clause 9). The remaining amendments have been explained briefly in the Explanatory Statement to the Bill and do not, therefore, call for any special comment. The Bill, which has been drafted in close consultation with the Law Society of Singapore, has benefited considerably from its advice and suggestions. The Bill constitutes a workable piece of land legislation and will help to ensure that the law in force in Singapore in relation to the registration of titles to registered land keeps pace with the changing needs of our rapidly developing and fast industrialising society. 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. [Mr Speaker in the Chair] 3.46 p.m. Clauses 1 to 15 inclusive ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 16 -”
“Under the existing provisions of the Ordinance, any applicant for a possessory title may be required to contribute to the assurance fund such fee by way of indemnity, not greater than two per cent of the value of the land. Sir, the Explanatory Statement to the Bill is incorrect and misleading to the extent that it suggests that an applicant is required to contribute. This should, of course, read "may be required to contribute". The issue of a title to a possessory owner of land exposes the Government to claims for the recovery of damages against the assurance fund under clause 17 of the Bill. Such claims will normally depend on the prevailing market value of the land. It is considered that the present rate of two per cent may be inadequate. In certifying a title that rests on adverse possession, the assurance fund is exposed to a greater degree of risk than with regard to other forms of certification. It is relevant that a person with a possessory title is, by virtue of subsection (6) of section 33 of the Ordinance, deemed to be a purchaser of value who thus acquires many of the benefits conferred by the provisions of the Ordinance dealing with indefeasibility of title. It is proposed to increase this rate to five per centum which is the present rate required to be paid under Rule 43 of the Land Titles Rules, 1960. Clause 18 confers power upon the court to rectify the land-register in certain circumstances, that is to say, where two or more persons have by mistake been registered as proprietor of the same registered estate or interest in the land that is registered, or where the court is satisfied that any registration or notification has been obtained through fraud, omission or mistake.”
“A similar provision appears in the Land Titles (Strata) Act, 1967, which has satisfactorily solved the difficulty under that Act with regard to flats. Clause 14 amends section 112 of the Ordinance. The existing provision in section 112 (4) of the Ordinance does not specify the cases where an application to remove a restriction could be made to the land. The applicant, therefore, has to rely on common law cases. The provision now under this clause will enable the court to remove restrictive covenants on the application of any person interested in land where, by reason of the change of user of such land, the continuance of the restriction will impede development for public or private purposes, or where the removal thereof will not materially injure the person entitled to the benefit of the restrictive covenant. Provision is also made for compensation to be paid by the applicant to any person entitled to the benefit of the restriction. This will thus allow landowners a reasonable opportunity of developing their land in line with any planning user that is imposed by Government. This amendment will meet in some measure the representations of the Law Society for the enactment of legislation for the discharge or modification of restrictive covenants. Clause 17 amends section 127 of the Ordinance and provides that claims may be brought against the assurance fund constituted under section 123 of the Ordinance only if the Registrar or any member of his staff can be held liable for any omission, mistake or misfeasance in the bringing of such land under the provisions of the Ordinance or in registering any instrument. Another amendment that relates to the assurance fund occurs in clause 7 which amends section 33 of the Ordinance dealing with applications for possessory titles.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." The Bill now before this House, as Members will note, is a rather technical one. I propose, therefore, to confine myself to the major amendments proposed therein. These amendments are, in the main, designed to bring more lands that are approved for development under the Ordinance and to bring the Ordinance into line with the provisions of the Land Titles (Strata) Act, 1967, and the Planning Ordinance, 1959. Clause 2 of the Bill is designed to hasten the pace generally of conversion to the Torrens System of land registration by empowering the Registrar of Titles to bring unregistered land, in respect of which permission to develop has been granted under the Planning Ordinance, 1959, under the control of the Ordinance by issuing a qualified certificate of title in respect thereof. The registration of conveyances can thus be effected more quickly without survey being finalised. This provision will have the beneficial effect of enabling purchasers of units of new housing estates and, in certain circumstances, owners of flats to obtain their title deeds with a minimum of delay, and immeasurably assist landowners who wish to use their title deeds as security for loans to finance commercial or industrial undertakings. Clause 11 deals with implied easements for the passage of water, electricity, drainage, gas and sewerage in each lot of land forming part of the same housing estate. The purpose of this amendment is to resolve the difficulty in carrying out the existing provisions of the Ordinance relating to notification of easements on certificates of titles where cross-easements in respect of all lots in a housing estate are required to be created.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, In page 1, to leave out lines 12 to 18 inclusive and insert - " Provided that where an approved company is or has been reconstructed and amalgamates with a company or has taken over the whole of the business and the assets of a company, which has satisfied the conditions of this paragraph, the said conditions shall be deemed to have been complied with by the approved company, unless it fails to pay a dividend at the rate of not less than five per centum in respect of its first full financial year of operations or in respect of any of its subsequent financial years; and". Sir, the amendment as now proposed is to remove any doubt whatsoever that a company which has been reconstructed and amalgamates with another, which other company has heretofore enjoyed the status of an approved company, or has taken over the whole of the business and assets of a company which on its own has attained the status of an approved company, would after such reconstruction and amalgamation, or taking-over or merger, be deemed to have satisfied the principal conditions of this paragraph. The presumption regarding such a company shall not operate if this new company fails to pay a dividend at the rate of not less than five per cent in respect of its full financial year of operations or indeed in respect of any of its subsequent years. It has been thought necessary to introduce this further amendment in order to ensure the viability of such a company so long as it wishes to continue receiving trust monies as investments. Amendment agreed to. Clause 2, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Bill reported with an amendment; read a Third time and passed. LAND TITLES (AMENDMENT) BILL Order for Second Reading read. 3.36 p.m.”
“The Government recognises the need for the prohibition at present contained in section 4 (2) (b) , the object of which provision is, of course, to ensure that such a company is a going concern and has made profits sufficient enough to allow it to declare a reasonable rate of return. This general rule is thus preserved, but the proviso accords a flexibility which was missing and which was not envisaged in the Act of 1967. It may be said, therefore, that the present amendment proposed in the Bill merely removes the technical impediments in the way of former reconstructed companies but leaves untouched the safeguards contained in the Act of 1967. Companies which have been amalgamated or been subject to reconstruction but which are essentially the same as their former selves, as it were, will not be thus unfairly prejudiced. 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. [Mr Speaker in the Chair] 3.32 p.m. Clause 1 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 2 -”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." As the law now stands, trust funds may only be invested in what is known as authorised investments, which are listed in section 4 of the Trustees Act, 1967. There is, amongst other things, specific prohibition on the investment of trust funds in the form of loans to a company, unless that company is an approved company which satisfies three conditions, namely: (a) its ordinary share capital is not less than S$5 million; (b) it has paid a dividend at the rate of not less than 5 per cent per annum for each of the last three years prior to the time of the investment; and (c) the total amount of the borrowings of the approved company from all sources does not exceed two-thirds of the amount for the time being secured to the approved company from its borrowers. It follows, therefore, that in order to qualify as such, a company must have been in existence as a Singapore incorporated company for not less than three years prior to the time of the investment, assuming, of course, that it has straightaway paid a dividend of not less than 5 per centum for the very first year of its incorporation. Indeed a company which has reconstructed itself for the sole reason of seeking to qualify as an approved company, or a new company which has taken over another company qualified as an approved company, may be caught by reason of the exclusionary provisions. In order, therefore, to accommodate such companies which may heretofore have been properly enjoying the status of trustee investment companies and have been excluded merely because of the technical requirements of section 3 of the Act in respect of the status of an approved company, the proviso in section 4 (2) (b) has been introduced.”
“The technical divisions of the Economic Development Board, that is, the Singapore Institute of Standards and Industrial Research, the Light Industries Services, the Enginering Industries Development Agency and the National Productivity Centre provide technical services to industries and help to organise seminars and courses to promote quality con sciousness among our industries and workers. As an additional incentive, the Government has decided that all Government departments and statutory bodies will give preference to the purchase of products which have been awarded the Quality Certificate by SISIR. The best encouragement and incentive, however, would be the recognition of the Quality Certificate and the purchase of such certificated products by the public at large. COMMISSION OF INQUIRY ON STATISTICAL ACTIVITIES IN SINGAPORE (Publication and implementation of report) 12. Mr J. F. Conceicao asked the Minister for Finance if the findings of the Commission of Inquiry on Statistical Activities in Singapore will be made public soon; and to what extent the recommendations of the Commission will be implemented. Mr Tang See Chim (for the Minister for Finance): Mr Speaker, Sir, it is intended that the Report of the Commission will be made public in the near future. The recommendations of the Commission appear sound and should be largely implemented, but the actual extent will be determined by my Ministry after consultation with the Ministries and departments affected by these recommendations.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the safety of pedestrians using the stretch of road between Delta Circus and Alexandra Circus has been under close study for some time by our road engineers and the Road Department Committee. I am pleased to inform the Member for Delta that the Committee has decided to construct an overhead bridge to replace the zebra crossing in front of the Alexandra Road Post Office. Tenders for the construction of the overhead bridge will be called shortly, and it is expected that the bridge will be completed by the end of the year or soon thereafter. SINGAPORE INSTITUTE OF STANDARDS AND INDUSTRIAL RESEARCH (Issue of quality certificates to industries) 11. Mr J. F. Conceicao asked the Minister for Finance how many quality certificates have been issued to various industries by the Singapore Institute of Standards and Industrial Research; and what encouragement is being given to firms to qualify for such certificates. The Minister of State for Finance (Mr Tang See Chim) (for the Minister for Finance): Mr Speaker, Sir, the Quality Certificate Scheme was initiated in August 1969 and by June this year 21 certificates had been awarded for various products. A further 28 are at present under pre-certification testing and 21 additional applications for acceptance into this Scheme have been received by the Singapore Institute of Standards and Industrial Research (SISIR). The Government attaches great importance to the production of quality products by our industries, and every encouragement is being given to firms to qualify for such certificates.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, if we cancel the contracts for the advertisements of these cigarettes, we will be liable for breach of contract. These are annual contracts, and when they expire at the end of one year I assure the Member for Jurong that we will follow Radio and Television Singapore and not renew advertisements for cigarettes. As for the six bridges, the three under active construction now are one at New Bridge Road, near the People's Park; another one at New Bridge Road, near Hong Lim Park; and the third at Tiong Bahru Road, near Redhill Close. The two overhead bridges which are already at New Bridge Road are, in fact, constructed by the People's Park Complex developers. Tenders have been called for the construction of three more overhead bridges at Bukit Timah Road; one near Swiss Cottage School, the other near Coronation Road, and the third at Linden Drive. I think the Member will agree with me that the traffic along Bukit Timah and Dunearn Roads on the main highway to Johore is indeed very heavy; hence three more overhead bridges. MENTALLY DEFECTIVE CHILDREN (Ward facilities) 12. Mr Hwang Soo Jin asked the Minister for Health what is the total number of beds available for mentally defective children in the ward situated behind the Woodbridge Hospital as against the number of children waiting to be admitted; and what steps are being or will be taken to expand the facilities available at that ward.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, there are 24 overhead pedestrian bridges in the Republic; three more bridges are under construction; and tenders have been called for the construction of another three. Ten of these overhead pedestrian bridges have been let out for advertisements, and the advertisements displayed are in respect of goods generally, medicines, and cigarettes. The annual income received from these advertisements was $54,110 in 1968 and $67,062 in 1969.”
“I cannot agree more with the Member that sufficient consideration should be given before traffic lights are installed. The sum incurred in this case was small - we were fortunate in that respect. But I agree with the Member that it was rather foolish to erect traffic lights close to a junction which already has traffic lights. OVERHEAD BRIDGES (Letting out for advertisements) 11. Mr Ho Kah Leong asked the Minister for Law and National Development (a) how many overhead bridges there are in the Republic; (b) on how many of them has advertising space been let out, and the nature of the advertisements; and (c) what is the annual income derived from those advertisements.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, traffic control lights for the crossing of pedestrians were installed at High Street following a number of complaints received during the Pedestrian Safety Campaign early this year. The experiment was not a success and caused confusion to motorists and pedestrians, as a result of which the control lights were removed. About $450 was incurred in their installation and removal.”
“I think we are all getting confused! The question I was asked by the Member for Kallang was whether people in his constituency would be given priority. The answer was yes, if they were cleared by the Housing and Development Board or affected by housing development. But if they are not affected cases, in other words, if they are not evicted by the Resettlement Department of the Housing and Development Board, then they do not deserve the same degree of priority as clearance cases. But we are just as interested in getting rid of slums as both the Members are or appear to be. TRAFFIC LIGHTS AND PEDESTRIAN CROSSING AT HIGH STREET (Installation and removal) 10. Mr Ho Kah Leong asked the Minister for Law and National Development why the traffic control lights and pedestrian crossing which had been newly installed at High Street have been removed; and what expenditure was incurred in the installation and removal.”
“The answer is probably this. The clearance cases in other constituencies were given priority because they were more special cases. But, as far as is possible, we try to accommodate people where they want to live, and preferably in the area or locality from which they have been evicted. People in Singapore are reluctant to move from, say, Katong to Bukit Timah, or from Geylang Serai to Sembawang. This is because they have got used to the place. But, as far as is possible, we accommodate them where they would like to go.”
“They will not be given priority because there are other slum-like areas in other constituencies which deserve as much priority as the slum dwellers of Kallang. But should any residents of Kallang be affected by some development project and are cleared accordingly, then they will, of course, be given priority as the clearance cases are given priority in other constituencies.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the question is in three parts and I propose to answer accordingly. (a) Piling work for the flats in the former Balestier Estate will commence in two months' time and about 2,000 flats are expected to be completed by the end of 1971. Another 3,000 flats are expected to be completed by late 1972 or early 1973. (b) These flats will be offered to both the public and the clearance cases. Residents in the Kallang Constituency affected by the clearance programme will be given priority, but not those residents who are not so affected. (c) In Balestier Estate, a market and shopping centre will be provided for the residents, together with car parks and children's playgrounds. Four acres of land will be set aside for outdoor recreational amenities, like basket-ball, badminton and sepak raga.”
“They are always subject to bargaining. We are reasonable. FLATS IN FORMER BALESTIER ESTATE (Particulars) 9. Inche Abdul Aziz Karim asked the Minister for Law and National Development (a) when construction of dwelling flats in the former Balestier Estate along Lorong Limau will begin and when they will be completed for occupation; (b) whether those flats will be offered first to residents in Kallang Constituency, who have been or are likely to be affected by the Government's development programmes, and also to Kallang residents who are staying in slum-like areas; and (c) what amenities will be provided to the tenants of those flats.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the Housing and Development Board has set aside a site for a temple in Kallang Basin for all the Chinese temples affected by development or clearance projects in Kallang Basin. This offer is similar to those made in Toa Payoh, Queenstown and Bukit Ho Swee, where all the owners of Chinese temples in each locality joined forces to develop one permanent temple at the site offered by the Board. The Board will make the offer of this site to the temple owners when they get together and form a single body.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Third time." Members will recall that the Bill was referred to a Select Committee on the 22nd December, 1969, to enable further representations of the profession and those of the public to be made so that consideration could be given thereto. I am happy to report that 13 written representations were received and the Select Committee heard oral evidence on three of these representations. Some of the contributions made to the Committee were most valuable and several suggestions were accepted. Amongst these were - Firstly, the reduction of the period of practical experience in engineering required for qualification under section 8 (c) from three years to two years. Secondly, the widening of the powers of the Professional Engineers Board to include the power to suspend an engineer from practice for a period not exceeding one year under any of the circumstances set out in section 12. Thirdly, the increase of the penalties that an unregistered person will be liable to face upon conviction for practising or holding himself out as a professional engineer. The Committee's Report was published on 15th June, 1970, as Paper Parliament 3 of 1970. Mr Speaker, Sir, the Bill as now tabled before this House incorporates the recommendations of the Select Committee. Sir, I beg to move. Question proposed.”
“NATIONAL SERVICEMEN (EMPLOYMENT) BILL "to make provision for securing the employment of persons who have completed national service and for matters connected therewith", recommendation of President signified; presented by the Minister for Defence (Mr Lim Kim San); read the First time, to be read a Second time on the next available sitting of Parliament, and to be printed. FIRST SUPPLEMENTARY ESTIMATES OF EXPENDITURE FOR FINANCIAL YEAR 1ST APRIL, 1970, TO 31ST MARCH, 1971 (Paper Cmd. 17 of 1970) 2.47 p.m. Order read for consideration in Committee of Supply [Allotted Day]. [Mr Speaker in the Chair]”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, hawkers are not eligible for public assistance allowances as long as they are holders of a current hawker's licence. A licensed hawker is presumed to be in regular employment, and it is regretted that the Social Welfare Department cannot consider such cases for public assistance. This presumption is necessary as it is not possible to assess the actual income of hawkers, particularly the itinerant ones. The Department will, however, consider applications for public assistance from hawkers who are temporarily incapacitated by illness, provided the applicants can produce the necessary medical certificate. Hawkers who have become unemployed and have surrendered their current hawker's licences to the Hawkers Department will be eligible for public assistance. BILLS INTRODUCED 2.44 p.m. SUPPLEMENTARY SUPPLY (NO. 2) BILL "for making Supplementary Provision for the Public Service for the financial year 1st April, 1970, to 31st March, 1971", recommendation of President signified (Mr E. W. Barker); presented for the Minister for Finance by his Parliamentary Secretary (Mr Tang See Chim); read the First time, to be read a Second time on the next available sitting of Parliament, and to be printed. ROAD TRAFFIC (AMENDMENT) BILL "to amend the Road Traffic Ordinance, 1961 (No. 26 of 1961)", presented by the Minister for Communications (Mr Yong Nyuk Lin); read the First time, to be read a Second time on the next available sitting of Parliament, and to be printed.”
“Superintending Pharmaceutical Chief Pharmacist Chemist Deputy Chief Chemist Deputy Chief Chemist and Deputy Chief Inspector of Dangerous Materials.' Title or Name of Office" respectively of the items shown in Part II of the said Schedule : - ADJOURNMENT Resolved, "That Parliament do now adjourn to Thursday, 21st May, 1970." - [Mr Barker]. Adjourned accordingly at Twenty-eight minutes past Three o'clock p.m. to Thursday, 21st May, 1970. WRITTEN ANSWER TO QUESTION Thursday, 7th May, 1970 RESEARCH OFFICERS IN PUBLICITY AND BROADCASTING DIVISIONS Mr J. F. Conceicao asked the Minister for Culture what are the duties and responsibilities of the research officers in the Publicity Division and Broadcasting Division.”