Ng Kah Ting
Singapore
“Mr Speaker, Sir, before I ask my supplementary question, may I declare, on behalf of the Member for Kebun Baru and myself, that we are both involved in the building of Montfort Secondary School and Montfort Junior School both of which are Government-aided schools. My question now, Sir, is: when will this take effect?”
“But, Sir, at the end of this debate on the Second Reading and the Bill committed to a Select Committee, I sincerely hope that all those who have the interest of Singapore at heart should come forward and make their contributions, be they critical or ways and means on how better we can improve upon this Bill.”
“But the basic foundation, I submit, and that is, the political stability-honest, efficient and an incorruptible political leadership-is paramount to the future well-being of Singapore, and that is, if we are to continue to enjoy our good standard of living, our good government and of course as an independent, sovereign entity or nation.”
“Sir, I knew that the NCMP would come out and say that-don't mix up the ISA with PPSO because basically it is the same. I say, no. Because in 1958, PAP was not in power. It was the Lim Yew Hock government. That is the difference I am trying to make. So let us not go around in this wild political rhetoric. I understand that.”
“Sir, before I make my observations, I just want to make a couple of points in reply to the Non-Constituency MP, Dr Lee. He said that in 1958 when he was asked to stand as a PAP candidate in Kallang he was afraid of the ISA. I do not think that is quite correct because in 1958, Sir, there was no ISA.”
“We should take advantage of the present political stability to provide for the future. In conclusion, Sir, let me draw an analogy. With Singapore being the No. 1 port in the world, this analogy is not inappropriate.”
The complete record
Every one of 1,870 lines we hold for Ng Kah Ting, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 29 of 38.
“Sir, this is indeed a very encouraging reply, and I must admit that I have no knowledge of what the composition of the Committee is like. In any case, I must say I am very happy with the detailed reply given by the Minister, and I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 101 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 101. Sir, I am glad to note that the Institute of Medical Specialities has passed through Phase I and that the Centre is now in operation. But then Parliament is being asked to provide for Phase II of the project which costs slightly more than $200,000. 7.30 p.m. Sir, I would be grateful if the Minister for Health could elaborate on the type of specialized units that we are going to set up in Phase II of the Institute of Medical Specialities. Sir, I am told that some specialists are fighting over the question of priority of specialization. If this is true, can the Minister say whether his Ministry has encountered any difficulties in setting up this Institute?”
“Sir, I can always take "No" for an answer and can assure the Minister that the answers given by him are satisfactory. I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The sum of $12,061,480 for Head 97 ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. Head 98 -”
“Sir, the Minister has taken the question out of my mouth. He mentions an area of 1,300 acres bounded by certain roads. In fact, I notice that there are many septic tanks in a few places within the area mentioned by the Minister. In other words, there is already provision of modern sanitation. With the extension of sewerage facilities to Serangoon, can it not be extended to Upper Serangoon? The Minister says that Punggol will have sewerage facilities later on. But the area mentioned by the Minister is a congested area and quite a number of housing estates are coming up there There are septic tanks in this area. Are we doing away with septic tanks and having the houses connected direct to main sewers?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 97 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 104. Sir, there is a provision of $1 million for the Serangoon sewerage scheme. What I am going to bring up is nothing new, because it is stated in the Memorandum on the Development Estimates that the project will have a capacity to serve 77,000 persons. I shall be grateful if the Minister will enlighten this House on which particular area in Serangoon will benefit by this project?”
“I was not very expressive in explaining to the Minister, but my question was whether this drainage outlet should be allowed to divert into someone else's land by the Drainage Department of the P.W.D. My point was that this should not be allowed, and therefore the drainage outlet should be diverted outwards, even though there are low-lying areas. Certainly you should have a system whereby you allow a drop of so many inches per length of, say, a hundred feet outward onto the main road. Further, we have a scheme along Tampines Canal. That area of Punggol which I am discussing is rather low-lying, and all drainage outlets that are directed to that area will definitely flood it.”
“Point of clarification, Sir. The drainage problem in one of the two places where these new housing estates are coming up was attended to by the Drainage Department of the Public Works Department quite some time ago. The point I am trying to drive home is whether the Drainage Department of the Public Works Department studies the drainage problem pertaining to a proposed housing project. Will they not consider this aspect that drains in the housing estate should not divert into someone else's land? When complaints come up, the private developers just keep the matter in abeyance. Meanwhile, they go on building houses, and who suffers? It is the residents. In other words, it is the Drainage Department of the P.W.D. that has to make sure that the developers do not allow the drainage outlet to go into someone else's lands which are low-lying.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I share the sentiments expressed by the Member for Changi. At the same time, I wonder whether the Minister is aware that the drainage and flood alleviation system in certain areas in Punggol needs to be attended to. Sir, I bring up a somewhat new subject under this topic "Drainage and Flood Alleviation". Whilst the Government is taking steps to introduce schemes to alleviate floods, etc., the private developer also presents this problem. I have noticed two projects in my constituency, at about the 6¾ milestone opposite Upper Serangoon Road. They have their own drainage systems in the private housing estates. Very often the drains are constructed in such a way that, instead of the outlets facing the main road, they face inwards, towards low land. Consequently, all waste and water just simply run on to somebody else's land, and, worse still, the residences in the neighbouring lands are affected. I hope the Minister will look into this problem of drainage and see what steps the private developers have to take to ensure that the water in the estate does not drain into someone else's land, This will prevent houses in the lower area from being subject to flood hazards.”
“Sir, I am not moving. The sum of $13,272,300 for Head 95 ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. Head 96 -”
“In view of the Minister's reply, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. 6.45 p.m. The following amendment stood in the name of Mr Ng Kah Ting That the total sum to be allocated for Head 95 be reduced by $100.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 95 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 310. In moving this amendment, Sir, I am referring to item 007 - not James Bond, of course - which concerns Bus Bays, Shelters, Vehicle Parks and Roadside Kerbs. This item has a provision of $300,000. I would be grateful to the Minister if he could inform this House whether any bus shelters will be put up along Punggol Road this year. I have made representations on this before, and was told no funds were available and that I was to be patient.”
“I am not moving, Sir. The following amendment stood in the name of Mr Ch'ng Jit Koon - (4) That the sum to be allocated for Head 95 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 306. Mr Ch'ng Jit Koon: I am not moving, Sir.”
“Sir, I beg leave to withdraw. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 95 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 201. Sir, this item concerns the Pan-Island Expressway, and I have only one question to ask. Will the Minister consider developing a coastal road round the island?”
“I am not moving both amendments Nos. (2) and (3), Sir. The sum of $1,703,300 for Head 94 ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. Head 95 -”
“(2) That the sum to be allocated for Head 94 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 211. (3) That the total sum to be allocated for Head 94 be reduced by $100. The Chairman: Mr Ng Yeow Chong, amendment No. (1).”
“I am not moving, Sir. The sum of $2,457,020 for Head 93 ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. Head 94 - The following amendments stood on the Order Paper Supplement:”
“Sir, I must thank the Minister for his kind consideration, and I do beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The following amendment stood in the name of Mr Ng Kah Ting - (8) That the total sum to be allocated for Head 93 be reduced by $100.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the Minister has mentioned just now that there were 400 applicants for 60 places. In view of the large number of applicants for such a training course, I would enquire of the Minister if he would consider taking in as many applicants as possible for such courses, because at the moment we have quite a large number of fishing trawlers. Some time ago the Minister for Finance made a remark in this House that our youths could not withstand the training at sea. Therefore, in view of the, large, number of applications for these courses, would the Minister not. consider opening the door wider so that more youths could come forward to play their part? And what future prospects do these trainees have in this respect? Sir, I also feel that more publicity should be given to this matter as I strongly support the setting up of such training facilities.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 93 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 301. Sir, I just wish to seek further information on the question of providing the necessary fishing training facilities by the Fishing Training Centre. How many courses have been conducted and how many trainees have passed out to date? Has the Fishing Training Centre encountered any difficulties in recruiting the necessary trainees? Mr Barker: Mr Speaker, Sir, two training courses have so far been completed at the Fishing Training Centre at Changi. The first course was from August to October 1969, and the second course was from December last year to February this year. A third course will be started in April this year, that is to say, next month. There has been no difficulty in recruiting students. There were 60 places for the two courses - in other words, 30 places for each course. More than 400 youths applied for training. To date, 42 trainees have completed the course successfully, and 75 per cent of them have already found jobs on fishing vessels. The rest are likely to be taken up for employment by fishing companies in the near future. Reports received show that the fishing companies are satisfied with the work of the trainees. 6.30 p.m. In addition to these three-month courses to which I have referred, the Fishing Training Centre conducted a one-week course in January for captains of small trawling vessels to give them some up-to-date knowledge of navigation and chart reading, as well as modern fishing methods and use of fishing gear. Forty-five persons applied for the course, but only 38 were taken. Thirty-five completed the course and are now back on their jobs.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I just wish to ask one question. I notice that under this subhead, a "Farm Licensing, Agricultural Survey and Agricultural Statistics Unit" will be set up. Can the Minister disclose to this House how many licences have been issued up to the latest convenient date? I welcome the proposal to set up this unit and I hope it will assist the farmers in every possible manner, because I feel that the agricultural produce supplied by the farmers in Singapore has contributed in no small measure to our economy.”
“Yes, Sir, Changi and also Tampines. We have a sizable population in these areas. Under such circumstances, will the Minister for Law and National Development sympathetically consider the building of rural abattoirs? And, if not, whether he will look into the prospects of awarding tenders for the construction of rural abattoirs with a view to getting private organisations to run them?”
“I am not moving, Sir. The sum of $47,145,650 for Head 92 ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. Head 93 -”
“(2) That the sum to be allocated for Head 91 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 201.”
“Sir, in view of the answers given by the Minister, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.”
“Sir, just one more question. Will the Minister consider accepting into this Junior Approved School, when it is completed, not only delinquents referred to the juvenile courts, but also those children whose parents have no control over them?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 81 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 101. Sir, this subhead concerns the Junior Approved School. I believe I have another amendment* on Head 141 - U.K. Financial Assistance Schemes. This refers to the same topic I am going to discuss now. I will not be moving my amendment to Head 141. * The amendment reads as follows: That the sum to be allocated for Head 141 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 401. Sir, I would like to seek further clarification on the type of Junior Approved School that is to be constructed and which is expected to be completed either this year or next year. This work will be undertaken with financial assistance amounting to $175,000 from the United Kingdom. Perhaps the Minister for Social Affairs will elaborate on what this Junior Approved School is. I find that what it says on page 7 of the Memorandum on the Development Estimates of Singapore is not very clear to me.”
“I am not moving my two amendments, Sir. The sum of $1,595,840 for Head 71 ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. Head 81 -”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I am not moving all my three amendments. The sum of $330,500 for Head 62 ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. Head 71 -”
“I am not moving, Sir. The sum of $194,600 for Head 55 ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. Head 61 -”
“I am not moving, Sir. The sum of $15,178,560 for Head 53 ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. Head 55 - The following amendment stood in the name of Mr Ng Kah Ting That the total sum to be allocated for Head 55 be reduced by $100.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I fully agree with the proposal to redevelop the passenger terminal building. I believe that the number of passengers entering and leaving Singapore is increasing. Hence there is a need to redevelop the building which, I understand, will be completed in late 1971. In this respect. I would suggest to the Minister for Communications that in redeveloping the passenger terminal building, consideration should be given to the improvement of the transit lounges. In other words, we should provide better facilities for passengers in transit. Furthermore, can the Minister say whether there is an intention to develop the terminal building in the same way as in some other countries where the planes are parked just next to the terminal building and the passengers can simply walk down the gangways right into the terminal building? For example, like the terminal buildings in New York and Schipol in Amsterdam. This would more or less relieve the passengers from having to come down from the plane, get into buses or coaches and be transported to the terminal building. In other words, we want a modern passenger terminal building.”
“Sir, I wish to thank the Minister for Law and National Development for his intervention and very good suggestion. And I hope the Minister for Education will take this into serious consideration. Under the circumstances, Sir, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. 4.15 p.m.”
“Sir, I beg to correct the last sentence. The vocational secondary school in Punggol does not exist any more. It is now known as the Punggol Industrial Training Centre. Sir, the Parliamentary Secretary has not given me a satisfactory reply with regard to the re-siting of the Polytechnic. He says that he has not been able to locate an ideal site for the Polytechnic. But can he assure this House that vigorous steps will be taken to ensure that the construction of the Polytechnic will not be too far into the future?”
“Certainly, Sir, not in Punggol. I would rather prefer Punggol to be a peaceful area, without all the banging going on in the machinery workshops. Anyway, my question is this: with the re-siting of the Polytechnic, the emphasis on technical education will inevitably be greater. So should we not start off on this new site rather than spend more than $1 .5 million on these works and buildings as a temporary measure?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the Parliamentary Secretary has mentioned just now that the works and buildings will be of a temporary nature to cope with the increasing demand for places in the Polytechnic. I believe that the additional buildings for the Polytechnic on its present site will not be sufficient and there is contemplation to re-site the Polytechnic. Therefore, this being the case, can the Parliamentary Secretary say whether or not the Polytechnic, together with the Singapore Technical Institute which will be completed by 1971, could provide sufficient places, in spite of the present crash programme of building additional works and buildings? Under these circumstances, Sir, I would be grateful if the Parliamentary Secretary could also indicate where the new Polytechnic will be sited.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move. That the sum to be allocated for Head 41 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1202. Sir, I believe this is a contribution to the Polytechnic. For last year there was only a token contribution of $10, but for this year a sum of slightly more than $1.5 million is asked for Works and Buildings and Furniture and Equipment. Will the Minister kindly indicate to this House what sort of Works and Buildings will entail such a high cost?”
“I beg leave to withdraw. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The following amendment stood in the name of Mr Ng Kah Ting - (11) That the sum to be allocated for Head 41 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1101.”
“Sir, in that case, when will the Institute be completed?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 41 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1001. This subhead concerns the Singapore Technical Institute, and Parliament is asked to vote for a provision of $300,000. I would like to know the location of this Institute, and what courses of study leading to what level it provides. I would also like to know the student enrolment, and whether the Minister or his Parliamentary Secretary can indicate the number of students who have passed out from this Institute.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, this concerns the conversion of schools. Under these subheads one can see the following titles: subhead 701, "Construction of Centralised Workshops for Academic Schools"; subhead 702, "Modification of Multi-Purpose Schools Workshops"; subhead 703, "Conversion of Academic/Vocational Schools into Bilateral Schools"; and subhead 704, "Modification of Technical School Workshops". I have been trying to find out more about these titles from the Memorandum on the Development Estimates of Singapore for the financial year 1st April, 1970, to 31st March, 1971 (Misc. 2 of 1970), but I have not been able to get any clear picture of the type of conversion or construction. I hope the Parliamentary Secretary will elaborate further and inform this House of the exact nature of the work to be undertaken this year and next year. 4.00 p.m.”
“Sir, I am satisfied with the Parliamentary Secretary's reply. I beg leave to withdraw. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. Mr Ng Kah Ting: Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 41 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 701. Sir, with your permission, may I, in my discussion, range over amendments (8)* and (9)+ which stand in my name? The amendments read as follows: *(8) That the sum to be allocated for Head 41 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 702. +(9) That the sum to be allocated for Head 41 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 703.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, in that case, what is the difference between a vocational institute and a technical institute? In other words, what is the difference in the level of instruction between the two types of institute?”
“I have been told - rightly or wrongly - by the Parliamentary Secretary just now that this provision is for the Vocational Training institute. Would he care to elaborate further on the term "Vocational Training Institute"?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 41 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 601. Mr Speaker, Sir, the title under this subhead is "Land Acquisition for Technical Education". There is a provision of $500,000 and, of course, as usual it is subject to Treasury sanction. I notice also that there is a revote of $311,800. I would like to seek clarification on the location of the land which will be required for technical education purposes.”
“I am not moving, Sir. The sum of $2,192,000 for Head 31 ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. Head 41 - The following amendment stood in the name of Mr Tay Boon Too - (1) That the sum to be allocated for Head 41 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 101.”
“Sir, I am not moving the two amendments. The sum of $1,233,800 for Head 22 ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. Head 31 -”
“(7) That the sum to be allocated for Head 21 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 301. The sum of $232,749,810 for Head 21 ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates Head 22 - The following amendments stood in the name of Mr Ng Kah Ting- (1) That the sum to be allocated for Head 22 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 201. (2) That the sum to be allocated for Head 22 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 404.”
“(6) That the sum to be allocated for Head 21 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 201.”
“(5) That the sum to be allocated for Head 21 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 101.”