S. Dhanabalan
Singapore
“Mr Speaker, Sir, on a point of clarification. I said in my intervention on Tuesday that the general election is the right forum to determine the electorate's support because it puts the issue in a total and correct context.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, with hindsight, of course, we can be very wise. But since one of the three islands was excluded, it was a substantial reduction in the scope of works. The assessment then, which I agreed with, was that if you called for a re-tender, you would get a substantially reduced tender.”
“To the extent that we can, we should work with countries that have a common interest, to come together and form economic groupings targeted at trade liberalisation. We have started this process within ASEAN under the AFTA Scheme. Economic linkages in groupings like APEC are also growing in significance.”
“Mr Speaker, all these questions make a lot of sense when the events are finished, and you look back. But the officer looking at the case at that time had to deal with the facts as they were at that time.”
“ASEAN countries agreed to publish all the Inclusions and Exclusions lists, as well as the full list of actual tariff reductions. The ASEAN Secretariat had since followed up and released, as scheduled, on 1st November 1993, the publications showing these lists.”
“Kallang Theatre was closed for five months in 1992 for cyclical maintenance and upgrading costing $3 million. This included a major upgrading of the toilets, recarpeting the auditorium, rewiring and repainting.”
The complete record
Every one of 1,635 lines we hold for S. Dhanabalan, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 12 of 33.
“Sir, I think the Member was referring to the areas affected by the Controlled Premises (Special Provisions) Act which are, in the first instance, the conservation areas. Yes, we are aware that there are old people there who need special assistance. During the debate on the amendment to the Act, I did mention that the URA has identified about 1,700 old single persons, aged 40 to 50 years, males and females, who may require assistance in Chinatown, Little India and the Kampong Glam areas, which are the three areas identified in the first instance for conservation. But it does not follow that all the 1,700 will, in fact, need assistance. From the experience that URA has had in other parts of Chinatown, we find that only about 35% of the senior citizens really require alternative housing. The others have families elsewhere and they moved in to stay with their families. In the case of those who require assistance, we have identified sufficient HDB rental flats as close as possible to the conservation areas where these old single persons can be re-housed. We will, of course, in the process of re-housing them liaise very closely with the Ministry of Community Development and find out the specific needs of these persons and see how they can be assisted. So we are quite confident that disruption can be minimized. I do not think some of the other kind of abuses that the Member mentioned are likely to arise because there are sufficient provisions in the Controlled Premises (Special Provisions) Act for tenants, sub-tenants and other occupiers to qualify for compensation and to be heard by the Tenants Compensation Board, if they are not satisfied with the compensation offered by the landlord.”
“Whether or not we embark on the re-location programme, the fact remains that people were moving out of the 1-room blocks, and those markets and shops which were dependent upon the residents in the 1-room blocks, of course they were affected, because the customers went elsewhere. And for such people, again, we have a scheme to either get them to move somewhere else to pay their compensation so that they could go into some other kind of business.”
“Mr Chairman, Sir, what I said was that the whole re-location exercise started as a result of blocks having large numbers of vacancies. Even before we embarked on the re-location programme, we found that many 1-room blocks had 40%, 50%, 60% vacancies, and the shops in those blocks were already suffering from poor business. So HDB had one of two alternatives. First, to let the normal course of vacancy take place until everybody has been cleared out. This may take many years and it will mean that large numbers of flats in a block will be empty, attracting all kinds of undesirable elements to use these empty flats and so on. The other alternative is to encourage those who are left behind in these flats to buy flats. They are given incentives such as no downpayment, 25 years' loan and a removal allowance to buy new flats. As a result, those who could not buy flats were then removed from these 1-room blocks and gathered together in other 1-room blocks. In other words, if there were four 1-room blocks, each one 30-40% occupied, we tried to put them into one or two blocks, 100% occupancy, and the rest were then cleared and the blocks knocked down. That is the process that we adopted. Of course, some who were left behind and who would have liked to stay longer were asked to move. I do not deny that. They were either asked to move to another 1-room block nearby or they were given, as I said, incentives to buy flats. In fact, more than half of those who were left behind took the opportunity to buy 3, 4 and 5-room flats, because in the case if they bought 3-room flats, they did not have to pay any downpayment. They could just move and pay the monthly instalments. This was the kind of encouragement we gave them. Businesses - I know they suffer because of an exodus of people.”
“Here we have enforced it but in spite of it, we do have arrears and from time to time I have given figures in this House on the extent of arrears. The trouble is that while there are genuine cases of hardship there is also a large number of cases of people who think that the HDB should be the last in the queue to be paid. There have been people who pay their car parking charges on time. There have been people who even submit proposals to the HDB Area Office to renovate their flat when, in fact, they owe sums on service and conservancy charges or on instalment payments. So they think they can do everything, meet all the obligations and HDB should take its place in the queue right at the back. For such cases, I think we need to have some system of penalties. We have not worked out, but HDB is now working together with the Accountant-General to introduce a system of penalties, and lessees in arrears will have to pay penalties. But, of course, in the adjustment period, we will give some grace for those who are in arrears to pay up before we impose the penalties. I hope to again announce this when the system is worked out. As far as town councils are concerned, there are provisions in the Town Councils Act for the town councils to levy charges or interest on late payments. Town councils do have the authority and they can, in fact, impose penalties. I will now ask my Senior Minister of State to answer the question on the financial policy relating to town councils.”
“This means that about 70% of the flats will still be sold at existing posted prices but the other 30% will be affected by the new premiums and discounts that we will be introducing. The HDB will be announcing the details in a week or two. I also mentioned in the debate last year that we need a more accurate system of assessing demand. When we had very large unmet demand, HDB could just build in large numbers and expect that the flats would be taken up. Now that we have, in fact, met the problem of housing, public housing now addresses basically those who want to upgrade and the demand by new nuclear families. We need, a much better system of estimating demand. We cannot expect to build in the hope that people will take it up. So HDB has been working on this problem and here again I hope that by the middle of this year I will be able to announce a new scheme which will require HDB registrants to commit to buy a flat in a particular area. This will mean that HDB will have a much more accurate idea of demand and we will not waste public funds building flats in the hope that they will be taken up. The Member for Nee Soon raised the question of arrears. First of all, I want to commend the Member on his concern over the subject because one important reason why we have been able to succeed with our public housing programme in Singapore is that we have been very rigorous in the enforcement of the obligation that people have to meet their payments. Very often, public housing in other countries has failed because governments have not been prepared to make sure that people fulfil their obligations by either paying the rental or instalment payments or service and conservancy charges on time. That is why the public housing programme in many instances has collapsed.”
“These were the premiums and discounts for various locational advantages or disadvantages, for example, those flats which commanded a good view or which were near the MRT stations commanded a premium, those which were opposite dustbins or near sewage pumping stations, of course, had a discount. In other words, we adjusted the prices to reflect to some extent the particular locational advantages or disadvantages instead of having a uniform price for the whole zone. This policy has been quite well accepted by HDB home purchasers. The HDB will now introduce further premium and discount factors to bring the pricing mechanism nearer to what is practised in the market and to also properly reflect the particularities of the site. These new flat premiums will be based on the location within a zone, how high the flat is, the building design, the orientation of the flat, whether it is facing afternoon sun or morning sun and whether it is near a source of noise like, for example, a major expressway or a junction. So certain price adjustments will be made. There will also of course be discounts where the factors are adverse. Whether a home purchaser needs to pay more than the current price of the flat will depend on the choice that he makes. For a start, the adjustment will apply to Bishan West and Pasir Ris. I can say that in the case of Bishan West where the design is rather special and where flats command an unobstructed panoramic view the prices will go up on average from 11-17%. Likewise, the price of 4-room Model A and 5-room Improved Pasir Ris flats which face the sea will have a price increase of around 10%. However, prices of flats in other new towns will generally remain unaffected.”
“I would like to inform Members who may see these vacant sites and will be chasing my Ministry as to when the redevelopment will start, that in the central area the redevelopment will be a little slower. Members must also take into account the fact that with the lower rate of building, which is about 10,000-12,000 p.a., the scope for rapid redevelopment of all the vacant sites is much less today than it would have been, say, four or five years ago. The other type of improvement that is possible is upgrading the existing flats. This is something that is being considered and I hope that by the middle of this year we will be in a position to announce some plans for it but it is still too early to give details. We are quite aware that HDB flats built during the building boom have poor quality finishes. We are also aware that the older flats do not compare so well with the newer designs and something has to be done. HDB is paying attention to this problem and as soon as they have got the plans worked out we will announce them. The points on the financial policy relating to Town Councils, I will ask my Senior Minister of State to answer later. I will take up the other points raised by Dr Vasoo. I think I have already covered his queries on redevelopment. I would like to just touch on three other points. One, as part of the exercise to upgrade and change the social structure in HDB flats, we have set aside areas for private housing development so that HDB areas will have a mix of public and private housing. As the Member mentioned, we introduced in 1987 certain new factors in pricing the HDB flats.”
“Sir, can I first take the subject of the redevelopment of the older housing estates. The relocation exercise which involves the relocation of tenants in 1-room HDB flats and demolishing these flats really arose out of the large vacancies in the 1-room flats. So this has, in fact, given the HDB an opportunity to redevelop some of the older estates. In the course of the redevelopment of these vacant sites HDB will not only introduce better types of flats but also facilities which may be needed. But I must point out that there is a limit to what can be done in the older estates. Unless we raze the whole estate to the ground and start from scratch, it is not possible to make these older estates the same as the newer estates. On this score too, Sir, I would like to inform Members that the rate of redevelopment of sites which have been made vacant by the relocation exercise will vary from area to area. Over the next 12 to 18 months, HDB plans to build about 1,000-1,500 units on sites which have been so vacated by the demolition of 1-room flats. But most of the flats which will be redeveloped will be in the new towns where it will be part of the on-going building programme. In the central area where we have such vacant sites, we will redevelop the sites a little more slowly because we need to time the redevelopment with the overall comprehensive urban planning for the central area with a view to maximizing the long term potential of the land in the central area. In the meantime,of course, we will not leave these sites as eyesores. We will clear the sites, level them properly, turf and plant trees.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I think he is completely out of order in raising this question. May I suggest that Mr Chiam move a motion in this House to debate on this subject so that there can be a full airing on the subject. 3.38 pm”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the land on which the hot spring is located used to belong to Fraser & Neave. In 1985, it was acquired for MINDEF's use. However, MINDEF has agreed to allow F & N to continue to draw the water from the hot spring by piping it to their factory for bottling. The bottling plant is located on a site adjacent to the acquired land. If, after finalizing its plans, MINDEF is able to release some of the acquired land, my Ministry will consider developing the released land for recreational use. The water from the hot spring can be piped to such a development without the spring itself being accessible to the public. SIMEI HOUSING ESTATE (Public telephones at Void Decks) 3. Mr Teo Chong Tee asked the Minister for Communications and Information whether the Telecommunication Authority of Singapore will install public telephones at the void decks of all the Housing and Development Board blocks in Simei Housing Estate.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the PWD will signalize the junction of Simei Street 3 and Simei Street 1 in June 1989. Students living in nearby HDB flats will then be able to cross Simei Street 3 at this signalized junction for Changkat Primary School which is within walking distance. HOT SPRING IN SEMBAWANG The following Question stood in the name of Mr Chiam See Tong - 2. To ask the Minister for National Development whether he will consider converting Singapore's only hot spring at Sembawang into a tourist attraction and/or recreational centre.”
“The vacant land next to the Potong Pasir Community Centre at Potong Pasir Avenue 2 is a reserve site. HDB normally maintains a number of reserve sites in each New Town. This is to cater for future and unforeseen needs of the community living in the New Town. The site will be developed when a clear use arises.”
“When we use this law, it does not mean that a landlord can just blindly, without proper planning or without funds to carry out his plan, get rid of his tenants. That is the protection that the tenants have. Where it comes to renovation and restoration of rent-controlled properties which are still rent-controlled, then the question of the increases in rent will come up, but that has got nothing to do with this law. That is the Control of Rent Act. And the Rent Conciliation Board deals with that kind of thing, and I do not think I should go into that under this Bill. So this Bill, when implemented, would enable the landlord to repossess his property. And once he repossesses his property, of course, the question of rent increase does not arise any more. It is a new property. It is a de-controlled property and after he has renovated, restored, the rental will be the market rental. 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 S. Dhanabalan]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. ADJOURNMENT Resolved, "That Parliament do now adjourn to a date to be fixed." - [Mr Wong Kan Seng]. Adjourned accordingly at Fifteen minutes to Five o'clock pm to a date to be fixed. extracts - DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS: OTHER PROFESSIONS (Cols. 801 - 808)”
“He must have a definite schedule of implementation. Then the landlord has to give an undertaking to the Board that he will deposit with the Board within 14 days of the Board's decision the amount of compensation determined by the Board. So once the Board hears the case, fixes a compensation, within 14 days the owner must deposit the money with the Board. After he has made his application and paid the required fees, the landlord is required to give a copy of his application to all the tenants and sub-tenants in the building. The Board will then fix a date for hearing and will exhibit a notice in the premises so that all those living in the particular building will know that a hearing is coming up, and this notice will be in all the four languages. Everybody in the landlord's premises would be aware that there would be a hearing. If the tenants, sub-tenants or occupiers of the building wish to be heard, they must of course file with the Board a notice that they want to appear before the Board and there is a time limit within which they have to do that; it is 14 days. So that is the procedure. Where the tenant and the landlord cannot agree, they have recourse to this procedure. So there is no question of a landlord just booting out the tenant. He has to show that he has the resources and that he will carry out the plan according to a certain time table. If he recovers the property, having deposited the money and clearing out the tenants but does not proceed with his conservation programme as undertaken by him, then we can acquire. In fact, we will acquire the premises, and the acquisition value will be as in the law, which may be lower than the market value on the date that the landlord's property has been acquired. So there are some penalties.”
“First of all, as I have mentioned, under the Controlled Premises Act, and this amendment will become part of the Act, recovery of tenanted rent controlled properties by landlords is only possible where they want to redevelop the property. In other words, they cannot serve notice on the tenants and ask them to quit without showing that they have redevelopment plans. If they can settle with the tenants by direct negotiations, of course, they can do so. But if the tenants do not agree, then they have recourse to the Tenants Compensation Board. This is quite different and distinct from the other board that I think Dr Lee referred to, which is the Rent Conciliation Board. That is a completely different thing. The Tenants Compensation Board established under the Controlled Premises (Special Provisions) Act will then hear the case. There is a certain process to be gone through. First of all, the owner must apply to the Tenants Compensation Board on a prescribed form with certain supporting evidence. He must show that he has sufficient funds for developing the premises and in the case of conservation areas he must show that he has funds to carry out the conservation. In other words, he cannot say, "I want to do something" without showing evidence that he can carry it out. Secondly, the landlord must show that he has written approval from the Government for a plan of development. So in the case of conservation area, the URA which will be the conservation authority will have to consider the plans and approve the plans. Then the landlord will show that he has the money as well as approved plans. Thirdly, the landlord has to give the Board a written undertaking that he will commence work within six months from the date he obtains possession of the premises.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, perhaps I can take the last point first because both Dr Vasoo and Dr Koh have raised this point. This relates to senior citizens in conservation areas. We are aware that there are a number of senior citizens who are single, who do not have families and who are in the conservation areas. They will require special assistance. In fact, as part of the programme to redevelop the conservation areas, we have identified such old single persons and we will try and re-locate them, re-house them in HDB premises as close to the present conservation area as possible. If such senior citizens are already receiving assistance from the Ministry of Community Development, of course, they will continue to get such assistance. But I must inform Members that the experience of the URA in the clearing of some of the buildings in China Town in the past has been that the majority of these old people do have families and they do not move separately into the HDB estates. They go and live with their children. But regarding those who do not have families, we certainly will try and make special arrangements for them to be rehoused. On the other question, Sir, I feel that a number of questions raised by Dr Lee Siew-Choh are really not relevant to this Bill. They have to do with compensation and types of compensation and so on. But some of the questions may be due to the fact that the process of re-possessing properties under the Controlled Premises Act is probably not well understood. If I may, Mr Speaker, Sir, I would just like to go through the process so that some of the misunderstandings will be cleared up. They will know what the process is.”
“In the case of the conservation areas, the redevelopment will mean conservation works. Later, when we extend it to other areas, redevelopment will mean the traditional definition of "development" which is knocking down and rebuilding. Sir, since the policy on phasing out of rent control was announced on 6th October 1988, some 100 planning applications have been received from private owners in conservation areas. The enthusiastic response shown by private owners, even before the conservation areas have been declared designated areas, augurs well for Government's conservation programme. With the passing of this Bill, private owners will be able to recover their properties and get on with conservation works. Sir, I beg to move. Question proposed.”
“In other words, on that date, any rent-controlled premise that was owner-occupied or owned by a company but occupied by a servant of the company, is exempted from the provisions of the Control of Rent Act. Sir, in other words, the Control of Rent Act now only applies to properties which are tenanted. Rent control of other properties will be phased out in stages under the Controlled Premises (Special Provisions) Act. The conservation areas of Chinatown, Little India, Kampong Glam, Boat Quay, Emerald Hill and Cairnhill will be declared as development areas in the first phase of decontrol. Sir, if I may clarify, there is an important distinction between using this Act to decontrol and just repealing the Control of Rent Act. If we repeal the Control of Rent Act, it would amount to saying that all rent-controlled properties are decontrolled and the owners can take possession. The owners need not do anything with the property. All they need to do is compensate the tenant or just raise the rentals for the tenant and then if the tenant does not pay, he is turfed out and the owner takes possession and he can move in and occupy the property. So there is no development work that needs to be done in order to gain possession of a rent-controlled property. That would be the effect of repealing the Control of Rent Act. By using the Controlled Premises (Special Provisions) Act, what we will be doing is that, we will, in phases, decontrol areas and those owning properties which are rent-controlled can take possession of the properties if they are able to come out with redevelopment plans. In other words, they just cannot take repossession of the properties. It must be coupled with some plan to redevelop.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." Sir, the Controlled Premises (Special Provisions) Bill enables owners in conservation areas to recover possession of their rent-controlled properties. The Controlled Premises (Special Provisions) Act, enacted in 1970, was used to enable owners in the Collyer Quay/Shenton Way central business district area, also known as the "Golden Shoe Area" to recover possession of their rent-controlled properties for redevelopment. This area which was declared a development area on 27th February 1970 is an example of the successful redevelopment of our city through the Act. The Act in its present form provides for redevelopment of rent-controlled properties. Such redevelopment often involves demolition of existing buildings, consolidation of small plots and construction of entirely new buildings. This, however, is not what would be required in conservation areas. Owners of properties in conservation areas would be required to renovate their premises based on URA's conservation guidelines, and not to tear them down and put up new buildings. The Controlled Premises (Special Provisions) (Amendment) Bill seeks to broaden the definition of "develop" to include approved renovation works. With this, owners of rent-controlled properties in conservation areas will be able to recover possession of their premises to carry out renovation works based on approved guidelines. Sir, as at 7th October 1988, all owner-occupied premises, vacant premises and premises owned by a body corporate which are vacant or occupied by or let to a director or employee of the body corporate, are exempted from the provisions of the Control of Rent Act.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I hope I did not miss any important point in the end because the interpretation was cut off. Sir, I thank the two Members for their support of this Bill. The point has been raised on acquisiton. Although this part of URA's responsibility or power has been repealed, it does not change the substance. All acquisition will now be through the Commissioner of Lands and URA or any other statutory body which wants to acquire a particular piece of land can still initiate action which will be coordinated by the Minister for Law. So in substance there will be no change. As Dr Wang pointed out, it is better for one body to coordinate all acquisition. 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 S. Dhanabalan]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. CONTROLLED PREMISES (SPECIAL PROVISIONS) (AMENDMENT) BILL Order for Second Reading read. 4.21 pm”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." Mr Speaker, Sir, to enable the URA to carry out its role as the conservation authority of Singapore, the Urban Redevelopment Authority (Amendment) Bill provides for additional functions for the URA. These are: (1) to prepare and execute projects for the conservation of any area as agent or consultant for the Government; and (2) to make recommendations on the designation of conservation areas, and all matters related to the conservation of those areas. Guidelines for conservation The Bill empowers the conservation authority to issue guidelines for conservation, and make available such guidelines for free inspection or sale at a reasonable cost to the public. There are two other amendments to the Bill which do not relate to conservation. The first relates to acquisition powers. In line with the Government's move towards removing from statutory bodies powers relating to land acquisition, my Ministry is taking the opportunity of the present amendment Bill to repeal section 18 of the Urban Redevelopment Authority Act 1985. The other amendment relates to auditing procedures. In addition, the standard provisions relating to the tightening of financial and auditing procedures of statutory boards as advised by the Accountant-General have been incorporated into the Bill. Sir, I beg to move. Question proposed.”
“With these measures that I have just mentioned, anybody who has a property in the conservation area should be able to raise a loan from any financial institution to carry out his works. I thought I might just take this opportunity to comment on one point and that is, the definition of conservation. A coat of paint is not conservation. The block of buildings in Hill Street has not been designated as conservation area. That block and the building next to it, Stamford House, will be temporarily rented out until such time as the demand for commercial space in Singapore requires that whole area be redeveloped. So what is happening at Hill Street is just the sprucing up the place to use it on a temporary basis. It is not conservation. Conservation guidelines are quite detailed and anybody who has a property in a conservation area, if they go to URA and obtain the guidelines, will find that it is not just a coat of paint. There are not only restrictions on what can be done but also things that ought to be done, and this goes far beyond just giving a coat of paint. So I want to clarify to Dr Lee that the building where his clinic is situated is not intended at the present moment to be a conservation area. 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 Dhanabalan]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. URBAN REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (AMENDMENT) BILL Order for Second Reading read.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I thank Mr Peh and Mr Chng for their support for this Bill. A question was raised whether any financial help or assistance would be given to those who own buildings in the conservation areas. There is no plan at the present moment to give any financial assistance. But I think the type of assistance we will be giving under this Act should be sufficient. First of all, once an area is designated as a conservation area, then change of use of buildings within the area, for example a residence changed to a shop or eating house, will not attract development charge. So that is an incentive. Secondly, we have also announced that such changes of use which under the normal circumstances may require payment of car park deficiency charges will also be waived. And the third very important aspect is that this comes under the the last Bill tha I will deal with today - the most important incentive is that the owner would be able to recover his premises, his rent-controlled premises and carry out conservation. So these are the types of incentives. Over and above that the Government will be planning and implementing infrastructural works. In other words, the public areas - roads, the side-walks, the lighting, planting and so on - would be done in such a way that the whole area becomes attractive so that people will spend money renovating and restoring the buildings and will find that they will be doing it within the context of a total redevelopment, and that will make their property more attractive. But we are not thinking in terms of cash grants because we looked at the problem and we did not think that was necessary.”
“Therefore, preserving certain characteristics and appearance of conservation areas will not only enable our younger generation to know our historical background better but also to appreciate the struggle and the efforts of our forefathers who had contributed to attain the Singapore of today. I understand it is no easy task to delineate conservation areas out of our limited land. However, for the sake of our posterity, we have to preserve more of such areas like Kreata Ayer and Tanjong Pagar. It merits our support. Therefore I support this Bill.”
“Sir, to provide for powers to enforce the control on planning applications and compliance with conditions as imposed by the competent authority, the Bill seeks to provide that: (a) A person who does not apply for permission before carrying out works of conservation shall be guilty of an offence and a penalty is imposed for such an offence. (b) A person who fails to comply with any condition imposed by the competent authority or the Minister shall be guilty of an offence and a penalty is imposed for such an offence. (c) A person who fails to comply with any condition imposed by the competent authority or the Minister may have his written permission cancelled by the competent authority. Sir, the Bill also empowers the Minister to make regulations relating to conservation and the carrying out of works within the conservation area. Existing regulations will be amended accordingly. Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move. Question proposed. Mr Peh Chin Hua (Jalan Besar GRC)( In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I support this Planning (Amendment) Bill because this Bill is to enable the URA to have the power to preserve, supervise and to take charge of the work carried out in the conservation areas. A conservation area is an important feature of Singapore's history. It is also a national treasure of Singapore. Therefore, when we are actively promoting the formulation of our National Ideology and preserving our traditional values, these conservation areas will provide our younger generation with very rich and vivid teaching materials on our historical and cultural heritage. Today,we are gradually advancing from a developing country along the path towards a developed country.”
“With the appointment of the URA as the conservation authority, the powers and duties of the Chief Planner relating to conservation may be exercised by any officer of the URA, who is authorized by the Chief Planner, subject, as I said, to the direction and control of the Chief Planner. The Bill spells out the process whereby the Minister may designate an area, district or premises as a conservation area. Essentially, the process is similar to that adopted for any alteration or addition to the Master Plan. Where the Minister is satisfied that the proposal submitted by the competent authority is of special architectural, historic, traditional or aesthetic interest, and that it is desirable to preserve this character, the Minister may designate the area, district or premises as a conservation area. Following the designation, the area will be demarcated on the Master Plan and thus made known to the public. The Bill defines "works within a conservation area" as any decorative painting, renovation or building works which may affect the character or appearance, whether external or internal, of any building, premises or land situated within a conservation area. With the passing of this Bill, planning controls are instituted for such works. Any person who wishes to carry out any works within a conservation area must have the written permission of the competent authority. When considering such applications, the competent authority may impose conditions to require compliance of any guidelines issued by the conservation authority.”
“The Planning Act in its present form, controls the development of land but does not specifically cover works of conservation. To effectively implement urban conservation programmes, there is a need to have an authority which will be given the power and responsibilities pertaining to conservation. The Bill provides for the appointment of such an authority. "Conservation", as defined in the Bill, means the preservation, enhancement or restoration of the character or appearance, and trades, crafts, customs and other traditional activities of conservation areas. Sir, over the years the Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA) has built the resources and expertise necessary to carry out conservation in Singapore. The Bill designates the URA, or such other body or person as the Minister may appoint, as the conservation authority. The Urban Redevelopment Authority Act also needs to be amended to enable the URA to carry out its role as the conservation authority. I will elaborate on this when I move the Second Reading of the Urban Redevelopment Authority (Amendment) Bill. Presently, the competent authority who is responsible for the enforcement of the Planning Act is the Chief Planner of the Planning Department. The Bill intends to allow for the delegation of the duties of the competent authority without diluting his authority. It provides that the powers and the duties of the competent authority may be exercised by any officer of the Planning Department or any officer in the employment of a public authority, subject to the competent authority's direction and control.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." Sir, the Urban Redevelopment Authority's conservation guidelines for Chinatown, Little India and Kampong Glam were announced on 14th July 1988. These guidelines provided information on the history as well as the Master Plan and planning and urban design guidelines that will help shape the future of the conservation areas. In addition, architectural characteristics and standards of restoration for buildings in the conservation areas were provided. When my Ministry announced the Government's policy on phasing out rent control on 6th October 1988, we said that the conservation areas would be designated as development areas in the first quarter of 1989. This was to enable owners to recover their rent-controlled premises under the Controlled Premises (Special Provisions) Act. Sir, my speech on this Bill will have a bearing on the other two Bills that are on the Order Paper, that is, the Urban Redevelopment Authority (Amendment) Bill and the Controlled Premises (Special Provisions) (Amendment) Bill, because together they provide the framework to facilitate the conservation programme. The Planning (Amendment) Bill brings the conservation of areas and buildings within the purview of town planning and development control. The Bill provides for: (1) The appointment of a conservation authority; (2) The designation of conservation areas and the demarcation of such areas on the Master Plan; and (3) The control of works within a conservation area, which may affect the character or appearance of that area in the same manner that we control other developments. Sir, the most important provision in the Bill is the institution of planning control for works carried out whthin a conservation area.”
“Mild steel water tanks for flats in Eunos GRC will be replaced by precast concrete tanks in accordance with the following schedule: Area Schedule Kaki Bukit Apr 90 - Jun 91 Eunos Aug 90 - Nov 91 Tampines Sep 90 - Nov 91 table - BREAKDOWN OF RENTAL ARREARS BY FLAT TYPE (Cols. 713 - 714) list - SINGAPORE IDD RATES VS. CORRESPONDING INCOMING RATES (Cols. 715 - 716) Table - SUMMARY TABLE OF FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE GIVEN TO SMALL AND MEDIUM-SIZED ENTERPRISES (Cols. 717 - 718) Annexes - APPLICATIONS FOR NEW FLATS BY RACE AND ZONE, APPLICATIONS FOR RESALE FLATS BY RACE AND ZONE, PURCHASES OF RESALE FLATS BY RACE AND ESTATE IN 1988 (Cols. 719 - 722) Table 1 - PROPORTIONS OF FLATS PERMITTED FOR EACH RACE IN EACH NEIGHBOURHOOD AND BLOCK, NEIGHBOURHOODS AFFECTED BY LIMITS SPECIFIED IN TABLE 1 AS AT 15 FEB 89 (Cols. 723 - 726)”
“Yes, within the context of the law. Here, it must be within the context of this particular law. I am not a lawyer and I am sure that well, my colleague is not here but there are other Members here who can bear me out. But because we use the term that town councils manage an estate, it does not mean that they are managers in the sense that is meant here. They are not occupiers either. But I can give you this assurance that town councils are not involved in this Bill. But if the town council rents premises from the HDB, then of course that is a different position. 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 S. Dhanabalan]. Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed. MINOR OFFENCES (AMENDMENT) BILL 2.45 pm Order for Second Reading read.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I do not think such an amendment is needed. I think you have got to read the Act and take these words in the context of the Act. I do not see how a town council can be considered to be the occupier or in control of the area in the sense that a tenant is. Just because we use the term that the town councils manage an estate, it does not mean that it has this meaning. I do not think so.”
“If he wants an assurance that the town council is not covered within the ambit of the Act in the sense that he means, I am prepared to give that.”
“It is not an occupier. The occupier is one who rents and occupies the building. So we differentiate between the owner and the occupier. That is why the whole Bill covers owners and occupiers in the sense that someone who is in occupation of a building, if he discovers something is wrong and he asks the owner to do it, and if the owner does not, he can do it and charge the owner. Or if the owner can show that he was not aware that the occupier was doing things although he had exercised due diligence, then he will be free from liability. It is that kind of situation that is envisaged under the Bill. But if the town council rents a building from the HDB for its own offices, then it is an occupier of that building. But it is not an occupier of the estate as a whole. It is just merely an agent carrying out the function of maintaining and making sure that the place is clean, the rubbish is collected, the place is painted periodically and so on. It is not an occupier under the terms of this Act. If it is not clear, I am prepared to make it clear. That is certainly not the intention. A town council is only an occupier under the terms of the Act if it happens to rent the place. The town council is not an occupier of the other areas. Regarding Sections 32 and 33, as far as the town councils are concerned, in their function as an agent to maintain the estate, this Bill does not cover them. But if somebody in the town, a flat owner, wants to make amendments to his flat, say, he wants to knock down a wall or do something, it is not the town council that has to deal with that. It is the owner, the HDB, the lessor, which will have to deal with that matter because HDB is the lessor of the building. I hope that point is clear.”
“He may employ a firm to do a turn-key project and the firm would design the building, build the building according to the developers requirements. I would not rule out such an approach because countries which do have this approach seem to have enough regulations to ensure that safety and quality are not compromised. But it is still not the major practice in Singapore and, if my understanding is correct, the professional has to be quite separate from the builder. A point was made that such turn-key building should be regularly inspected. As I mentioned, under the law, all buildings regardless of how they are built by a developer-builder or turn-key or any other method will have to be regularly inspected, and in the case of residential buildings, once in 10 years. The only buildings that are exempted are terrace houses, bungalows and other similar single storey structures. But even a single storey structure like a commercial building, a warehouse, will have to be inspected every five years. So there are sufficient safeguards to ensure that buildings are regularly inspected and the inspection procedure is such that if there is anything wrong with the building and it becomes apparent that structures are cracking, then the Building Authority can take action. Having said what I said about penalties, I am certainly prepared to look further into this. As Dr Lee has suggested, perhaps we should increase the penalty to make it proportionate to the size of the job. Well, that is one way of doing it. This can be considered in future. The question regarding Town Councils. I think there is a misunderstanding. I will have to get, of course, legal opinion on this. But the town council is not the occupier. The town council carries out work as an agent to maintain the buildings.”
“But what we ought to do and I will ask the CIDB to do this is to ask for particulars of directors and key officials of all developers and make this available publicly. Then when a particular developer has carried out works which result in, say, a poor structure or a structure that is a danger to the occupants or to those living around that building, then we ought to publicize those involved by name, so that even if they turn up under the guise of another company, people will know who are those involved in the operation. A point was made that turn-key projects will undermine the independence of the professionals. We do not have many turn-key projects. In fact, in Singapore the practice is still to separate the developer, builder and the professionals. But there are, as Dr Lee has pointed out, developers who are also builders. And I would agree entirely that we ought to be specially careful about such developers. In fact, in the case of residential buildings, developers have to get permission to sell their buildings to the public. They have to obtain a special licence to do so. My own approach would be that where the developer is also a builder we would not allow him to sell until the whole building is completed, so that the buyer can see what he is buying. This will, of course, cut down the extent to which the developer-builder, because he plays both roles, compromises standards as well as quality. But in countries which practise the system of turn-key projects, like Japan, they have been able to maintain standards both of finishes as well as of structural safety. I would not rule out the emergence of this type of activity in Singapore where a developer wants to have a building constructed and he does not want to employ an architect.”
“A number of points have been made that the penalties under the Act are not sufficiently harsh. The penalties for poor construction which result in danger or damage to the structure of a building can be attributed to the qualified person, that is the architect or engineer, the builder or the developer in most cases, either the qualified person or the builder. The penalties stipulated in the Act, $50,000, $10,000 and so on, basically apply to actions that they have taken which do not comply with the Act. It does not necessarily mean that such non-compliance will immediately result in a danger to the structural safety of a building. But we must enforce the procedures and make people take these procedures seriously, which is why we have those provisions. But if a structure collapses because of criminal negligence on the part of any of the parties involved, there are of course other recourses, and I think the Member for Potong Pasir knows this. In the case of a qualified person,the architect or engineer, he is liable not just during the period of construction and until the construction is completed. He is liable virtually for life, as long as he is practising. And if we can prove that he was criminally negligent in the manner in which he carried out his responsibility, then the professional body concerned will be able to strike him off. In other words, he will not be able to practise his profession anymore. And that is a very serious deterrent. In the case of a builder and developer it is a little more difficult to take up the suggestion that they should be barred from further participation in the industry. Because these are corporations. They are not natural persons, not individuals, and they can always close down one firm and start another.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, first of all, I want to thank all the Members for supporting this Bill. They made some useful points to which I would like to respond. The first point I want to make, Mr Speaker, Sir, is that while this Bill and the Government bodies involved in implementing the provisions of the Bill have an important role to play, there are other parties involved who must also exercise their own responsibility in order to ensure that our buildings are built safe. Other parties involved are what we call qualified persons, the architects, the engineers, and the professionals. Another very important party involved here is the buyer. The one reason why we have not had as good buildings as we should have is because buyers have not been discriminating. They never ask: who is the builder, who is the architect, who is the developer? During the boom years people were just interested in putting a deposit to book a flat or an office space in the hope that they could turn around in three or six months and sell it for more than what they paid for it. This is the reason why during the boom years many buildings were built, I would say, not structurally unsafe, they are structurally sound but with many defects which caused complaints from occupants as well as subsequent buyers. So all parties must play their role. This Bill will ensure that the plans are properly drawn up, the building is properly constructed and the people who build it will be responsible and that the building after it is built is maintained by regular periodic inspection; in the case of commercial buildings every five years, and in the case of non-commercial buildings, residential buildings, every 10 years. But I must emphasize that buyers must exercise their part of the responsibility.”
“But because of the corrosive nature of the saline components, the life of a structure would therefore be greatly shortened, and a firm and solid building structure would after a period of time become a dangerous building. We have to take preventive measures against such happenings. For the Bill to be effective, the independence of the professionals plays a key and fundamental role. At present, in the United States and Japan, there is a popular building construction practice called "turnkey project". The method of operation is for the designer and the builder to join up together to tender for a project from the developer and carry out the designing and construction work. I understand that some local building projects have been completed under this "turnkey project" method. One result of this "turnkey project" operation is that the professional independence of the designer may perhaps diminish gradually under the pressure of his financially powerful partner of the same company. If the Building Control Authority would allow the "turnkey project" system to be put into practice, for the sake of the interest of the public all relevant authorities or organizations should formulate strict regulations to ensure the professional independence of building professionals. The Bill also provides for the inspection of private apartment builiding every ten years by a qualified structural engineer to ensure the safety of the building. I would like to ask the Minister whether the HDB flats are also required to be inspected once every ten years, if so, by which organization or authority. Mr Speaker, Sir, I support this motion. 2.19 pm”
“To big builders, a $50,000 fine is a small sum compared with a project costing tens of millions of dollars. To them, such a fine may not have a deterrent effect. If the Building Control Authority would blacklist those habitually errant builders, clerks-of-works and supervisors and suspend them from practice for a definite period under this Bill, I feel this would be more effective than monetary fines and would also ensure the safety of buildings and protect public interest. Take local concrete buildings for example. The building materials are generally mixed by suppliers before delivery to the building worksite. Besides the correct planning by the structural engineer and the correct execution of work by the builder, the safety of a building depends more importantly on the correct standard and quality of materials. Under the Bill, the responsibility for the right quality and standard of materials rests on the builder while no mention is made of the supplier of materials. Should a supplier be irresponsible and supplies sub-standard or below quality materials, such as a higher water content, wrong timing after adding water, or wrong quantity of cement, and so on, the usual penalty is to reject such materials at the worksite, there being no other more severe penalty. I would like to ask the Minister whether there are other Acts which can effectively be applied to prevent those irresponsible suppliers from such wrongdoings? I would like to point out a possibility. When there is a serious shortage of materials, lack of plain water, not enough supply of sand and granite, adventurous and irresponsible suppliers might be tempted to substitute sea water for plain water, sea-sand for granite-sand, whose concrete mixing components might meet the stipulated standard proportions.”
“Internally, the BCD has built up a strong team of structural engineers to carry out structural checking during design and construction and to conduct structural inspection of buildings. So the delay in the passage of this Bill has given an opportunity to the BCD to prepare itself for immediate implementation of the Bill. Mr Speaker, Sir, in conclusion, I would like to express my appreciation to the many people who have contributed to the preparation and drafting of this legislation. Sir, I beg to move. Question proposed. Dr Low Seow Chay (Chua Chu Kang)( In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, following the collapse of the Hotel New World and other buildings with problems of structural defects, the general public have become very concerned about the safety of buildings. Dangerous buildings not only threaten the safety of life but also cause the loss of life-long savings of purchasers which would be a very heavy blow to them. The passing of this Bill is very timely as it will ensure the safety of future buildings as well as enhance the confidence of purchasers. The Bill clearly spells out the duties and obligations of the developer, the builder and the professionals respectively and the penalties they may face. The professionals are subjected to double control. Should they commit any offence under the Act, they will be punished under it. Moreover, the Professional Engineers Board and the Board of Architects will also take appropriate disciplinary procedures against them according to the severity of the case. Lighter offences could be suspension of practice for one or two years and heavier offences could even be a life-ban from practice. On the other hand, any errant builder, clerk-of-works and site supervisor would merely be fined a sum of money as penalty.”
“These are very minor works which do not have a significant impact on the structural integrity of a building. Need for Immediate Supervision The Bill requires all structural works to be executed under the full-time supervision of a qualified person or the site supervisor. However, for minor building works, there is a need for "immediate supervision" or, in the language of the construction industry, "standing supervision" only for the critical structural works. In other words, for minor building works it is not necessary to have a full-time supervisor for all the works that have to be carried out. It is only necessary for the very significant and critical structural works. Clause 8(1) has therefore been amended to require that critical structural works such as concreting, piling or pre-stressing are carried out under the immediate supervision of a qualified person or a site supervisor. The other amendments to the Bill are consequential amendments and amendments of a technical or drafting nature. Building Control Regulations Regulations will be promulgated to put into effect the new control measures introduced in the Bill. The new Regulations have been drafted and sent to professional bodies for their comments before they are completed. This Building Control Bill, together with the new Building Control Regulations, when enacted, would be a very complete and comprehensive piece of legislation to ensure the structural safety of buildings in Singapore. Implementation The Building Control Division is ready to implement the Act when it is passed. The BCD has shortlisted more than 60 accredited checkers to whom building plans could be sent for checking. A list of buildings has also been drawn up for maintenance checks over the next two years.”
“Additional Amendments Subsequent to the Select Committee Report, some additional amendments were introduced as a result of a review of the draft Building Control Regulations. There will be regulations made under the Act. When we drafted the Regulations, we found that some parts of the Bill had to be amended to make sure that the draft Regulations do not exceed the ambit of the Building Control Bill. Revocation of Permit to Carry out Building Works To protect public safety during the construction phase, the new sub-clause 7(3) has been inserted to empower the Building Authority to revoke the permit to carry out building works if it is deemed to endanger public safety or to cause damage or adversely affect the structural stability of surrounding buildings. Powers to Take Samples We have also amended clause 34 to empower the Building Authority to take, without compensation, reasonable samples of building materials for analysis in ascertaining whether there has been a contravention of the Act or of the Building Regulations. Exclusion of temporary Buildings and Minor Building Works The new clause 4 in the Bill has been inserted to specifically exclude temporary buildings and minor building works specified in the Schedule from the requirement of building plan approvals and permits to carry out building works. We would not insist that every type of building work will require submission of building plans and application to commence building works. Minor works can proceed without such a procedure. These minor building works include internal lightweight partitions, stall or shed of lightweight construction, simple awning, low boundary walls, minor replacement works of floor, ceilings, and so on.”
“Independence of Structural Engineer Clause 28 has also been amended to spell out the duties of the structural engineer carrying out building inspections and the penalty for failing in his duties of inspection. A new clause 29 has been introduced to ensure the independence of the structural engineer appointed to carry out such inspections. It is important that the structural engineer must not have any professional or financial interest in the building to ensure that the performance of his duties is fair, impartial and unprejudiced. Exemption of Government Buildings from the Bill Clause 3 in the original Bill was included to make it clear that Government buildings and building works carried out by Government for its own use are not bound by the provisions of the Act. This clause has been deleted now as it is unnecessary to reiterate what is already provided in section 55 of the Interpretation Act. However, I would like to emphasize that Government buildings will still have to be subject to the structural, health and safety provisions of the Building Control Regulations. For example, on the requirement of independent checking of structural designs, the PWD has instituted a system of internal checking of structural designs. Structural designs undertaken by one division are checked by structural engineers of another division. Designs undertaken by statutory bodies, which are exempted from submission of building plans to the Building Control Division, will have similar internal checking system. The Building Control Division (BCD) will conduct an annual audit on such statutory boards to ensure that the Building Control Regulations are complied with.”
“Therefore we intend to enforce the requirement of proper qualification of clerks-of-works in three years' time, ie, 1992. This will give enough time for CIDB to conduct courses so that all clerks-of-works who are now working in the industry without certification will have an opportunity to attend courses and take the examinations and be certified. Permits to carry out Building Works As a result of the Select Committee's recommendations, the provision on the permits to carry out building works has been amended in clause 7 of the Bill to require the builder as well as the developer and qualified person to be a joint applicant for the permit. The previous practice was to issue such building permits to the developers only. The new practice will ensure that there is proper and distinct assignment of duties and responsibilities between the qualified person, the developer and the builder. Periodical Inspection of Buildings The Bill will require mandatory inspection of buildings at regular intervals by structural engineers, ie, every 10 years for residential buildings and every five years for non-residential or commercial buildings. The original Bill did not explicitly make provisions for structural checking of buildings which are both commercial as well as residential components, like condominiums. Clause 26 has been amended to take this into account. Any residential building which does not have more than 10% of its floor area being used for commercial purposes will be subjected to mandatory inspection every 10 years; in other words, such a building will be construed to be a residential building although there are commercial components in such a building. But the commercial component cannot exceed 10% of the floor area.”
“For example, the builder must ensure that the actual concrete strength achieves the designed value and all reinforcement bars are placed in accordance with the approved building plans. Upon the completion of the building works, the builder has also to certify that the building has been built in accordance with the approved plans. The builder must also inform the Building Authority if he ceases to be the builder and the developer must appoint another builder in place of the first builder, and this second builder will then become responsible under the law. The penalties imposed on the builder for offences under the Bill are similar to those prescribed for the qualified person in respect of analogous offences. Where a convicted builder is a body corporate or partnership, every director or person occupying an executive and managerial position in the organization will be personally guilty, unless he can prove that he has exercised due diligence to prevent the commission of the offence. Role and Responsibility of Site Supervisors Role and responsibility of site supervisors is also an important aspect of the Bill. This provision in the Bill before the House is the same as in the original Bill. The new law will make it mandatory to appoint a full-time site supervisor to supervise the construction of structural works of the buildings. The duties of site supervisors are spelt out in clause 10 of the Bill. Supervisors could either be graduate engineers or clerks-of-works. All clerks-of-works will require to be properly trained and certified to carry out their duties and responsibilities. Today there are not enough certified clerks-of-works. Training is being conducted for supervisors to be certified.”
“It requires all building works to be supervised by a qualified person and under the continual supervision of a site supervisor. The qualified person is required to maintain proper records, site records, test reports and other documents on the site for examination or checking by the Building Authority. He is also to carry out various structural tests during the construction stage. This will help prevent incidents like the Cheng Hong Mansion where lapses during construction by the supervisor resulted in the erection of sub-standard and unsafe concrete structures. This provision again was in the original Bill. The most important change to the Bill as compared to the original Bill is that concerning the role and responsibility of the contractor. It was the general view of the various representors to the Select Committee that contractors play a crucial role in ensuring that a building is built safely and constructed in accordance with the approved building plans and building regulations. As such, it is important that contractors be brought under the ambit of the law. The Select Committee agreed with these representations and several clauses in the Bill have been amended to achieve this. A new term 'builder' has been inserted in clause 2 of the Bill. The 'builder' as defined, refers to the main contractor who carries out building works for the developer. It excludes sub-contractors. A builder can be a person, a partnership, a company or a body corporate. A new clause 11 has been included to spell out the duties of the builder. It requires the builder to build in accordance with the requirements of the building regulations and the approved plans of the building.”
“Having studied all the written representations and having heard oral evidence from some representatives, the Select Committee recommended some substantive amendments to the Bill. The proposed amendments and the reasons for these amendments are contained in the Select Committee's Report which was circulated in August 1988 to the House. Before the debate on the Third Reading of the Bill could be heard, Parliament was dissolved and the Bill lapsed. It has therefore become necessary now to present the Bill afresh to Parliament. The new Bill incorporates the recommendations of the Select Committee as well as some further improvements by the Ministry. I will now highlight the key features of the Bill, including the changes to the original Bill as a result of the recommendations by the Select Committee. In the design stage of a building the Bill requires that all structural plans and calculations are checked by an accredited checker who has no professional or financial interests in the project. This checking of plans will be done before they are submitted to the Building Authority for approval. It includes major renovation works, additions and alterations to buildings. This will ensure that all structural plans and calculations are subjected to a system of independent checks. It will also prevent a situation where the design of the structures is carried out by an unqualified person, such as a draughtsman under the supervision of an irresponsible engineer, as happened in the case of the Hotel New World. This provision was in the original Bill. To ensure that there is proper supervision of the construction work, the Bill stipulates that the appointment of a qualified person and site supervisor must be done before a permit to carry out construction building works will be issued.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time." The Building Control Bill seeks to revise and strengthen the law in respect of building control. This includes: (a) enhancing the powers of the Building Authority in relation to regulation of building works and safety of buildings; (b) implementing a system of independent checking of structural plans by accredited checkers; (c) requiring construction supervision by qualified persons and site supervisors; (d) requiring certain tests to be carried out under the supervision of a structural engineer; (e) requiring mandatory inspection of buildings at regular intervals by structural engineers; and (f) providing for enhanced penalties in respect of offences under the Act. There are three important new aspects in the Bill which will change the present practice in the building industry. The first concerns the independent checking of structural design plans before the commencement of building works. The second new aspect is in bringing the main contractor and clerks-of-works within the ambit of the law. The third new feature of the Bill is the requirement for mandatory structural inspection of buildings at regular intervals. Mr Speaker, Sir, when I moved this Bill before the House in March 1988, in the Sixth Parliament, it was resolved that the Bill be committed to a Select Committee so that the building industry and members of the public would be given an opportunity to make representations. This was to ensure that the Bill meets all our requirements. The Select Committee received 18 written representations on the Bill from various professional groups, individuals and other groups. These representations made some very pertinent and constructive comments on the Bill.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I did consult both the Minister for Law and the Attorney-General on whether these measures would be against our Constitution and I have been advised that they are not because they apply to all. Nobody is being discriminated against by these measures. They apply to all races in Singapore. BUILDING CONTROL BILL Order for Second Reading read. 1.52 pm”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, Members will have noted that in grouping the various ethnic groups we use Chinese, Malays, Indians and Others. In the case of Malays, Indians and Others, there is already now an established way of identifying who are such people because we have in the law, for example, in the GRCs, how they should be identified. There will be not many cases which are very specific, very peculiar to that particular person. We do have a special committee in HDB already to look into such cases and flexibility is always exercised. So whether a person wants to call himself Indian or Chinese, and whether the HDB is prepared to accept that can be looked into. But I do not think this will account for the a large number of cases. Encik Wan Hussin bin Haji Zoohri (Aljunied GRC): Sir, one question for the Minister. Sir, in the light of these restrictions placed on flat owners to sell their flats to buyers of their own choice and in the possibility of sellers not getting the market rate, could the Minister assure the House that these restrictions or measures are not against their Constitutional rights?”