Sim Boon Woo
Singapore
“Thank you very much, Sir. As everyone is jumping on to the band wagon. I thought I would join in also. I regret to note that the Changi Airport Development which costs $129.6 million has been planned with total disregard for the welfare and livelihood of the fishermen directly affected by this project.”
“Some three weeks ago I asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for National Development to convene a meeting with the Primary Production Department and the Housing and Development Board, but to my surprise nothing has been done.”
“Sir, I think the Minister is mistaken when he said that I was being unfair to him by saying that he did not tell me about the project that was going on in the Bedok resettlement. Perhaps the officers who briefed the Minister could have made the mistake. The first case of repossession of land was at Lorong Dangai and Koh Sek Lim.”
“But these people obeyed the warning of the land inspectors and resumed their farming. But after a month they were again issued with another notice stating that their land would be repossessed.”
“Sir, it is very hard to please the Minister. I have never mentioned about allowing every Tom, Dick and Harry to hawk all over the place. My request is that those fishermen, who are old and unable to fish because they have been resettled in Housing Board flats far away from the sea, be given licences in Bedok New Town where markets and sta…”
“But I feel that the point must be driven home to our people that what they have enjoyed and hope to continue to enjoy must be paid for by constant vigilance and no one can afford to be complacent, which would make it easier for the Communists to make a comeback.”
The complete record
Every one of 308 lines we hold for Sim Boon Woo, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 4 of 7.
“Sir, I would then have no alternative but to say, "Good luck", and close shop. And with that I think I would have to turn either to robbery or some other offensive deal. Sir, I think it is high time that the Government should readjust its policy, so that the small man with a small capital can earn a decent living.”
“From there, the Chief Building Surveyor would come after me. And the Planning Department, the Health Division, and even the Fire Brigade would come after me.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I have just a little doubt about the Neptune Orient Lines. Out of the $70 million loan asked for, $18.9 million will be "by way of purchase price and downpayment" for two Freedom-type vessels. I understand that the Neptune Orient Lines is negotiating with the Ishikawajima-Harima Heavy Industries in Japan and, at the same time, with the Jurong Shipyard. Sir, since we have a shipyard in the Republic ready to build ships, can the Minister tell us why we should not give the order to our own shipyard, instead of negotiating here and there?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, can the Minister say whether there is any flood alleviation scheme for Changi, especially in the Koh Sek Lim Road area which was very badly hit by the recent floods?”
“The Member for Sembawang cannot read English! You have to excuse him.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, T think this is the third occasion on which I have mentioned in this House The poverty of the people in Pulau Tekong and asked the Government whether it has any plan to develop the place into an agricultural complex. I remember the Parliamentary Secretary did tell the House that there were plans and that the Research Unit would look into the possibility of developing this island into an agricultural complex. But, Sir, year after year the same question has been raised in this House. My colleague, the Member for Jurong, could not resist reminding the Minister and the Parliamentary Secretary of this again. I think it is time that something should be done in these two islands, especially Pulau Tekong Besar, so that the livelihood of the residents there could be improved.”
“I agree with the Member for Mountbatten.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I do not rise to speak on low-class music, pop songs or anything of that sort. My complaint is about the low-class films being televised. The Minister for Culture has said just now that the Chinese operas have received very good support. There have been complaints about re showing these films many times on television. Is the Minister aware of this? Sir, on the question of censorship of books and records, is the Minister aware that many Chinese literature books imported from Taiwan are allowed to be sold in the bookshops? The literary classics published in China are bad, but what is more surprising is this. Someone went to Hong Kong and bought some books and records on the teaching of the Chinese language, but these books were confiscated because they praised Mao Tse-tung. Of course, the censorship board could have expunged the phrases which praised Mao Tse-tung or anybody else, but if we in Singapore, having a multi-racial society and a multi-lingual system of translation in Parliament, want to learn and speak a particular language well, we are certainly not going to have Chinese teaching manuals from a college in London. Sir, if we want our people to study more languages and be more fluent in their speech, the censorship of these manuals should be relaxed and they should be censored only when they praise any heroes. Can the Minister give an assurance that he will look into the matter so that everyone of us will be happier in reading these books?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I am doubtful when the Member for Serangoon Gardens said that in the case of a male citizen of Singapore who marries a non-citizen from another country, the wife can reside permanently in Singapore. I have come across several cases during my meet-the-people sessions of male Singapore citizens who got married in Johore and have children born in Singapore. The wife was sent back to Johore. When the husband applied for permanent residence for the wife, he was told that the application was refused on the ground that he could not support his wife. 4.45 p.m. Sir, I would like the Minister to make this point a little bit clearer so that we do not have any difficulties in dealing with the public. I also wish to refer to the immigration check-point at the Woodlands end of the causeway. The process of checking passports should be speeded up. I can understand that sometimes delays are caused when checking non-Singapore passports but, with Singapore passports which are not stamped, a few seconds should be enough. Sir, I think you will agree with me that if you go to the satay club in Johore Bahru and you come back during the weekend you will experience the same thing. I shall be grateful if the Minister can look into ways and means of reducing the time taken to check Singapore passports.”
“As for the individual cases quoted by the Member for Sembawang, I do not think it will be fair for me to answer him here, But if he has any particular case on which he thinks we have made a wrong judgment, he can always write to me and I will look into it and advise him accordingly.”
“As regards children born in foreign countries and whose parents are Singapore citizens, they can apply for citizenship if they are under the age of 21 provided that they are residing in Singapore. It is also possible to register a person born outside Singapore as a Singapore citizen by descent if at the time of his birth his father was a citizen of Singapore by birth or by registration. As to children who were born in Singapore of unknown or unascertainable parentage, it is the practice to regard such children as citizens of Singapore by birth, unless the contrary is proved. So abandoned children would therefore appear to come within the ambit of the law. In the case of orphans, their guardians can apply to register them as Singapore citizens. Of course, each case will be considered on its own merits. The question of setting up an advisory board to study rejected cases was also raised by Members. Obviously they are not aware that there is already, under the Citizenship Ordinance, an advisory board in existence. This Board does go through all cases of refusal before the applicants are informed of the result of the application. The Member for Ulu Pandan says that we need more staff in the Citizenship Registry. I agree with him very much.If only the Minister for Finance can be persuaded to allow more posts to be created! But as for the Minister for Labour visiting the registry, I can assure him that the registry is visited very often not by the Minister because he has got many other duties to perform, but by many other people under him who do that chore.”
“Why not? Mr Sia Kah Hui: As regards children who were born in Singapore on or after 17th March, 1967, to parents who are non-citizens, there is provision for registration. If such parents apply, I am sure consideration will be given. As to the applicants who claim to be born in Singapore but who do not possess the necessary documentary evidence, I must draw the Member's attention again to the Minister's statement on the 10th July in this House. I quote from Hansard, Volume 27, No.9 dated 10th July, 1968, : 'During the national registration exercise, it was revealed that there were many people who claimed birth in Singapore but who, on further investigation, were found not be born in Singapore. If we do not have some criteria for judging proof of birth in Singapore and if we just relax or ignore the law, qualifications and evidence required to prove citizenship, then having regard to the conditions prevailing around us, we might have thousands of people coming here who were not born in Singapore. They cannot produce birth certificates or any other evidence of their birth in Singapore.' I think Members may not be aware that during the national re-registration exercise, some 1,050 cases came to light in which the holders of identity cards had used other persons' Singapore birth certificates to claim Singapore birth. As for the man who marries a Singapore citizen, there is nothing to prevent him from applying for citizenship if he possesses the necessary qualifications tinder the relevant Article of the Con stitution. But again his application will have to be considered on the basis of the policy as enunciated by the Minister.”
“Sir, for once I am inclined to support the complaints made by the Member for Anson, the Member for Kampong Kembangan, the Member for Tiong Bahru and the Member for Delta who is the only lady Member of this House. Firstly, I would like to ask the Minister concerned whether anti-national elements and communalists could not be deprived of their citizenship, and, instead, citizenship be granted to persons whose loyalty towards Singapore is not in question and who wish to live in Singapore permanently. Secondly, would the Minister consider the case of children who were born in Singapore after 17th March, 1967, and whose parents are non-Singapore citizens? If these children are not granted citizenship, they will be faced with grave problems in the future. Furthermore, they will also create problems for our society. 4.00 p.m. [Mr Speaker in the Chair] Sir, they are unable to go to school because they are non-citizens. When they grow up, they cannot be employed because they will be issued with blue identity cards and they cannot get public assistance because they are non-citizens. These are the problems that they will face. They have got no alternative but to become secret society members, thieves or even kidnappers and the peace of our country will be at stake. This is our problem and we have to face it. Sir, if the Minister will give consideration to this matter, perhaps we can be less stringent.”
“I do not have the same idea as the Member for Anson has. The Parliamentary Secretary should not make a mistake.”
“Sir, although I am not satisfied. I would like to give the Parliamentary Secretary a chance. I beg leave to withdraw. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.”
“Sir, he is a Member of Parliament. Not only that, Sir, he is also the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Labour! That is the reason why the Department pulled up their socks in his case! I am not satisfied with the answer given by the Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Finance. He agreed that the Property Tax Department is under-staffed. Then why not do something about it? We need money for defence. We are imposing a levy on P.U.B. bills. Why not speed up the valuation and revaluation of properties so that we can collect more revenue? [Mr Speaker in the Chair] 6.45 p.m. At the same time, the Parliamentary Secretary says, "Wait for information." Who is going to give information if the Commissioner of Inland Revenue does not want to send his men around to look for information? I am not going to tell how much the Member for Anson is earning because I do not know. It is the duty of the Commissioner to do something about it. Mr P. Govindaswamy: You know very well how much I am earning.”
“Sir, it is my view that if the technical staff of valuers and assessment officers of the Property Tax Department is increased, it will not only result in speedier assessment of property values, leading thereby to the quicker collection of property tax, but also allow for a periodic revaluation of landed properties, leading to increased Government revenue. Sir, again I find it difficult to believe that all people who are liable to income tax actually pay tax. I would like the Inland Revenue Department to make every effort to see that all those who earn taxable incomes pay income tax. It is no use saying, "Give us the information," because I just do not know what a person's income is. But every body knows that hawkers and stallholders and others who are operating on a big scale make a lot of money. Take pirate taxi operators, for instance. When their vehicles are confiscated, they buy back their vehicles and go into business again. Surely they cannot do this unless they earn $500 or $600 a month. As another example, take the case of the big food-stall owners. They look prosperous. If you watch them at their stalls, you can see that they do a roaring trade. As I say, I cannot give information on individuals. I can only speak from general impressions. But the Commissioner of Inland Revenue has the power and he must exercise it. Sir, I would like the Minister's or the Parliamentary Secretary's assurance that all this is being done and that everyone who is liable to tax actually pays tax. Sir, I beg to move.”
“Mr Speaker, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 0406 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1001. Mr Speaker, Sir, it is a well-known fact that with the rapid development of Singapore, land values have tended to increase over the past few years. The question is whether our Property Tax Department has done anything to revalue properties to reflect the increased value of landed properties. To my mind, a periodic revaluation by the Property Tax Department is logical, so that taxes on properties will be realistic and not be based on values which no longer apply. Mr Speaker, Sir, another criticism I have to level at the Property Tax Department is the considerable delay it takes to assess the values of properties of new housing estates. It may take as long as two or three years. When the assessment is finally made, the property owner may sometimes be required to pay two or three years' assessments in one lump sum. Besides the hardship this would cause to the property owner, the delay in the collection of property tax may result in a loss of Government revenue. Sir, the delay in assessing property values in new housing estates and the failure to revalue properties to reflect the current land values may be due to a lack of sufficient technical staff in the Property Tax Department. Sir, according to the 1968 Estimates under Head 0406, subheads 1101 to 1133, there are only 58 technical staff in the Property Tax Department, and the question arises whether this complement of staff is adequate to carry out the technical duties.”
“I beg leave to withdraw. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The sum of $7,713,640 for Head 0405 ordered to stand part of the Estimates. Head 0406 -”
“If the shops are made more respectable and comfortable, they might also attract middle-class customers. All this will also benefit my constituency, which is Changi, where many coconut trees are grown.”
“But anyone driving along Dunearn Road can see from the road what the conditions at the Government-run toddy shop there are like. The premises are old and in poor condition. The roof has a zinc extension and under this, the customers sit on long benches which have no back rest. The area has no walls and the customers have no privacy. These are conditions which the colonial Government had considered to be suitable for Indian labourers. These conditions need to be improved. Sir, today as we pass the Government toddy shops, we can see many non-Indian customers. The Ministry must improve conditions for all customers at these Government toddy shops. Singapore now exports canned toddy. If a tourist visiting Singapore wants to try fresh toddy, where can he go? Toddy is an all-Singapore drink. It is revenue-producing. As it produces revenue, why cannot some of it be used not only for the maintenance of toddy shops but also for the improvement and innovation of the shops and the provision of better facilities? The Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister for Culture (Mr Fong Sip Chee): What about opening toddy shops?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 0405 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 2013. Sir, I refer to the extremely poor conditions under which customers at Government-run toddy shops drink their toddy. Sir, I am not a customer myself. An hon. Member: Who knows!”
“Sir, I beg leave to withdraw. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.”
“Sir, after 5 years how much will the interest be?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 0403 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 2202. Sir, the purpose of this amendment is to seek information from the Minister concerned why this large sum of money is being allocated under this subhead for the next financial year.”
“Sir, in view of the clarification and explanation given by the Minister, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The sum of $390,200 for Head 0301 ordered to stand part of the Estimates. Head 0401 -”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the sum to be allocated for Head 0301 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 1001. Sir, the only purpose of this amendment is to seek information on why only a token provision has been made for -the Minister's salary. Sit, is the Minister going to live on fresh air? Secondly, why is it that there is no Permanent Secretary attached to the Ministry of Science and Technology? 3.30 p.m.”
“This might be a better way, but it is not a sure way or an effective way. It will take a long, long time to raise the needed $60 million, and we must have the money by 1971 or 1972 when the sports complex will be completed. Sir, the Government, in running public business, cannot be blind to reality. It has to be pragmatic and face realities. Let it be borne in mind that without a Government- sponsored game of chance such as Toto, the illegal forms of gambling that have plagued Singapore will go on despite the tightening of the law against them. Therefore, even if Toto is regarded as an evil, let us choose the lesser evil of the two and channel the proceeds of this non-profit corporation to the general good of society and the country. Sir, the British Museum was built with the proceeds of lotteries. So was the National Theatre of Australia. Let The sports complex of Singapore stand as a monument to the co-ordinated efforts of the Government and the people of Singapore in returning to the people what has been received from them in this painless, effective and almost effortless game of chance called "Toto". 6.20 p.m.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, for decades and decades, there have been many forms of illegal gambling in Singapore. Millions of dollars change hands every month in such forms of illegal gambling as chapji-kee, chee-fah, mahjong, pai-kow, fan-tan, 1,000 characters, 10,000 characters, 3- digits, 4-digits, punting and illegal off-course bookmaking. The monies involved in these forms of gambling only go towards enriching a handful of bookmakers and operators but are of no direct benefit to society. With due respect to moral teachings and to the anxiety of religious leaders to uphold the moral standards of our nation, it appears to me that, generally speaking, gambling is in the blood. Even in legitimate businesses like trading in tin and rubber and on the Stock Exchange, the element of gambling is very marked. Therefore, instead of allowing the numerous forms of illegal gambling to go on in Singapore, the Government has thought of a simple game of chance called "Toto" a game which the Member for Delta is so very much against - to help raise funds for a cause that will benefit society and the nation as a whole, namely, the building of a sports complex costing $60 million to promote sports and thereby help to build a rugged society in which there will be less and less of what I call the sissy type of citizens but more and more of the virile type. Sir, some idealists might argue against Toto because it is a form of gambling, but let them suggest a better way of raising the money needed for such a worthy cause as a sports complex. They might suggest that the Government should appeal to the goodwill and patriotism of the people to donate to the fund, just as they have done so splendidly in donating to the National Defence Fund.”
“Sir, our innocent public need protection and it is our responsibility and duty to see that they are protected as fully as possible. The Medicines (Advertisement and Sale) (Amendment) Bill is undoubtedly welcomed by all. On the other hand, it is very much regretted that it was not passed long ago. It should have been brought to this House much earlier. Nevertheless, with this amendment Bill, it is hoped that unscrupulous and unprincipled drug pedlars will be dealt with accordingly, so that our innocent citizens will be protected and no one will be deceived by unethical medical advertisements and swindled by quacks and medical pedlars. 6.45 p.m.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, for some time now, certain so-called and self-styled "medical practitioners" have wantonly and unethically claimed to cure and treat all kinds of illnesses - in particular female ailments, such as overdue menstruation - and they have often procured illegal abortions as well. In the past, these quacks and street pedlars used to stand at street corners announcing their presence by beating gongs and playing music from their vans. They then orate to the people present about the miraculous qualities of the medicines they peddle. By such means, these rogues and vagabonds were able to sell whatever oil they were peddling as a miraculous cure for broken bones. To my surprise, I also found they were selling plain 'Aspro' pills as pregnancy pills and as cures for sterility and so on. However, by such means, they could reach only a limited number of people who happened to be attracted by the music from their vans and gongs and who fell prey to their oratory. But now these pedlars and quacks have become wiser. In order to reach a wider section of the public, they now use the Press to advertise their wonderful medicines and their nonsense. These malpractices, therefore, have become a real menace to our society. It is, therefore, opportune that this Bill be passed to control such malpractices. Sir, these pedlars and quacks have already unscrupulously exploited and cheated a large section of the general public. Not only did the susceptible victims lose large sums of money, but, in fact, their diseases were made worse by the treatments and drugs. In some cases I believe the results were fatal. Such cases are the talk of the town. In fact, too many of our good citizens have fallen into these traps because of the advertisements claiming these miraculous cures.”
“If you want evidence, you have to catch them redhanded?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, as the Prime Minister put it in his speech upon your election as Speaker, if the Barisan Sosialis had decided to participate in the last General Election, they would have secured about six to eight seats in this House. Sir, it was the folly of the Opposition that led to the present situation of the absence of an Opposition. But the mere wanting of an Opposition in order to fulfil the ideals of a democratic institution is not necessarily relevant in all cases. There is nothing wrong in having an all P.A.P. Government if the people decide that such an arrangement is to their best advantage. This will, of course, make our job as Backbenchers more difficult. Not only have we to take on the duties of the Opposition, but we have also, on the other hand, to explain to the people that for the next half decade, if Singapore is to continue to survive and prosper as a separate entity in this region, much sacrifice will have to be made. There should be tolerance and restraint in all quarters, higher productivity, and a more careful and practical handling of the situation. I believe that there is no substitute for sheer hard work. Mr Speaker, Sir, may I join my colleagues in supporting the motion standing in the name of the Hon. Prime Minister, expressing the thanks of the House to the President for delivering his speech.”
“We have many advantages here: a good harbour, a good geographical position, a practical population and an experienced business community. All these notwithstanding, Singapore must survive and prosper along with other countries in this region. To believe that Singapore can survive on its own, totally disregarding others in the region, is naive. For the survival and prosperity of the Southeast Asian countries, regionalism appears to be the only solution. We believe that nobody is dependent on himself alone but everybody is inter-dependent on one another. Sir, it is my conviction that whatever arrangement Singapore enters into in the near future, whether an economic alliance or a regional defence system, we must present ourselves as a credible and contributing partner. We have come a long way from the Colombo Plan, from a recipient nation to a donor nation. Mr Speaker, Sir, the President, at the outset of his speech, has pointed out that Singapore's problems in the next 10 years would be external rather than internal. I hope that by the end of 1971, a credible defence arrangement could materialise. Singapore has made history not only in the field of human endeavour, but also in the history of democratic constitutional government. This Parliament will experience very difficult times. We are in a unique position where, in spite of so many formidable problems facing us, effective solutions to them will not be found wanting. The people do not seem to show any lack of confidence. The result of this is an all-P.A.P. Parliament. Yet we should have no cause for complacency. I wish to point out that the absence of an effective Opposition in this Chamber does not necessarily mean that we have one hundred per cent support.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the President's Speech has ushered in the most difficult period in the history of Singapore. In the years ahead, much has to be done to offset the side effects of the complete withdrawal of British forces from this region. Never before has Singapore been in this kind of situation where everything is left to herself. One would imagine that the three years and eight months of Japanese occupation would have been the most bitter times for Singapore, but, if Singapore had never been recovered from the Japanese, we would not have lost anything, for Singapore was then not ours and defence then was not our business at all. Sir, 20 years ago, when the question was asked, "Which country in South-east Asia will turn Communist first?", the answer was, "Singapore." Twenty years later, the same question is asked again, "Which country will go Communist?", and the answer is still, "Singapore." For this must be the case with all the years of hard work put in by our people. We cannot afford to lose Singapore, for this is our country and our stake is in it. Few countries in Southeast Asia can claim a higher living standard than Singapore. Our social and medical services and public housing are second to none. Our progress can also be achieved by other neighbouring countries. What we lack is land, but, on the other hand, the kind of leadership which is the propelling force of our advance and progress cannot be readily found in other countries. As I have said earlier, what we have achieved here can be achieved by other countries if only they can produce from among their millions of people, a hard core of dedicated, clear-thinking, incorruptible and dynamic individuals whom we in Singapore are compelled to choose from only two million people, young and old.”
“Sir, if finance companies are to be allowed to continue their operations in the Republic, they should be placed under some control in order to safeguard the interest of small depositors, but they should be allowed reasonable scope for conducting their business to ensure that there is enough profit for discharging their obligations. I am sure that the Bill, in spite of its restrictions, gives genuine finance companies, not the mushroom type, enough scope to do business and make some profit. Sir, originally I thought that after the Second Reading of this Bill, it would be referred to a Select Committee to enable the affected parties to have an opportunity to voice their opinion.; or make their recommendations. Sir, I would further add that it would appear, at first sight, unfair on the part of the Government to pass a Bill of such a nature without listening to the views of the public. I could not understand the urgency for this Bill going through its Third Reading today, but having heard the explanation of the Minister for Finance, I am satisfied and convinced that the earlier the Bill becomes law, the better it will be for the have-nots. Sir, I doubt whether other countries have similar legislation, but unique circumstances must be met with legislation. After all, the P.A.P, is the People's Action Party, not just in name only. If we are to protect the small traders, fishermen and farmers from being swindled by unscrupulous operators of finance companies, the protection given by this Bill is very necessary. Sir, I support this Bill without reservation.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the advent of finance companies seems to be quite a recent one. They have sprung up like mushrooms. At a glance, they may be classified into three categories :- 1. Finance companies which are subsidiaries of banks; 2. Small-time finance companies which lend money in respect of sales or hire purchase of cars, taxis and even to kelong owners, fishermen and farmers; 3. Large finance companies which operate independently in the field of investment. Sir, the fact that banks operate their Own finance companies appears to stress the need for such institutions. It also to a certain extent reflects the inadequacy of the services provided by the banks themselves. On the whole, finance companies do serve the needs of certain sections of our population. One may place them somewhere between banks and the chettiars or moneylenders. For those who have access to banking facilities and who are reluctant to use the facilities provided by the chettiars or moneylenders, finance companies will be in a position to offer the necessary assistance in their financial problems. The increasing number of finance companies operating in the Republic does point to the necessity of legislating certain controls over them. About the Bill itself, my colleagues and I are concerned about the ceiling of $1,000 for loans of an unsecured nature. This will definitely affect the small traders, farmers and kelong owners I hope the Minister will reconsider relaxing a little on these $1,000 unsecured loans.”
“Sir, in view of the time factor, I would like to ask only two questions. Sir, I beg to move, That the total sum to be allocated for Head 64 be reduced by $100.* Mr Speaker, Sir, I would like to refer to subhead 101 - Special Study on Traffic Planning and Mass Transit System. Can the Minister say who are the people undergoing this study and why is there such a big increase of expenditure for 1968? Sir, subhead 102 refers to "Implementation of Traffic Management Measures". In 1967, $316,000 has been spent. May I know what has been implemented so far?”
“In view of the assurance given by the Minister, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. 6.45 p.m. The time allotted for Head 63 having expired, the following amendments were not proceeded with:”
“If there is proper organisation and research, I, think the orchid industry can assist our economy to a certain extent. I would like to make this suggestion to the Minister for his consideration. Since our climate is very suitable for orchid growing and we have what I would call a natural greenhouse, would he consider the establishment immediately of an orchid institute like the Rubber Research Institute of Malaysia, and lease out suitable agricultural land to orchid growers who are interested in the study of orchids, and build an orchid nursery subject to the requirements of the authorities?”
“Sir, it is very much regretted that only a token sum of $10 is provided for 1968 for agricultural development of Pulau Ubin and Pulau Tekong. [Mr Tang See Chim in the Chair] 6.29 p.m. The Minister for National Development himself has visited Pulau Tekong and he knows exactly the poverty of the island. I remember sometime ago a research committee was formed to do a special research of the island and it recommended to the Government to utilise the land around our islands for agricultural purposes. Can the Minister enlighten this House on the result of the research committee's work and whether its recommendations can be implemented immediately so that the people in the islands will be better off? 6.30 p.m. Here again in subhead 205, I wonder whether the Minister has overlooked the importance of the "Research Services and Marketing Organisation for Export of Orchids and Horticultural products." There is only a provision of $10 for 1968. I think this organisation is quite important for the export of orchid blooms to Europe and the United States. I have here with me the Asia Magazine dated 22nd October, 1967. At page 6, , line 23, I quote: 'In l960 Singapore growers exported a relatively insignificant US$37,600 worth of cut orchid blooms to florists in Europe and the United States. By 1965 this figure had been tripled. Last year, that is 1966 the exports soared to US$250,000; and, with demand rapidly snowballing, few doubt that Singapore's orchid industry will pass the million-dollar mark before long.' In 1966 we earned US$250,000, that is to say, the amount that was declared. But I think it is well over US$250,000. From this little effort by backyard orchid growers and four or five big orchid growers, we can get such a big amount of foreign exchange.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move. That the sum to be allocated for Head 63 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 204. Sir, can I also speak on amendment No. (7)+ too, as they are connected? + Amendment No. (7), standing in the names of Mr. Sim Boon Woo and Mr. Ng Yeow Chong, reads as follows: That the sum to be allocated for Head 63 be reduced by $10 in respect of subhead 205.”
“Sir, I assure the Minister that I will try my very best. In view of his explanation, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. The sum of $117,020 for Head 32 ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. Head 40 -”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the total sum to be allocated for Head 32 be reduced by $100. Sir, under this head, I find that a sum of $117,020 has been provided for the year 1968. But there is no provision for a mobile dental clinic. To my mind, this mobile dental clinic is very important as it can better serve the rural people. So I wonder whether the Minister has taken into consideration a plan to provide such mobile dental services. If there is no provision now, perhaps he can put it forward in supplementary development estimates in the near future.”
“No. Question on the amendment put, and negatived. The sum of $4,204,520 for Head 22 ordered to stand part of the Development Estimates. Head 31 -”
“This is about four times higher than the old rent, which is about $100. Moreover, in the new environment, whether the business will be as good as before remains to be seen. In many instances - there are some in my constituency - the problem of resettlement is a very serious one. Many businessmen in my constituency have complained to me that after moving in to their new place, it will take them a few years before their business can pick up and reach the level of their former business. I hope the Minister will consider the points I have raised. The people who are being resettled should be given some sort of compensation. Secondly, as far as the shops are con-cerned, they should be given some subsidy for the rent. Of course, this subsidy does exist now, but it is not given to everybody. The system is by tender. If the tender is for $800, then the shop' will have to pay $800. Three years' concession is given. If the basic value of this building is $400, they have to pay $400 in the first year. In the second year, they have to pay 50 per cent of the tender value, which is $600. In the third year they have to pay $800. As far as the small businessmen are concerned, this is a heavy blow. I hope the Minister will pay attention to this problem.”
“So in this respect their expenditure has been reduced correspondingly. But if we demolish these houses and resettle the people elsewhere - we probably would put them somewhere far away and farther than their present places - then as a result they would have to pay more for their transport. Another point is rent. If we resettle them, the new rent will be higher than the present rent. For example, if the present rent is $40 for two rooms and one hall, then in the new place which has one hall and one room, the rent is $46. So this unavoidably brings about a greater burden on these people. The difference in the rent is $20 or more, and the burden is correspondingly higher. There is also the problem of removal. When these people move out, they have to get a lorry with two or three labourers to carry the furniture. But the Housing Board does not seem to think it necessary to give them any allowance for removal expenses. They do not consider it at all necessary to grant them any allowance for removal. I think this is most improper. I think this is a great burden on them, as on removal they have to spend more money. If we do not consider these points and continue to neglect these problems and let the people just suffer in silence, then the problem will be aggravated as time goes by. 6.15 p.m. Now about the land which is required by the Government for development. We all know that many shops in Chinatown pay very low rents and, as a re sult, their businesses can carry on. But as a result of resettlement, these people are moved to flats or shops which are built by the Housing Board. Of course, this is good. The new flats are quite pretty and well constructed. But their rent is about four times the rent paid by these shops in Chinatown. The Housing Board rent would be about $400.”
“Usually the people would like to have suitable alternative accommodation, but these resettlement officials usually cast aside their complaints and carry out their course of action. Of course, sometimes the people are wrong to complain, but sometimes their grievances are legitimate. However, the officials do not consider their grievances. What happens is this, in the old days we used to have an Opposition Party. However, now we are all in the same Party. Those Members sitting opposite are all in our Party. Perhaps because of this, the resettlement officers are not afraid to carry out any harsh measures. And because of this, our Government has received a great deal of unnecessary criticism. Of course, the aim of the Government is good. It is to provide accommodation for them. But unfortunately the attitude of the officials in charge has given rise to a lot of criticism. Another point is that in the course of resettlement the people incur a loss. It is like this. There are two different conditions of resettlement. First, when Government requisitions a piece of land, the people who live on it have, according to the time given to them in the notice, to leave and go elsewhere. Second, suppose the land belongs to the Housing Board and suppose at the time of the construction of the new buildings they find that a lot of houses have been built on it, as a result of which a lot of land is taken up, and they find it is necessary to demolish these buildings. Of course, if we want to demolish these buildings, we have to move the people away and to resettle them elsewhere. The question is this: if the people who are resettled were to live in Housing Board flats, they would pay a very low rent at present, and communications and transport are usually very convenient.”
“In view of the explanation, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. Madam Chan Choy Siong(In Mandarin): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That the total sum to be allocated for Head 1108 be reduced by $l00*. * The same amendment also stood in the name of Mr Teong Eng Siong. There are three main points that I want to raise. First, we all know that our urban renewal scheme is something that we all look forward to in the future. Actually at the moment we can see very clearly that Singapore has many tall buildings and we are continuing to build blocks of tall buildings. This goes to show that the Singapore Qovernment is achieving a great deal. It also goes to show that the Ministry of National Development has achieved great success in this direction. Not one of us can criticise what has been going on. However, I have a few questions which perhaps have been neglected. When we want to carry out urban renewal, we have to resettle the people affected, and this problem of resettlement has been solved quite successfully and satisfactorily in the past. As a rule, most people are quite satisfied. However, in the last year or so this matter has been neglected. I do not know what is the reason for this neglect, and whether the Minister is aware of the causes. I do not think I need to point it out. First, the officials in charge of resettlement have a different attitude nowadays. They seem to treat the people affected in a very harsh and demanding way. They just tell them to move out and to resettle. They give them a period of one month or so to move, and these people have to move away.”
“Mr Speaker, I would like the Minister to elaborate further. If 154 standpipes have been removed this year, why should the same amount of $1.7 million still appear in the Estimates? Since we have cut down the number of standpipes, we should cut down the amount.”