Teh Cheang Wan
Singapore
“The Board does not propose to reinstitute the procedure for the resale of flats at the respective Area Offices in Ang Mo Kio New Town. As a pilot project, the Board has centralised the resale of Ang Mo Kio flats at Sales Section, Maxwell Road.”
“At the contract price or whatever it is, and this is due to the mistake made by the HDB, the HDB has been quite generous. If the mistake made by the HDB staff has been to sell the flat at lower than the posted price, then the owner has the benefit of this mistake.”
“The Member for Potong Pasir is asking a question which I have to check for an answer. I do not carry with me the millions of accounts of HDB flat-owners with me. So I cannot give him an immediate answer. But I can assure the Member for Potong Pasir that those people will be refunded.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, since the announcement by HDB on 4th July 1986, 49 HUDC lessees appealed to the Board to buy their flats. All were unsuccessful. As at 20th September 1986, 27 HUDC flat owners had sold their flats in the open market. Twelve of them sold their flats above their original purchase prices.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, since the implementation of the policy, HDB has resold 13 HUDC flats from among those flats HDB bought back from the HUDC owners. In addition, HDB has sold 44 new HUDC flats. The slow sale of HUDC flats is due mainly to the depressed property market.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I have no figures readily available as to how many of these 49 HUDC flat-owners who requested the Board to buy back the flats have committed themselves to buying other property.”
The complete record
Every one of 1,213 lines we hold for Teh Cheang Wan, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, in full, without an account. Page 15 of 25.
“The Depot Road Market was built in 1974 and has 46 cooked food stalls and 83 market produce stalls. In November 1981, the HDB carried out heat insulation works, and repairs and redecoration at the Market. Despite these improvements, some 33 market produce stalls have been vacant. As surveys indicate that there is a demand for additional cooked food stalls, the Board has plans to convert the vacant stalls into 12 cooked food stalls by April 1984. The improved facilities should be adequate to cater for residents in the new Gillman Heights HUDC estate, which will be ready for occupation in early 1984. The 607 middle-income families occupying the flats at Gillman Heights will improve the business in the Depot Road market. WATER SUPPLY TO HOUSING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD FLATS IN TELOK BLANGAH 8. Mr Rohan bin Kamis asked the Minister for National Development if he is aware that the water supply to the Housing and Development Board flats in Telok Blangah appears to be contaminated by brownish sediment in recent months and if he will ask the HDB and the Public Utilities Board together to investigate the matter with a view to remedying the situation; and when the solution can be expected to be implemented.”
“VACANT RENTAL UNITS BY ZONE AND PERIOD OF VACANCY AS AT 1 JUNE 1983 Zone Cen- Jur- Bedok/ Ang Bukit Yis- Wood- Total tral ong Tamp- Mo Batok/ hun lands ines Kio/ Cai- Hou- cuo- gang gang ______________________________________________________________ Months Vacant ______ 1 month 63 176 84 142 2 2 1 470 2 months 22 131 33 40 1 6 2 235 3 months 10 31 5 19 - 1 3 69 4 to 6 27 94 13 24 4 - 3 165 months ______________________________________________________________ Total 122 432 135 225 7 9 9 939 ______________________________________________________________ DEPOT ROAD MARKET STALLS 7. Mr Rohan bin Kamis asked the Minister for National Development if he is aware of the unsatisfactory facilities and consequently poor patronage of the stalls in the Depot Road Market; if he will consider upgrading the facilities and, if so, what are the plans and when they will be implemented; and if the new facilities will sufficiently improve the market to cater for the residents of the new Housing and Urban Development Company Estate at Gillman Heights.”
“The HDB manages a total of 132,414 rental units, of which only 939 units (0.7% ) were vacant as at 1 June 1983. The table below (cols. 103-4) gives details of the vacant units by zone and period of vacancy. A rental flat is not immediately allocated for occupation when it falls vacant. For the comfort and convenience of the tenants, the HDB undertakes general repairs and repainting of each vacated flat before offering it to resettlement cases or public applicants on the waiting list. It normally takes 2 weeks to complete repairs and repainting. The process of offering takes another 2 weeks, inclusive of the time needed for the Lettings Section to identify and match applicants against vacancy lists, obtain the necessary approvals and notify the successful applicant. The applicant is given 1 week to decide whether to accept the offer. If he rejects it, the flat is offered to the next applicant in line. This process goes on until the flat is finally accepted. Generally, 2 to 3 offers are made before a flat is taken up. The average period between the termination and occupation of HDB rental flats is 2 to 3 months. Flats in less popular areas, however, require a longer time to be accepted and may be vacant for up to 6 months. The inevitable time lapse between termination and occupation of rental flats may cause the uninformed to believe that the HDB deliberately withholds flats from applicants who have waited a long time for accommodation. In reality, at any point of time, vacant flats will be undergoing repairs and repainting or will be under offer to resettlement cases or applicants on the waiting list.”
“Some people have the choice. The remaining 0.9% comprising 66 tenants have decided to give up their tenancies. They have a choice. These 66 opted to give up their tenancies. It cannot even be said that all the 66 tenants who are giving up their premises are doing so purely because of the increase in rental. Because over the last five years, an average of 380 tenancies were terminated every year for various reasons. So, in fact, after the increase in rental, only 66 people are giving up their tenancies. And this year may prove to be the lowest number of HDB shop tenants to give up their tenancies. It may sound strange but it turned out to be so which, of course, I do not expect the hon. Member to understand. The President of the Singapore Chinese Chamber of Commerce and Industry has on the 25th June 1983 written to me to express his gratitude towards the HDB for substantial concessions on the proposed rental increases, and the Chamber has commended the HDB for taking a flexible stand by considering the tenants' appeal compassionately. Eight traders' associations in HDB estates - they represent almost all the shops - have also on 11th July 1983 written to thank me. 7.00 p.m.”
“The Member just now said that there is widespread unhappiness among shopkeepers and so on and so forth. I will give him the facts. By the 20th August, 99.1% of all the affected tenants have accepted the increase in rentals and signed the supplementary agreement - 99.1%. How many more per cent can you ask? Mr Jeyaretnam: What choice do they have?”
“They made various constructive suggestions to minimize the possible hardship that increases would cause to some shopkeepers. After a thorough discussion and careful consideration, my Ministry adopted many of the MPs' suggestions with the approval of the Cabinet. The concessions worked out by the staff of my Ministry together with the MPs' suggestions were accepted by Cabinet. And those concessions have been very extensive and generous and, I am glad to say, have been accepted by all concerned. I would like to emphasize that during this period I have not received a single suggestion from the hon. Member for Anson on how to resolve this problem. I have not received nor has my Senior Parliamentary Secretary received any suggestion from him either in writing or verbally. Am I right in saying that? So he has made no suggestions.”
“The Members did not object to the principle of rental increases because they understood. And even the Member for Anson did not object, if I heard him correctly. Some hon. Members: Hear, hear!”
“I will come to that. In the past, the disparity in rentals between the older and newer tenancies was not very glaring. In the last three years, however, the development cost of the shops and rentals shot up drastically. HDB has decided to adjust the rentals but only to the 1980 level and not to the 1983 level. The rentals proposed by the HDB at present are at the 1980 level. If the Member goes back to Anson to inquire from his shopkeepers, he will find that the shop rent at $800, as he has mentioned earlier, in fact, is still low. If the shopkeeper gives up his tenancy and we go for public tender, I am quite sure the shop will fetch more than $1,000, maybe $1,500. He can find out from his shopkeepers. It will prove that what I say is correct. The reason for the HDB fixing the rental at the 1980 level for the older shops is that HDB would like to soften the impact of the increase of the rental on these shopkeepers. Also, it is not the HDB's policy to lead the market in setting shop rentals. HDB's shop rental is still cheaper than that of the shops in Orchard Road. The hon. Member has mentioned that the HDB shops are not in the prime location. That is correct. Therefore, HDB shop rental is not as high as the shops in Orchard Road. The Member for Anson's proposal to form a Committee of this House to examine the rental increases, I think, is totally unsound. When the increases were first announced in May 1983, 43 PAP Members of Parliament held a meeting with myself, my Minister of State, my Senior Parliamentary Secretary, and the staff of my Ministry, and the HDB. They were not invited by us. In fact, they came to see me. They got together and came to see me. [Laughter] I will come to you later.”
“He can get a shop at a lot of places. He can get a shop at an HDB estate. He can get a shop in a private development. In fact, if the tenant finds that he has over-tendered the premises, he can re-tender for the same premises in competition with other tenderers. And if his tender is realistic, he may be able to retain his shop at a lower rental. I will give the Member an example. In 1975, in Marine Parade, Metro originally tendered at the rental of $39,300 per month for its supermarket in Marine Parade. Finding that this tender is too high, it subsequently gave up the premises and successfully re-tendered for it at $23,600 in 1978. In other words, the tenant who made a mistake can correct it by giving up his shop and tendering again. He is not tied down by the HDB that he has to continue to pay high rental for his shop. The Marine Parade Metro is still there. The hon. Member for Anson can go and have a look and find out whether the facts are correct or not. The HDB has a right under the tenancy agreement to increase rentals to the market rate. Until recently, HDB has not exercised this right, The HDB had considered increasing its shop rentals in 1974. The proposal was deferred because of the 1973 oil crisis and subsequently the world-wide recession.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, the Government's policy, i.e. the HDB's function, is to provide decent homes for the people. Therefore, the prices, rentals, service and conservancy charges for HDB flats are kept low. Public housing is therefore heavily subsidized. This is the Government's policy. It is not the HDB's responsibility to subsidize businesses located in HDB estates. This again is the Government's policy. Businesses are run on a commercial basis and therefore the tenants of both HDB commercial and industrial premises are expected to pay market rentals. They cannot expect to pay subsidized rentals. The rentals of HDB shops are determined by public tender and HDB tenancies are designed to enable both the tenants and the HDB to terminate the tenancy agreements by giving one month's notice. In other words, the tenancy is a fair tenancy. Either party can terminate. A successful tenderer who subsequently finds that he cannot remain viable or that his rental is far above the market rate can give up his tenancy. In other words, the shopkeepers are not tied down by HDB tenancies which insist, "You must rent HDB shops even if you have made a mistake in bidding for the shops at extremely high rentals."”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, That Parliament do now adjourn. Question proposed. INCREASE IN RENTS FOR HOUSING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD SHOPHOUSES 6.30 p.m.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I just want to add one point which the hon. Member has mentioned. As regards resettlement cases, the people are afraid that there would be a substantial increase in prices of HDB flats and that the HDB flats may be priced out of the reach of these people. At this juncture, I would like to announce some good news to those on the waiting list for HDB flats. The Government has repeatedly given assurance that flats will be kept within the reach of the people. In September last year, the HDB promised to hold down the price increases in 1983 and in 1984 to not more than 71/2% per annum for 3- and 4-room flats and 10% per annum for 5-room flats. Based on the preliminary figures of the building cost inflation for 1982 and the first two months of this year for the HDB projects, the increases in the selling prices for the next two years, i.e. to be effective from 1st July 1983 to 30th June 1985, are likely to be smaller. I hope they will be much smaller than the maximum increases of 15% and 20% announced earlier.”
“Sir, the resettlement of the hawkers in Kampong Bahru market will usually be done in accordance with the standard policy. I have not seen any report that they have proceeded with the resettlement of the hawkers in Kampong Bahru market yet. But once the clearance is initiated, action to resettle the hawkers will be taken. I can say to the hon. Member that once clearance action is taken, action will be taken for all involved in the resettlement, that is, the hawkers residents and everybody. This is the usual practice. For example, we will not clear the hawkers and leave the residents there, or clear all the residents and leave the hawkers there. Action will be taken together. In the clearance of the hawkers, the Resettlement Department will consult the Ministry of the Environment regarding the resettlement facilities to be offered to the hawkers. I do agree with the Member for Toa Payoh that if the HDB can make the arrangements and do all the maintenance work together there will be economies of scale. I have mentioned to him earlier that it is very difficult for the HDB to take on the additional task of looking after the remaining two thirds of the flats. Anyway, I will ask the HDB to make a study to see whether there is any way to help the residents. Mr Eric Cheong Yuen Chee: Sir, in view of the reply made by the Hon. Minister, I beg leave to withdraw my amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. In the absence of Mr S. Chandra Das, the following amendment standing in his name was not proceeded with: (111 That the sum to be allocated for Head T be reduced by $10 in respect of Subhead TF-01 of the Main Estimates.”
“The Auditor-General is the proper person.”
“I would suggest that he write to me personally so that I will look into the case. If the resettlement officers have behaved in an improper manner, we will take appropriate action.”
“You said it should come from rents. Some hon. Members: Yes.”
“And it would be unfair for me to press him on accounting. But he keeps on talking about accounting. On a simple thing, he says money for repainting should not come from service and conservancy charges but should come from rents. This is to show the Member's total ignorance of accounting, The HDB has two types of properties and it has 400,000 units of flats under management. One-third of the flats are on rental and two-thirds of the flats have been sold to the people. The HDB is collecting service and conservancy charges from both groups of people. That means those who rent also have to pay service and conservancy charges. Those who buy also have to pay service and conservancy charges. When we do painting and redecoration, we paint both the rental houses and also the sale houses. So based on the hon. Member's suggestion, those people who rent flats will be charged service and con- servancy charges and they have to pay for the painting and those who bought flats need not pay for painting. Perhaps one of these days I am going to apply this policy for Anson constituency and then all those people living in rental flats will go and see the Member. By then, he will come back and say, "No, no, this is rubbish. This is all nonsense. We should charge both, not just charge people who rent. Does the Member still insist that only those people who rent should pay and those who buy need not? Just now he mentioned this. An hon. Member: Yes or no?”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I am trying to avoid getting into an argument with the hon. Member for Anson on the accounting because I know that he is not a competent accountant.”
“He is the financial officer of the HDB. He is doing the HDB's accounts.”
“That is why the Member does not know and he is making a big fuss about this MND Holdings, thinking that it is some sinister scheme and trying to hide the accounts and so on and so forth. There are a lot of things which the Member does not know.”
“I am not questioning him about his ability in accounting. I think it is unfair for me to question him although he is trying to present himself in this House as the foremost accountant in this country. I have grave doubts that he is. The Member also spoke about the accounts of MND Holdings. The HDB has a share in MND Holdings. It is the policy of MND Holdings not to declare dividends because the money has to be utilized to expand MND Holding's activities. MND Holdings is involved in a lot of projects, including pig farming and the Resources Development Corporation which undertakes PWD jobs in construction. We are using MND Holdings as one of the arms for upgrading the skill of our own local contractors. The biggest organization in the MND Holdings is the Resources Development Corporation (RDC) which is producing granite, sand, and also undertakes road projects. This Corporation was set up to look into modern technology of construction. In Singapore, we have seen that the upgrading of the local contractors has been slow and we have to get a lot of foreign contractors. So Government set up its own construction company to upgrade local skills in construction and this company is under MND Holdings. The profits made by MND Holdings are kept so that we are able to buy better machinery. Members can see that the RDC has a lot of lorries and a lot of construction equipment going around. Government's policy is: whenever there is a profit, we plough it back into the company so that we can buy better and better machinery, and we can train our engineers so that eventually our engineers will be as good as other foreign engineers and be able to undertake more sophisticated jobs.”
“If the competence of the HDB accountants and the competence of the Auditor-General are questioned by the hon. Member, or he himself knows better about the accounts, then he can write to me and point out where they go wrong. Or if he knows of other persons who, he thinks, are better qualified, then ask them to write to us to say what is wrong with our accounts. Let us look at them. There is not much purpose served in this House by arguing on the details of the accounts. This set of HDB accounts has been properly presented and properly audited. That is my view. 5.00 p.m. The other thing is that he mentioned two or three items which are improper. I will just give him a simple explanation. Most probably he does not know and I happen to know this because I have worked in the HDB. The HDB paints the flats once every five years. Take the case of your own house, Sir. You paint your house once every five years. For argument sake, let us say it costs $500 to paint the house. There are two ways of doing the accounting. One way is: every year you set aside $100. For five years, you set aside $500. Although in the first four years no painting is done, you still set aside $100 a year. After five years you use that $500 to paint your house. So that particular year you spend $500. Another way of accounting is that you spend nothing for four years and on the fifth year you spend $500 because that is the year you paint the house. These are the two ways of doing the accounting. The HDB has adopted this method that the Member spoke about, $10 million has been set aside for redecoration. Every year the HDB is setting aside this money, and when we do the painting, the account is charged to this fund. The Member does not know. I am not blaming him because he is not a qualified accountant.”
“No. If you think that your particular friend is a better man than the Auditor-General, then write to us and let us see. We have a lot of qualified accountants in the HDB, We have a lot of qualified accountants in the Government. In the Auditor-General's Department we have a lot of competent accountants. If the hon. Member for Anson is saying that these people are not as good an accountant as the hon. Member, then let us see. Let us have some proof that the hon. Member is a better accountant. I doubt it. I say here that I doubt it. My statement about the confusing accounts of the Workers' Party is relevant because the hon. Member is the Secretary-General of the party. The hon. Member was talking about the accounts of the HDB and he has given us the impression that he is an accounting authority. I say that if he is really an accounting authority, then his party's accounts should not have been in a mess. If there is anybody who should resign, it is the Secretary-General of that particular party, not me. Why should I resign? The accounts of the HDB have been properly presented and properly audited by the Auditor-General of Singapore. The accounts have been prepared by qualified accountants and audited by qualified accountants. I do not see anything wrong in the accounting. If the hon. Member has other opinions, that other people think that the accounts are improper, I would ask the hon. Member to ask that person to write to me. I will then refer their views to the qualified accountants. I am not a qualified accountant. I do not claim that I am an authority on these accounts. But the HDB has qualified accountants and these accounts have been properly audited by the Auditor-General.”
“Sir, I disagree with the statement or observation of the Member for Anson - that the HDB's accounts have not been properly presented and that they have not been properly audited. I disagree with him because the HDB's accounts have been properly presented and audited by the Auditor-General of Singapore. Is the hon. Member suggesting that the Auditor-General is incompetent? Is the hon. Member suggesting that his particular friend is an authority on accounting, that he is the best and that nobody is as good as him? I doubt it. If the particular person”
“Member believes that we have broken the law - I am quite sure our Singapore Government system is based on the rule of law - if we have done anything against the law, action will be taken against us, including the Minister. The Minister is not above the law.”
“For the construction cost, you can go and ask HDB contractors what is the construction cost. This is an open book. There is nothing to hide. In fact, the flats built by HDB are at the lowest possible price. A lot of contractors do not want to take HDB contracts because the price is too low. So it is totally unnecessary for HDB to cook up the accounts because there is nothing to hide. In fact, HDB would like to make known its accounts to everybody so that the people know the extent of the subsidy given by the Government. The hon. Member has kept harping on this old accounting system because he knows that the HDB has followed the old SIT accounting system and which at present the Auditor-General has asked us to change the accounting system. As Members know, HDB has the biggest allocation of $3,162 million by the Government. This is the amount which the Government is giving to HDB for housing. We have the biggest allocation. When a political party with $18.47 has great difficulty in presenting its accounts, certainly the Secretary-General of that particular political party should be the first to know that when a sum of $3,162 million is involved - which is how many times $18.47 - it requires a lot of effort to switch the accounting system so that the people will not be inconvenienced. 4.45 p.m. We can switch the accounting system overnight but everybody will get confused. A person may get five bills asking to pay for the same account. So we must switch the accounting system in such a way that no inconvenience is caused to 75% of the population living in HDB flats. In fact, the HDB has nothing to hide. If the hon.”
“These are the areas where the majority of HDB flats are now being built. The construction cost of a 3-room new generation flat is $35,000 to $38,000 per unit, excluding land cost, architect's fees and the finance required during the period of construction. And what is the selling price of these 3-room new generation flats? It is $30,900, Construction cost paid to the contractor is $35,000 to $38,000, excluding land cost. This is just the construction cost. The selling price is $30,900. Is this profit-making that HDB has to cook up the accounts to fool the people? As for the 4-room new generation flats, the construction cost is between $50,000 and $55,000, depending on how deep is the piling and so on, in the Outer Suburban zone. The selling price of a 4-room new generation flat is $47,300. In other words, we are selling the 3-room and 4-room flats built in the New Towns at below the construction cost. Do not argue about the land cost. Do not argue about other things. So as a housing authority which is selling 70% of the flats at below the construction cost, let me just put a simple question: is this not a subsidy? If not, what is a subsidy? The Government is selling flats at such a low price and it is losing money in service and conservancy charges. The Government is renting out flats very cheaply to the people. Is it necessary for the Government to cook up the accounts so that HDB can hide the profits? Anybody who is mentally not confused will be able to know that the sale of flats is heavily subsidized. The provision of service and conservancy charges is again subsidized. The rental flat is subsidized. It is totally not necessary for HDB to cook up the accounts to hide anything.”
“HDB is losing money. The second question is: Is HDB charging very high rentals for the rental flats? Can the hon. Member answer me? $40 for a 1-room flat, is it expensive? Is this rental not subsidized? Or can the hon. Member do better and build some flats and rent them out at less than $40? If the Member can do that, then I must take my hat off and say that he is indeed very good, a financial wizard. Can he persuade anyone who has accommodation to rent it out at $40? No answer. He keeps quiet. Because he knows that renting a room in a flat is $200 a month with a condition that you do not do any cooking. The Member for Boon Teck just said that the condition is that you are not allowed to cook and that you must not have children. And HDB is renting out its flats at $40. You show me the accommodation that you are able to provide at less than $40, and I will supply you no end to the number of tenants. Tell me, where are the accommodations that you can rent? The third question is about the selling price of HDB flats. I do not want to take up too much of hon. Members' time, but here I just want to quote a very simple thing. The majority of applicants on the waiting list for HDB flats are applying for 3- and 4-room flats. This category has the largest number of people. Out of 110,000 people on the waiting list at the end of last year, 38,561 people have applied for 3-room flats and 42,490 applicants applied for 4-room flats. So for the 3- and 4-room flats, the total number of applicants is 80,000 out of the 110,000, which is an overwhelming majority. How much does the HDB sell its 3-room new generation flats in the Inner Suburban area, i.e. in the New Town in Tampines, Bukit Batok, Jurong East, Jurong West and Upper Hougang?”
“the 75% of the population who are housed by HDB and also the more than 100,000 applicants who are waiting for HDB flats. The first thing is that the 400,000 families who are living in HDB estates, HDB is collecting service and conservancy charges from them and providing the cleansing service and other services to these residents. Hon. Members most probably do not have the HDB's Financial Report with the exception of the Member for Anson. On page 8 of the 1981-82 accounts, the service and conservancy charges collected by HDB were $134,658,581 while the expenditure was $142,868,152. From there, you can see that HDB is subsidizing the service and conservancy charges. In other words, we are collecting less than what we spent. The second point is on rental of HDB flats. HDB is charging a rental of $40 for 1-room improved flats. I just do not want to go back to the argument. Ask anyone in Singapore: is this rental a subsidized rent, or is this rental a profit-making rental as maintained by the Member for Anson? If it is a profit-making rental, I would advise the Member for Anson to get some investors to build flats and rent them out at $40. I think a lot of Singaporeans would be grateful to him if he is capable of doing that. I come to the third point. It is the selling of HDB flats, These are the three items that are important. The hon. Member is trying to confuse the people by saying that HDB has got MND Holdings and so on and so forth. To the public, that is a Government investment. It is not that much different from Government investment in SIA. Therefore the HDB residents are not directly affected by the investment. Is HDB charging high prices for its flats? That is important. Is HDB making money out of the service and conservancy charges? The answer is no.”
“A Committee comprising the Auditor-General, Accountant-General and representatives from the Ministry of Finance, Ministry of National Development and the HDB, has been formed to select a consultant for the enormous task of changing the accounting system. I am indeed most puzzled that any informed person could think that it is possible for HDB to convert the accounting system of such a huge undertaking like the HDB overnight. I had expected the Member for Anson to be the first person to appreciate the complexity of the task facing the HDB since his own political party appears to have some accounting problems. If the press reports are anything to be believed, it seems that his party has been facing great difficulty in presenting its accounts while the balance standing to the credit of his political party amounted to - I must not use another unsuitable word - a grand sum of $18.47. Just now the hon. Member appears to have spoken with great authority on accounting knowledge. In fact, some of the people asked me, "Why don't HDB solicit his service to switch the accounting system?" I would say this much. The hon. Member seems to have a penchant for ignoring facts which look him in the face. He has accused HDB of organizing confused accounts to mislead the public. This is not so. In fact, he has come here to give the impression that HDB is - he has, in fact, repeated this many times in this House - purposely making confusing accounts, and that it is a profit-oriented organization and it is overcharging the residents. It is trying to sell the flats at a profit or that the rentals are unreasonably high, and all sorts of other accusations against HDB. Instead of going into details, I just want to give a fairly simple example. HDB is doing three things for the public, i.e.”
“Sir, the hon. Member for Anson has been harping on the HDB accounting system for a long time. In fact, the last such occasion he talked about the HDB accounting was on the 3rd December last year. I have repeatedly explained the HDB accounts, and I am sorry I have to repeat again for his benefit - that HDB's current accounting system is not an HDB's invention. The system was inherited by HDB from the Singapore Improvement Trust which was established by the British Government. It is not an HDB invention. It is certainly not a PAP invention. This method of accounting was, in fact, a widely accepted system of presenting the accounts of a public authority in England. However, in line with the Auditor-General's recommendation that HDB should adopt a more modern accounting system based on commercial convention of accounting, the HDB has been taking all the necessary steps to change its accounting system. The hon. Member for Anson must surely realize that the HDB has provided accommodation for 75% of the population in Singapore. The number of accounts handled by HDB comes close to one million, comprising 400,000 service and conservancy accounts, 160,000 loan and instalment repayment accounts for sale of flats over 100,000 rental accounts, thousands of hawkers' accounts, car parks accounts, and so on and so forth. The magnitude and the complexity of HDB accounts explain why the change of accounting system cannot take place overnight. Therefore, we have to continue with the present accounting system. The HDB is doing all it can to switch over with the minimum inconvenience to the 75% of the population living in HDB flats. 4.30 p.m.”
“I have already answered the question. In fact, he is repeating the same question. The hon. Member is repeating the same question and has forced me to repeat the answer. Now he is accusing me of repeating. If he repeats the question, then I have to repeat the answer.”
“The hon. Member seems not to understand me. What I said is that the rule is to try and avoid repetitive work on the part of the HDB. HDB does not have to deal with the case twice.”
“In short, in Anson constituency, as I mentioned just now, some of the constituents disagree with the policy of the hon. Member and they refuse to see him. This group of people are Singapore citizens and perhaps they should not be deprived of assistance from a Member of Parliament because they disagree with the hon. Member for Anson. We will consider this and perhaps we will change the set of rules for Anson Constituency, for those who do not wish to see the hon. Member. But for those who see the hon. Member, then our instruction is, there will be no repetitive work for those people who go to see the hon. Member. And PAP MPs should not interfere and should not write again. The policy is that the HDB will not do repetitive work. In other words, the policy will still continue. The HDB will do work only once. As for those people in Anson who go to see the Member for Anson, these people are his constituents and correctly he represents them. And if he writes to the HDB, the HDB will deal with the case on its own merit and give the hon. Member for Anson a reply. As for those Anson residents who disagree with the policy of the hon. Member for Anson, if they go and see a PAP Member, I think we will make an exception by looking into the case and give him a reply. This will not breach the principle of not doing repetitive work. In other words, the HDB is doing work only once, not twice.”
“The basis for my statement is relatively simple. Last week, I heard the Prime Minister say that the hon. Member is not part of the establishment.”
“This means, in fact, that additional work has been created. That is why I told the hon. Member for Anson that this is undesirable because we are trying to avoid repetitive work. On the point raised by the hon. Member for Henderson, the Ministry will look into the matter. I understand that a lot of people who are living in Anson disagree with the policy of the hon. Member for Anson and so they have refused to see the hon. Member. They will see other hon. Members for assistance because they disagree with the policy of the Member for Anson. In such cases, there is no repetitive work because the person did not see the hon. Member for Anson and only sees the hon. Member for Henderson. If the hon. Member for Henderson writes to the HDB, the HDB will give a reply. So there is no repetitive work, only once. I think this point merits consideration.”
“Mr Speaker, Sir, I am sorry. When I flicked over my notes, the two pages got stuck. That is why I thought I have answered all the questions. I would like to give assurance to the hon. Member that I will ask the HDB to study what is wrong with the window. Just for argument sake, if the wooden windows have been badly manufactured or defective, they will do something about it. If not, I will ask the HDB to make a check and to see how we can assist the residents. On the request by the Member for Henderson, the Ministry will look into this matter. Just now when I answered the hon. Member for Anson's question, I think the hon. Member has missed my point. The Member for Anson asked why can't somebody not from his own constituency, go to see him first to take his matter up with the HDB before he sees his own MP. My answer to him is that we do not want the HDB to do repetitive work. For example, my constituent from Geylang West wants an early allocation of an HDB flat. He does not come to see me. He goes to the hon. Member for Anson to request for early allocation of an HDB flat. Of course, the hon. Member for Anson will write to the HDB . The HDB will turn down the request by saying, "You cannot jump the queue because the HDB's rule is first come, first served." What happens to that person? He will come back to see me in Geylang West. He will say, "I saw the hon. Member for Anson and I got a 'No' from the HDB." Therefore, he has come to see me to ask for my assistance because he is my constituent. I am duty bound to help him. So I write to the HDB to look into this case. The HDB looks into his case and finds that my constituent has gone to see the Member for Anson first and that the HDB has given a first reply. But because I also write to the HDB, the HDB has to reply again.”
“The other two authorities have suggested this, "Just in case you are right that industrial water is corrosive, please use plastic pipes." Because plastic pipes can be used for industrial water. The HDB is continuing to look into this problem, and I would like to give an assurance to the hon. Member that we will find a solution to this problem and certainly we cannot ask the residents to accept the leaking ceilings in their toilets. This would not be acceptable to the HDB and would not be acceptable to us.”
“But I tell you that in Europe and in America, a timber house can cost a good deal more than a concrete house. A timber house is considered as a luxurious house, And also in Japan, a timber house is a very expensive house. It is not a cheap house. So the people here have got a wrong impression. A timber house is a permanent house. Some of the old Japanese buildings, old castles, are built of timber and the timber can last 100 to 200 years. So timber windows, if properly maintained, can last a long time. I do not know how old is the timber in this Chamber but it can last for a long time. Mr Speaker, Sir, I now come to the points raised by the hon. Member for Ayer Rajah. In fact, the hon. Member has warned me and warned the HDB that we are taking over a not-too-healthy baby, i.e. JTC flats. I am well aware of that because I have worked in the Jurong Town Corporation for almost three years. The problem of leaking pipes started almost from the time when the decision was made to save water and to use industrial water for flushing the toilets. This problem is still with us. Most of the JTC staff believe that industrial water is highly corrosive and therefore it damages the pipes resulting in leaks. The Public Utilities Board and the Ministry of the Environment are not convinced. They say, "It is not corrosive. Maybe it is because of bad workmanship. Maybe the pipe is not up to the standard", and so on and so forth. When the HDB took over this housing estate from the JTC, the HDB took up this matter of the use of industrial water with the Ministry of the Environment and the PUB. Up to today, there is still no conclusive evidence that industrial water is responsible for the corrosion of the pipes or not.”
“Yes, in Delta. Have you heard of any windows falling? The fact is that if the flat has been properly maintained, the windows should be in a reasonably good condition. I am not suggesting that this is the case with every window. For one reason or another, some windows are not in a good condition. But since these people own the flats, including those who own flats with timber windows, then if the timber windows are defective, I would suggest they get them properly repaired. I am not suggesting that all the tens of thousands of timber windows in the HDB estates are in good condition. I am not suggesting that. Some are defective, or are not in a good condition. What I am suggesting is that if they are found to be defective, they should be repaired. Buildings are just like human beings. We catch cold sometimes. So we need to take medicine. In the case of a building, you may find here and there leaking pipes, cracking parts, locks out of order, and so on and so forth. So they all require repairing. You cannot expect, after having bought the HDB flat, that you do not need to spend a single cent to maintain the flat. Every four or five years the HDB has a redecoration contract to paint the building, to make the necessary repairs to the common areas, and to the exterior of the building. But it is the occupier who owns the interior of the building, including the windows. So if a window is defective, I suggest he repairs it. 4.00 p.m. As regards timber windows, some people like timber windows. They say that timber windows or timber louvres provide better shade than glass. In fact, most Singaporeans are under the impression that a timber house is a temporary house and is a very cheap house because they usually associate a timber house with an attap house in a squatter area.”
“The Government's policy is to encourage our Singapore citizens to own their own homes. Our economic situation is such that we are fortunate to have enough jobs in Singapore and, as I have explained earlier, anyone who is willing to work can afford to own a flat. What the people need is to work a bit harder and do not waste their money on smoking and drinking. One of the biggest items I did not mention is gambling. A lot of people just waste their money on gambling. If they stop all this, they will be able to own their own flats. On the question of wooden windows, the hon. Member for Pasir Panjang seems to give the impression that the timber windows are bad, are very dangerous, and are falling down here and there. I can assure the House that this is not so. I give Members a concrete example. The HDB is managing some 20,000 units of SIT flats built in the 1950's, more than 25 or 30 years ago. Most of these flats have timber windows. You will see that some of the houses were built pre-war. Most of them also have timber windows, but you do not see the timber windows falling here and there. The reason is that the timber windows have been properly maintained. I know that some hon. Members here have SIT flats in their constituencies. An hon. Member: In Delta.”
“Member for Pasir Panjang that the HDB should build sufficient 2-room and 3-room flats for the applicants, I wish to give an assurance to him that the HDB at present has 42,600 units of 3-room flats under construction, and these will be completed in the next two to three years. There are, therefore, more than sufficient flats to meet the demand of the 3-room flat applicants. As regards the 2-room flats, or even the 1-room flats, I think these applicants will also get their flats. The HDB at present manages about 66,000 units of 1-room flats and another 49,000 units of 2-room flats. All the 1-room flats are on rental. In the case of the 2-room flats, most of them are on rental. A lot of people living in 1-room and 2-room flats are upgrading themselves. They are moving up to buy 3-room, 4-room or even 5-room flats. The HDB is now speeding up its construction programme and expects to complete 120,000 units of flats between 1983 and 1985. In other words, there will be an average of about 40,000 units per year over a period of three years. Based on the volume of construction and other factors, I am confident that the HDB will complete the construction of these 120,000 units. Once the construction of these units is completed, the tenants living in 1-room and 2-room flats will upgrade themselves to larger flats, and the vacated flats of the 1-room and 2-room units will be sufficient to meet the demand of those people who want to rent the 1-room and 2-room flats. But even though we have enough 1-room and 2-room flats for rental, I would strongly urge those people who are living in either 1-room or 2-room flats, or those people who are thinking of renting the 1-room and 2-room flats, to work hard in order to be able to own their own flats.”
“As for those hawkers in Radin Mas market, I understand that there are a few very stubborn hawkers who refused to heed the warning of our hawker liaison officers seriously. These hawkers were served with summonses. On the question of compounding the offence instead of appearing in court, the HDB is exercising its authority under the Environmental Public Health Act. Under this Act there is no possibility of compounding the offence. They must appear in court. I understand from the Ministry of the Environment that this is a more effective deterrent because some of the hawkers are doing very good business. Last week we heard the Minister for the Environment say that some hawkers own Mercedes Benz cars and send their children to England. For such hawkers, if you compound the offence for $20, they will say, "Thank you". They will pay $20 straightaway as this saves them a lot of trouble. Then there is the hawker who continues to smoke while frying his kueh teow and the ash drops on to the kueh teow. That is highly undesirable. The idea of bringing the hawkers to court is to deter them from committing the offence again. If they have been brought to court once, they will think twice before committing the offence again. If you simply compound the offence, some of them will not consider the fine of a few dollars as a deterrent. They will continue to commit the offence. As we all know, more and more Singaporeans are eating out and it is therefore most important that the cooked food they serve is hygienic. If just one of the hawkers is not clean, then you will find that a large number of his customers will have stomach trouble. On the request by the hon.”
“As regards the old HDB estates, the HDB has a programme of constantly improving the old estates. As regards the points brought up by the hon. Member for Boon Teck, for example, the old benches, the HDB has an updating programme. When the benches are not serviceable, we will change them for new ones. If the old benches are still serviceable, we will leave them there. This is a continuous process. As regards the soggy ground, the HDB again has an on-going programme. If there is a soggy ground, we will put additional earth and provide additional drainage facilities to improve the ground condition. With regard to the diseased trees, I understand that the HDB has been in touch with the Parks and Recreation Department to look into them. If a tree is diseased and requires a lot of maintenance, we will remove it and plant a new tree. On the points raised by the hon. Member for Chong Boon, the HDB will look into the vacant stalls in the wet market in his constituency as well as in Cheng San constituency, As has been announced in this House earlier during Question Time, the HDB will convert the vegetable stalls which have been empty for some time into cooked food stalls wherever possible. On the points raised by the hon. Member for Radin Mas concerning hawkers who have been served with summonses and have to appear in court, there is a standing instruction to the HDB hawker inspectors that if any hawker commits an offence, we first give them a warning, sometimes verbally and sometimes in writing. For those hawkers who persistently refuse to heed the warning, they will be served with a summons to appear in court. That is the standing instruction. I believe it is being followed.”
“In fact, as the Minister responsible for housing, I am all the time trying to work out a system so that eventually every family, our Singaporeans, will own a flat, with the exception of those determined not to own one. We cannot help them. They just do not want to work. They are hoping that the day of the so-called caring society will come. So they do not worry. They are waiting for the day when the caring society will come and help them to own a flat and give them food without working. The paradise will come without their doing anything! I think that group of people are being silly.”
“Government has made the price of HDB flats so cheap that it is almost impossible for anyone not to be able to buy a HDB flat, We are reaching that stage where it is almost impossible for anyone who is willing to work not to be able to buy an HDB flat. 3.45 p.m. Talking about families with grown-up children living in 1-room flats. When the children get married, they have to live with their parents because they have nowhere to go. For that group of people, my advice to young couples who are going to marry is this. Do not get married too early, because you may have financial problems. I think they may get into serious trouble if the boy is 20 or 21 years old and has just been discharged from National Service, and meets a girl who is a teenager and they decide to get married. They will have economic problems. I would advise them both to get engaged and to carry on working. In Singapore, if the young couple work, then in two or three years' time they can easily save enough money for the downpayment for an HDB flat. They can wait for another three or four years and then get married. If boys get married at the age of 25 or 26 years, and the girls get married at about the age of 22 or 23 years, that is quite reasonable. By that time they would have saved enough money for the downpayment and some may even have saved enough money to pay half the cost of an HDB flat. There is really no good or valid reason for them to marry at an early age. There are no circumstances to force them to get married and to live with their parents in a 1-room flat. It just requires a bit of management.”
“In the case of very large families of 10 people living in 1-room flats, I do not think they have to. If they have 10 children, some of them must be grown up. And in Singapore anybody who is willing to work will be able to earn a minimum of $500 or $600 a month. For example, in HDB the lowest paid workers are the cleansing workers. A cleansing worker's take-home pay is around $500 or $600 a month depending on when he joins the HDB. On top of that, he has got CPF. He finishes work at 2.30 p.m. so usually he can take on a part-time job as a gardener, car-washer or security guard. Almost all HDB cleansing workers have a second job in the afternoon and some even work up to 11.00 p.m. In fact, we tell them, "You should not work so hard because you would not be able to get up early in the morning to do the cleansing work." Very few of them are earning less than $600 a month. They get about $400 from HDB and they take on a part-time job either as a part-time gardener or a car-washer and they earn $600 a month. If they have got 10 children, I think the family's income is usually $2,000 or $3,000 a month. Just imagine, they have 10 children and three or four of them are working. And the Member tells me that the family is very poor. I think there must be some mistake. I would classify the family as reasonably rich with a total income of $2,000 or $3,000 a month. This person should have registered to purchase an HDB flat so that they need not crowd themselves together. There is a group of citizens who are not able to manage their own money. Whenever they get their salary, they spend it on smoke and drinks, but I am not suggesting that they are sinners. I think they are being silly as they are wasting their money. They should be in a position to buy HDB flats.”
“It is not like in Australia where they have got millions of square miles of territorial land where they can live in single storey houses. In Singapore, either we have high-rise housing or we have no housing. That is the choice. Since we are living in high-rise flats, all the residents must cooperate and they must understand that it is their responsibility to look after their place. On the point of keeping the place clean, I think HDB's top management is quite well aware of this problem and it will make sure that either HDB's own cleansing workers or the contractor's cleansing workers keep the place clean. But on the other hand, I will request Members of Parliament to get their grassroots organizations, such as the CCCs, RCs and MCs, to ask the residents to cooperate and to keep the place clean. On this question of large families in 1-room flats, this is due mainly to the poor planning of a small minority of our residents. The majority of Singaporeans are conscious of and appreciate the advantage of home-ownership. HDB today houses 75% of the total population of Singapore, or 1.85 million people. In fact, when the PAP Government came to power in 1959 the population of Singapore then was only 1.5 million. Since then the PAP Government has built flats to house 1.85 million people. In other words, we have, in fact, housed 350,000 more people than the time PAP Government came to power in 1959. Two-thirds of the HDB residents are flat owners. In addition, we have 107,000 applicants on the waiting list to buy flats. Singaporeans are conscious of the advantage of home-ownership and want to own their own homes. A minority group somehow cannot manage their finances and they continue to remain as tenants.”
“On the point about the appalling condition in the 1-room flats with communal chutes, I think this has been repeatedly raised by the Member for Boon Teck - if I remember correctly - since he came to this House. Year in and year out I hear the same complaint. I think this is quite true in all cases where there are communal chutes - you need only one inconsiderate occupant. For example, he eats porridge and leaves half a bowl. Two or three days later the porridge goes rotten. Instead of pouring the porridge properly into a plastic bag and throwing it down the chutes, he just pours it into the hopper. It is extremely smelly. The next person who comes round to throw rubbish finds that the hopper is sticky and smelly, and so he just throws his rubbish by the side of the chute so that he would not dirty his hands. We then have a situation where the whole area around the common chute becomes very dirty. HDB must take the responsibility of ensuring that the surrounding area of the common chute is properly cleaned. But, on the other hand, we also need the cooperation of the residents. If the residents do not cooperate, then it is very difficult to keep the place clean. I have said on countless occasions that even in most HDB flats where we have individual refuse chutes, although it requires the same effort to throw rubbish into the chute instead of throwing it out of the window, you can still see the tremendous amount of litter in our estates. When the Member goes round the housing estates to meet the residents, a common complaint is that the resident living on the top floor will throw down the rubbish or even left-over curry and dirty the clothings of those living on the lower floors. This is a common complaint. In Singapore, there is no alternative to high-rise living.”
“Sir, HDB is a very big organization and it has more than 12,000 staff. Among them, there are bound to be some staff who, in spite of repeated requests and instructions from the management and from Government that they must be flexible, helpful and to do everything they can to help the constituents, they are still not so flexible. Human nature is such. So they would not be as helpful as what the Member for Boon Teck wishes them to be. Let us take the case of the old lady. The Member said that she has a collapsible gate in her flat. According to the HDB rules, before anybody moves out from a flat, the tenant must remove the gate and return the flat to HDB in its original state because the next tenant or purchaser may not like the gate. I do not know the details of this case until this afternoon. Perhaps the HDB staff is worried that, if he allows the gate to remain, the new tenant might say, "Look here. I do not like the gate. Please remove the gate." The staff will have to go back to the Area Office and make arrangements to remove the gate, and that costs $20. Then the Area Officer will tell the staff, "The rules say that anybody who moves out must restore the flat to its original state. Why did you allow this gate to remain there?" He will be in trouble. So in order to avoid such a possibility, he sticks to the rules. The Member said that the new tenant or new occupier is quite happy with the gate. If the new tenant can come to an understanding with the old lady and even pay the old lady $50 for the gate, then in this case HDB will be happy to say, "The responsibility of removing the gate in future is now transferred to the new occupant." Then everybody will be happy.”